The following analysis comes from an extensive database my team and I have put together. It combines individual-level information of Florida voters (including where they were born) with precinct-level results.

The following graph plots precinct-level results. The size of the precincts are scaled to the total votes cast in a precinct in the 2016 General Election.  The Y-Axis is vote two-party share for Trump and Clinton. The X-Axis is the proportion of Hispanic voters in the precinct who are Cuban-born. Each precinct has at least 100 Cuban-born voters and at least 50% of voters were Hispanic.

As the LOWESS curves reveal, as the share of voters who are Cuban-born Hispanics increases, Trump’s share of the two-party vote steadily increases, intersecting with Clinton’s share of the vote around 42 percent of Cuban-born Hispanics, but then peaking at roughly 55 percent of the vote when the proportion of Cuban-born Hispanic voters reaches roughly 50 percent.

Although Trump won more than 60 percent of the two-party vote in a handful of these majority Hispanic precincts with a prevalence of Cuban-born voters, in Miami-Dade Precinct 335 (Hialeah), where 60 percent of the Hispanics who cast ballots were Cuban-born, Trump won less than 45 percent of the two-party vote.

Still trying to figure out how to best visualize Trump’s overwhelming victory on Election Day in Florida. The following panel of figures draw on precinct-level data that our Election Sciences team at UF has helped me collect. The data presented here show only the precincts in the state in which white voters made up at least 75% of the votes cast for each method of voting (Election Day, Early In-Person, and Vote-by-Mail), and that had at least 100 ballots cast for each method.  In other words, these are heavily white precincts where whites cast at least 75% of all ballots cast for each method of voting.

Running along the X-Axis is the proportion of the overall vote that Trump won (so, from 0% to 100%). The height of each vertical bar (there are a total of 60 bars) constitutes the fraction of the total votes Trump received — that is, add them all up and they equal 100% of Trump’s total votes by each method). The red vertical line in each panel is set at .5, or precincts in which Trump won 50% of the total votes cast.

As should be clear, Trump crushed it Election Days in these predominantly white precincts. The peak of the very tight normal distribution curve for Election Day voters in precincts where three-fourths of the votes cast were by white voters is greater than 65%.  Trump did not do nearly as well (relatively speaking) among vote-by-mail voters in predominantly white precincts; he fared better with predominantly white precincts whose voters cast early in-person ballots.

Stay tuned for similar graphs with Trump’s support among predominantly Hispanic precincts, broken down by method of vote.

(In each graph, the X-Axis is a precinct’s Election Day or Vote-By-Mail or Early In-Person votes cast out of total votes cast in that precinct by all three methods. The Y-Axis is Trump’s and Clinton’s share of total votes cast out of votes for all presidential candidates for each of the three methods.)