Red Towns, Blue Towns: An Interactive Map of Where 86 Boston Metro Communities Actually Stand
Cambridge voted 87.6% Democratic. Methuen went 50-48. Lawrence swung 30 points in 4 years. Use our interactive tool to explore how your target towns vote—and what it reveals about community values.
Massachusetts towns aren't equally blue. This interactive analysis reveals the 77-point spread between Cambridge (most Democratic) and competitive suburbs—and what voting patterns reveal about schools, housing policy, and community culture. Explore 2024, 2020, and 2016 data for 86 Boston metro towns.
Try the Interactive Tool
Launch the Boston Metro Voting Patterns Tool →
Filter by pattern (Strong D, Lean D, Competitive, Lean R, Strong R), sort by margin or shift, compare 2024 vs. 2020, and explore all 97 towns with charts, tables, and congressional district breakdowns. Now includes Republican-leaning towns!
🎯The 88-Point Spread: Massachusetts Isn't Equally Blue
Massachusetts voted 61.2% for Kamala Harris in 2024, making it her third-strongest state nationally. But that statewide average masks dramatic variation across the Boston metro area—including 11 towns that voted for Trump.
Our analysis of 97 Boston metro communities reveals an 88-point spread between the most Democratic and most Republican towns:
The Boston metro area now shows the full political spectrum—from deep blue urban cores to red working-class suburbs. The 2024 election revealed fault lines that had been building for years.
📊The Five Patterns: How We Classify Communities
We classify towns into five voting patterns based on their 2024 Democratic vs. Republican margin (percentage points):
| Pattern | Margin | # of Towns | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
Strong Democrat | ≥ D+25 | 52 | Cambridge, Somerville, Brookline, Lexington, Newton, Randolph |
Lean Democrat | D+10 to D+24 | 28 | Quincy, Woburn, Dedham, Peabody, Norwood, Marshfield |
Competitive | D/R +0 to +9 | 14 | Methuen, Wilmington, Billerica, Plymouth, Abington, Braintree |
Lean Republican | R+0.1 to R+10 | 3 | Tewksbury (R+1), Lynnfield (R+3), Hanover (R+3) |
Strong Republican | ≥ R+10 | 0 | None exceed R+11 in metro (Hanson at R+10.7 is close) |
Key finding: 54% of Boston metro towns (52 of 97) voted "Strong Democrat" with margins exceeding 25 points. But 11 towns voted for Trump, including 6 that flipped from Biden in 2020.
Education Predicts Voting More Than Income
Top 5 Most Democratic Towns (all 70%+ college grads):
- Cambridge: 82.7% college grads, D+77.1
- Brookline: 85%+ college grads, D+73.0
- Somerville: 75%+ college grads, D+72.0
- Lexington: 85% college grads, D+59.6
- Winchester: 80%+ college grads, D+54.0
Republican-Leaning Towns (all 25-40% college grads):
- Hanson: ~28% college grads, R+10.7
- Saugus: ~30% college grads, R+10.4
- East Bridgewater: ~32% college grads, R+10.0
- Dracut: ~29% college grads, R+8.0
- Hanover: ~35% college grads, R+3.0
Education level explains approximately 50-60% of voting variance among Massachusetts towns—surpassing income, race, or geography as the primary predictor.
📉The 2024 Shift: Working-Class Towns Moved Right
Massachusetts shifted 8.8 points rightward from 2020 to 2024—the largest swing in modern state history. But the shift wasn't uniform:
- •Lawrence (82% Hispanic, 15% college grads): Biden 74% → Harris 57% (−17 points, largest metro shift)
- •Chelsea (65% Hispanic, 22% college grads): Biden 74% → Harris 66.6% (−7.4 points)
- •Lynn (45% Hispanic, 25% college grads): Biden 65% → Harris 60.3% (−4.7 points)
- •Lowell (diverse Gateway City): Biden 60% → Harris 56% (−4 points)
- •Haverhill (working-class Merrimack Valley): Biden 58% → Harris 54% (−4 points)
Meanwhile, affluent suburbs held steady or moved left:
- •Cambridge: Biden 89.2% → Harris 87.6% (−1.6 points, relatively stable)
- •Lexington: Biden 78.8% → Harris 77.2% (−1.6 points)
- •Wellesley: Biden 75% → Harris 73% (−2 points)
- •Dover: Biden 68% → Harris 65.4% (−2.6 points)
What Drove the Working-Class Shift?
