This is a visual explainer based on the Wikipedia article on the 2008 United States presidential election in Texas. Read the full source article here. (opens in new tab)

Electoral Crossroads: Texas's Pivotal Role in the 2008 Presidential Election

A scholarly examination of the political landscape, campaign dynamics, and voting outcomes that shaped Texas's contribution to the national presidential race.

Explore Results ๐Ÿ“Š Understand Dynamics ๐Ÿ”

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!


When you are ready...
๐ŸŽฎ Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game๐ŸŽฎ

Overview

The National Context

The 2008 United States presidential election in Texas, held on November 4, 2008, was an integral part of the broader national election. Voters across the state cast their ballots to select 34 electors for the Electoral College, who would then formally elect the President and Vice President of the United States. This election was particularly significant as it saw a highly competitive national race, even if Texas itself was considered a reliably Republican state.

Texas's Electoral Significance

Despite being a "safe red state" in the eyes of most political analysts, Texas represented the largest single prize in terms of electoral votes for the Republican candidate, John McCain, in 2008. While McCain secured an easy victory in the state, his margin of victory was notably smaller than that achieved by former President George W. Bush in both the 2000 and 2004 elections. This marked the first time since 1996 that the Republican margin of victory in Texas was less than one million votes, signaling a subtle shift in the state's electoral dynamics.

Shifting County Alignments

The 2008 election also highlighted some interesting county-level shifts. It was the last election through 2024 in which Brewster County voted for the Democratic candidate. Conversely, Kenedy County, which typically votes for the winning candidate, did not do so again until the 2024 presidential election. These localized outcomes provide valuable insights into the evolving political geography of the state, even within a seemingly predictable overall result.

Primaries

Republican Primary

The Republican presidential primary in Texas was a key contest in the nomination process for the party. Candidates vied for delegate support, with the outcome contributing to the national momentum of the eventual nominee, John McCain. The primary reflected the conservative leanings of the Texas Republican base, setting the stage for the general election.

Democratic Primary & Caucuses

The Democratic presidential primary and caucuses in Texas were particularly notable for their intense competition. This multi-stage process involved both a primary vote and a caucus system, designed to allocate delegates proportionally. The contest in Texas was a significant battleground, drawing considerable attention and resources from the Democratic candidates as they sought to secure their party's nomination.

Campaign

Electoral Predictions

Leading up to the election, political analysts and news organizations widely anticipated a Republican victory in Texas. The state was consistently categorized as a "safe R" or "solid R" by numerous reputable sources, reflecting its historical voting patterns and the prevailing political sentiment. This consensus underscored the significant challenge faced by the Democratic campaign in a state considered a Republican stronghold.

Source Ranking
D.C. Political Report Likely R
Cook Political Report Solid R
The Takeaway Solid R
Electoral-vote.com Solid R
Washington Post Solid R
Politico Solid R
RealClearPolitics Solid R
FiveThirtyEight Solid R
CQ Politics Solid R
The New York Times Solid R
CNN Safe R
NPR Solid R
MSNBC Solid R
Fox News Likely R
Associated Press Likely R
Rasmussen Reports Safe R

Polling & Fundraising

Pre-election polling consistently showed John McCain with a substantial lead over Barack Obama in Texas. The final three polls before election day indicated McCain leading by an average of 52% to 41%. In terms of financial backing, Obama's campaign demonstrated significant fundraising prowess in Texas, raising $20,424,500, which surpassed McCain's $17,990,153. This highlights the Democratic effort to compete even in states where the odds were challenging.

Advertising & Visits

The allocation of campaign resources for advertising in Texas revealed a strategic disparity. Obama's campaign and its associated interest groups invested significantly more, spending $9,917,565, compared to McCain's $33,983. This substantial difference in advertising expenditure suggests a concerted effort by the Democratic campaign to engage Texas voters, despite the state's Republican leanings. Both presidential campaigns, however, recognized the state's importance, with each candidate making two visits to Texas during the election cycle.

Analysis

The Republican Stronghold

Texas, situated at the intersection of the Southern and Southwestern United States, has solidified its position as a consistently Republican state across all levels of government. As the home state of then-President George W. Bush, its Republican alignment was deeply entrenched. A significant portion of Texas falls within the "Bible Belt," where a large number of voters, particularly in rural areas, identify as born-again or evangelical Christians. These demographics often translate into strong support for Republican candidates due to shared socially conservative views. Historically part of the "Solid South," Texas has not supported a Democratic presidential nominee since Jimmy Carter in 1976.

