Which states with large farming populations swung toward or away from Trump in 2024?
Executive summary
Every state moved toward Donald Trump relative to 2020, and that shift included the country’s large farm states—much of American farm country swung further to the right in 2024, with deeply farming-dependent counties delivering lopsided margins for Trump even as some local races and pockets of farmers defected or remained uneasy about his policies [1] [2] [3]. Still, polling and reporting show important nuance: farmers’ overwhelming stated preference for Trump in surveys coexisted with active concern about tariffs, labor policy and trade—factors that helped Democrats regain ground in select state and local contests [4] [5] [6].
1. Nationwide and farm-county picture: a clear rightward swing
Analysts at Brookings found that every state swung toward Trump in 2024 compared with 2020, a national pattern mirrored inside farm country where Investigate Midwest reports that the most farming-dependent counties backed Trump by an average of 77.7%—a striking consolidation of rural support [1] [2]. AP VoteCast and related summaries put rural turnout and preference solidly for Trump—roughly 62% of rural voters supported him—signaling that states with large farm populations were part of a broad rural realignment in 2024 [3].
2. Which large-farming states swung toward Trump (examples and evidence)
Key farm states such as Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio are repeatedly singled out in coverage as battlegrounds where rural voters mattered; reporting shows Greater Minnesota and similar rural regions trending redder and that swing states with sizable farm economies were central to both campaigns’ calculations [7] [6] [8]. AgWeb’s state-level farmer polling highlighted the seven swing states with sizable farm economies—Georgia, Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Pennsylvania and North Carolina—as critical theaters, and broader vote totals confirm those states moved toward Trump in 2024 [8] [1].
3. Farmers’ stated preferences vs. policy grievances — the paradox
Surveys of farmers found large stated support for Trump—one Farm Journal poll of about 5,000 farmers showed roughly 85% planning to back Trump—yet qualitative reporting captured widespread anxiety among farmers about past tariffs, lost export markets and labor policy that damaged incomes during the previous administration [4] [5]. The Guardian and other outlets reported farmers who feared renewed trade wars or deportation policies could harm agriculture, even while many still voted Republican or for Trump specifically, highlighting a split between policy concern and voting behavior [9] [5].
4. Where Democrats made inroads despite the rural drift
Despite the dominant trend toward Trump, there were notable exceptions at state and local levels where Democrats or moderates outperformed 2020 benchmarks—reporting points to Democratic rebounds in parts of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Arizona and Ohio in state or congressional contests, suggesting that farm states are not monolithic and that local issues and candidate quality can blunt broader swings [5] [6]. Analysts caution that “Monopoly Farmers” or high-profile ag voices matter politically but constitute a small slice of the electorate and therefore cannot alone reverse state-level shifts [10].
5. What this means for the 2024 map and for farm policy politics
The upshot is dual: politically, farm states and farming counties broadly swung toward Trump and helped produce statewide movements to the right in 2024, but substantively, agricultural constituencies remain divided—many farmers report policy grievances that could reshape future alignments if unaddressed, and Democrats’ local gains show vulnerability in the Republican coalition where candidates or messaging resonate with working rural voters [2] [1] [5].