Closely And Deeply Divided: Purple Counties In The 2016 Presidential Election

The depth and degree of geographic polarization in American politics are key arguments that reside within the larger political polarization debate. Evidence used to argue against the significance of geographic polarization is the prevalence of "purple" counties. It is argued that when the aggregate voting results within counties for candidates from the two major political parties are close enough and competitive enough not to be designated as either "red" or "blue" and are designated as "purple", the electorate is considered spatially and homogeneously mixed within the county. It is assumed that these purple counties demonstrate that voters whose polarized political ideology are either closely divided or deeply divided live near one another. This paper challenges the assumption that partisans from differing parties live within proximity to one another in competitive counties by examining ten of the most "purple" counties of the 2016 United States Presidential Election. The results of this study provide evidence as to whether "purple" counties are homogeneous places where there is no geographic polarization or whether county aggregation merely masks a micro-scalar geographic political divide.