McCain's Dominance in Conservative Regions

John McCain's victory was underpinned by overwhelming support in the state's most conservative regions. He secured the vast majority of counties with double-digit margins, including many traditionally Democratic areas in Eastern Texas. His dominance was particularly pronounced in the Texas Panhandle (including Amarillo), the Permian Basin (encompassing Midland and Odessa), and the South Plains (featuring Lubbock). These areas, known as some of the most conservative in the nation, delivered McCain margins of victory as high as three-to-one, representing his strongest performance in any county nationwide. Some counties in these regions have not voted for a Democrat since Harry S. Truman in 1948, with King County notably giving McCain 92.64% of its vote.

Obama's Urban & Minority Gains

Despite the overall loss, Barack Obama significantly improved upon John Kerry's 2004 performance, narrowing the Republican margin of victory from 22.83% to 11.77%. A key factor in this improvement was his ability to flip major urban counties such as Dallas, Bexar, and Harrisโ€”home to Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston, respectively. These counties, which had been among the first in the state to turn Republican in the mid-20th century, had not supported a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964 (except Bexar in 1996). A robust turnout among minority voters, particularly Hispanics, was instrumental in giving Obama the edge in these populous areas. He also garnered strong support in Travis County (Austin) and the Latino-majority counties of the Rio Grande Valley along the Mexican border, which have historically favored Democrats. Even in Tarrant County, which he lost overall, Obama performed well in the southern and eastern parts of Fort Worth and eastern Arlington.

State-Level Dynamics

Concurrently with the presidential election, other significant races unfolded in Texas. Incumbent Republican U.S. Senator John Cornyn was reelected with 54.82% of the vote, defeating Democrat Rick Noriega (42.84%) and Libertarian Yvonne Adams Schick (2.34%). Republicans also gained a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives by unseating a Democratic incumbent. However, at the state legislative level, Democrats managed to pick up three seats in the Texas House of Representatives and one seat in the Texas Senate, indicating a more nuanced political landscape beneath the presidential outcome.

Results

Statewide Summary

The 2008 United States presidential election in Texas concluded with a decisive victory for the Republican ticket. John McCain and Sarah Palin secured the state's 34 electoral votes, reflecting Texas's consistent preference for Republican presidential candidates. The overall voter turnout, measured against the voting age population, stood at 46.8%, indicating significant civic engagement in this pivotal election year.

2008 United States presidential election in Texas
Party Candidate Running mate Votes Percentage Electoral votes
Republican John McCain Sarah Palin 4,479,328 55.45% 34
Democratic Barack Obama Joe Biden 3,528,633 43.68% 0
Libertarian Bob Barr Wayne Allyn Root 56,116 0.69% 0
Independent Ralph Nader Matt Gonzalez 5,751 0.07% 0
Constitution Chuck Baldwin Darrell Castle 5,708 0.07% 0
Green Cynthia McKinney Rosa Clemente 909 0.01% 0
Others - - 1,350 0.02% 0
Totals 8,086,952 100.00% 34
Voter turnout (voting age population) 46.8%

County-Level Breakdown

The granular data from the county-by-county results offers a detailed perspective on the electoral preferences across Texas. This breakdown illustrates the geographical distribution of support for each candidate, highlighting areas of strong partisan loyalty and regions where the contest was more closely fought. Such detailed analysis is crucial for understanding the underlying demographic and political currents within the state.

County John McCain
Republican		 Barack Obama
Democratic		 Various candidates
Other parties		 Margin Total
# % # % # % # %
Anderson 11,884 71.35% 4,630 27.80% 141 0.85% 7,254 43.55% 16,655
Andrews 3,816 82.44% 790 17.07% 23 0.49% 3,026 65.37% 4,629
Angelina 19,569 67.13% 9,379 32.17% 205 0.70% 10,190 34.96% 29,153
Aransas 6,693 68.45% 3,006 30.74% 79 0.81% 3,687 37.71% 9,778
Archer 3,595 82.36% 740 16.95% 30 0.69% 2,855 65.41% 4,365
Armstrong 856 86.46% 128 12.93% 6 0.61% 728 73.53% 990
Atascosa 5,462 54.96% 4,415 44.43% 61 0.61% 1,047 10.53% 9,938
Austin 8,786 74.96% 2,821 24.07% 114 0.97% 5,965 50.89% 11,721
Bailey 1,618 69.86% 682 29.45% 16 0.69% 936 40.41% 2,316
Bandera 6,935 74.59% 2,250 24.20% 112 1.21% 4,685 50.39% 9,297
Bastrop 13,817 53.02% 11,687 44.84% 558 2.14% 2,130 8.18% 26,062
Baylor 1,262 76.81% 366 22.28% 15 0.91% 896 54.53% 1,643
Bee 4,471 54.81% 3,645 44.69% 41 0.50% 826 10.12% 8,157
Bell 49,242 54.36% 40,413 44.61% 935 1.03% 8,829 9.75% 90,590
Bexar 246,275 46.69% 275,527 52.23% 5,690 1.08% -29,252 -5.54% 527,492
Blanco 3,418 69.20% 1,467 29.70% 54 1.10% 1,951 39.50% 4,939
Borden 316 87.53% 40 11.08% 5 1.39% 276 76.45% 361
Bosque 5,762 75.36% 1,797 23.50% 87 1.14% 3,965 51.86% 7,646
Bowie 24,162 68.67% 10,815 30.74% 209 0.59% 13,347 37.93% 35,186
Brazoria 67,515 64.34% 36,480 34.76% 945 0.90% 31,035 29.58% 104,940
Brazos 37,465 63.85% 20,502 34.94% 706 1.21% 16,963 28.91% 58,673
Brewster 1,855 47.56% 1,970 50.51% 75 1.93% -115 -2.95% 3,900
Briscoe 617 74.34% 205 24.70% 8 0.96% 412 49.64% 830
Brooks 556 24.08% 1,747 75.66% 6 0.26% -1,191 -51.58% 2,309
Brown 12,052 79.95% 2,822 18.72% 200 1.33% 9,230 61.23% 15,074
Burleson 4,547 68.22% 2,053 30.80% 65 0.98% 2,494 37.42% 6,665
Burnet 12,059 71.38% 4,608 27.28% 226 1.34% 7,451 44.10% 16,893
Caldwell 6,107 52.43% 5,403 46.39% 138 1.18% 704 6.04% 11,648
Calhoun 4,106 59.69% 2,729 39.67% 44 0.64% 1,377 20.02% 6,879
Callahan 4,589 80.28% 1,063 18.60% 64 1.12% 3,526 61.68% 5,716
Cameron 26,671 35.06% 48,480 63.72% 926 1.22% -21,809 -28.66% 76,077
Camp 2,798 61.27% 1,734 37.97% 35 0.76% 1,064 23.30% 4,567
Carson 2,548 85.50% 406 13.62% 26 0.88% 2,142 71.88% 2,980
Cass 8,279 69.89% 3,490 29.46% 77 0.65% 4,789 40.43% 11,846
Castro 1,562 68.18% 719 31.38% 10 0.44% 843 36.80% 2,291
Chambers 9,988 75.14% 3,188 23.98% 116 0.88% 6,800 51.16% 13,292
Cherokee 11,695 71.24% 4,610 28.08% 112 0.68% 7,085 43.16% 16,417
Childress 1,782 77.61% 497 21.65% 17 0.74% 1,285 55.96% 2,296
Clay 4,213 78.91% 1,085 20.32% 41 0.77% 3,128 58.59% 5,339
Cochran 758 71.71% 284 26.87% 15 1.42% 474 44.84% 1,057
Coke 1,252 79.80% 299 19.06% 18 1.14% 953 60.74% 1,569
Coleman 3,011 81.33% 643 17.37% 48 1.30% 2,368 63.96% 3,702
Collin 184,897 62.16% 109,047 36.66% 3,513 1.18% 75,850 25.50% 297,457
Collingsworth 943 78.91% 234 19.58% 18 1.51% 709 59.33% 1,195
Colorado 5,795 69.38% 2,508 30.03% 50 0.59% 3,287 39.35% 8,353
Comal 35,233 73.01% 12,384 25.66% 644 1.33% 22,849 47.35% 48,261
Comanche 3,813 73.09% 1,334 25.57% 70 1.34% 2,479 47.52% 5,217
Concho 807 74.93% 257 23.86% 13 1.21% 550 51.07% 1,077
Cooke 11,871 78.86% 3,051 20.27% 132 0.87% 8,820 58.59% 15,054
Coryell 11,550 63.00% 6,619 36.11% 163 0.89% 4,931 26.89% 18,332
Cottle 509 72.20% 187 26.52% 9 1.28% 322 45.68% 705
Crane 1,119 76.96% 319 21.94% 16 1.10% 800 55.02% 1,454
Crockett 1,026 66.41% 512 33.14% 7 0.45% 514 33.27% 1,545
Crosby 1,221 63.79% 684 35.74% 9 0.47% 537 28.05% 1,914
Culberson 257 33.86% 492 64.82% 10 1.32% -235 -30.96% 759
Dallam 1,269 79.86% 302 19.01% 18 1.13% 967 60.85% 1,589
Dallas 310,000 41.89% 422,989 57.15% 7,085 0.96% -112,989 -15.26% 740,074
Dawson 2,906 70.95% 1,152 28.13% 38 0.92% 1,754 42.82% 4,096
Deaf Smith 3,466 73.06% 1,247 26.29% 31 0.65% 2,219 46.77% 4,744
Delta 1,580 72.25% 589 26.93% 18 0.82% 991 45.32% 2,187
Denton 149,935 61.63% 91,160 37.47% 2,168 0.90% 58,775 24.16% 243,263
DeWitt 4,888 73.77% 1,716 25.90% 22 0.33% 3,172 47.87% 6,626
Dickens 730 75.10% 234 24.07% 8 0.83% 496 51.03% 972
Dimmit 874 24.37% 2,692 75.05% 21 0.58% -1,818 -50.68% 3,587
Donley 1,374 81.30% 291 17.22% 25 1.48% 1,083 64.08% 1,690
Duval 1,076 24.40% 3,298 74.80% 35 0.80% -2,222 -50.40% 4,409
Eastland 5,165 79.35% 1,271 19.53% 73 1.12% 3,894 59.82% 6,509
Ector 26,199 73.49% 9,123 25.59% 329 0.92% 17,076 47.90% 35,651
Edwards 673 65.02% 346 33.43% 16 1.55% 327 31.59% 1,035
El Paso 61,783 33.28% 122,021 65.73% 1,826 0.99% -60,238 -32.45% 185,630
Ellis 38,078 70.71% 15,333 28.47% 442 0.82% 22,745 42.24% 53,853
Erath 10,768 76.81% 3,128 22.31% 123 0.88% 7,640 54.50% 14,019
Falls 3,328 59.44% 2,225 39.74% 46 0.82% 1,103 19.70% 5,599
Fannin 8,092 69.20% 3,464 29.62% 138 1.18% 4,628 39.58% 11,694
Fayette 7,582 70.43% 3,014 28.00% 169 1.57% 4,568 42.43% 10,765
Fisher 1,083 60.71% 687 38.51% 14 0.78% 396 22.20% 1,784
Floyd 1,784 70.77% 730 28.96% 7 0.27% 1,054 41.81% 2,521
Foard 327 60.78% 198 36.80% 13 2.42% 129 23.98% 538
Fort Bend 103,206 50.89% 98,368 48.50% 1,248 0.61% 4,838 2.39% 202,822
Franklin 3,392 75.53% 1,036 23.07% 63 1.40% 2,356 52.46% 4,491
Freestone 5,205 71.42% 2,034 27.91% 49 0.67% 3,171 43.51% 7,288
Frio 1,644 40.47% 2,405 59.21% 13 0.32% -761 -18.74% 4,062
Gaines 3,385 83.23% 650 15.98% 32 0.79% 2,735 67.25% 4,067

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio
Click here to open the "2008 United States Presidential Election In Texas" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about 2008_united_states_presidential_election_in_texas while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.
Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

kellogg s
    
americas
    
thegn
    
manchu restoration
    
bhavani
    
mandriva
    
baeza spain
    
gospel
    
cowboysโ€“eagles rivalry
    
flannery o connor
    

References

References

A full list of references for this article are available at the 2008 United States presidential election in Texas Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Notice

This page was generated by an Artificial Intelligence and is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content is based on a snapshot of publicly available data from Wikipedia and may not be entirely accurate, complete, or up-to-date.

This is not political or electoral advice. The information provided on this website is not a substitute for detailed political science research, electoral analysis, or professional consultation on political matters. Always refer to official election results, academic studies, and reputable journalistic sources for comprehensive and current information. Never disregard professional analysis or historical data because of something you have read on this website.

The creators of this page are not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for any actions taken based on the information provided herein.