Secretary of State William Galvin noted Chelsea experienced a 16.7% turnout decline—the state's largest. Lynn, Revere, Boston, Everett, and Malden all saw turnout drops exceeding 10%.
Combined with economic anxiety and cultural conservatism (immigration rhetoric, transgender issues), working-class Hispanic and white communities shifted right even as affluent, highly-educated suburbs consolidated Democratic support.
🏘️What Voting Patterns Reveal About Community Culture
Voting patterns aren't just about politics—they correlate with community priorities, school funding, housing policy, and cultural values that affect daily life:
| Voting Pattern | Typical Characteristics | Housing Policy | School Priorities |
|---|---|---|---|
Strong Democrat (D+25+) | High education (70%+), affluent, professional class, urban/inner suburb | Strict zoning, preservation-focused, resistant to density | Academic excellence, test scores, college prep, enrichment programs |
Lean Democrat (D+10-24) | Mixed education (40-60%), middle class, suburban/working-class urban | Moderate zoning, some development openness | Balance between academics and vocational, sports emphasis |
Competitive (D+0-9) | Lower education (20-40%), working/middle class, outer suburbs/Gateway Cities | Pro-development, affordable housing supportive | Practical skills, workforce prep, cost-conscious |
Subscribe to Market Pulse
Get weekly Boston suburban real estate insights delivered to your inbox.
Real-World Example: Question 2 (MCAS) Revealed Class Divides
Wealthy Suburbs OPPOSED (wanted to keep standardized testing):
- Weston: 67% NO
- Wellesley: Strong NO
- Dover: Strong NO
- Lexington: 57.5% NO
- Carlisle: Strong NO
Gateway Cities SUPPORTED (wanted to eliminate testing):
- Holyoke: 73% YES
- Springfield: 70% YES
- Lynn: Strong YES
- Chelsea: Strong YES
- Revere: Strong YES
This reveals that wealthy Democrats and working-class Democrats want fundamentally different things from schools—even though both vote Democratic for president. Wealthy suburbs prioritize competitive advantages; working-class cities oppose perceived barriers.
For homebuyers: voting patterns predict school priorities beyond partisan labels.
🔍How to Use This Data in Your Home Search
When researching Boston metro towns, understanding voting patterns provides context beyond real estate metrics:
- •Check education demographics (Census data): The strongest predictor of community values and voting patterns. Towns with 70%+ college grads will feel dramatically different from towns with 30%.
- •Review ballot question patterns: Look beyond presidential votes to local referendums—these reveal true priorities (e.g., Question 2 on MCAS showed class divides within the Democratic party).
- •Examine turnout rates: High turnout indicates civic engagement and political infrastructure. Gateway Cities with low turnout often have weaker representation.
- •Compare income + education together: High-income + high-education (Dover, Weston) creates different environment than high-income + moderate-education (outer suburbs).
- •Consider shifts over time: Towns moving rapidly (like Lawrence) may be experiencing demographic or cultural transitions that affect community character.
- •Use as cultural proxy, not prediction: Voting patterns correlate with community culture, school priorities, housing policies—but don't predict individual neighbors' views.
Interactive Tool Features
✅ Filter by pattern: View Strong D, Lean D, Competitive, Lean R, or Strong R towns
✅ Sort options: By margin, alphabetically, or by 2020-2024 shift
✅ 2020 vs 2024 comparison toggle: See which towns shifted and by how much (including flips!)
✅ Visual charts: Bar chart of pattern distribution, Most Democratic vs Most Republican rankings
✅ Complete data table: All 97 towns with 2024 percentages, margins, patterns, and congressional districts
✅ Republican towns included: Now shows all 11 Trump-voting towns with verified data
✅ Town links: Click any town name to view full profile with schools, prices, demographics
✅ Methodology section: Full explanations, data sources, limitations, and context
The tool updates the URL as you filter/sort, so you can bookmark or share specific views.
📍Congressional District Context
Boston metro towns span seven congressional districts (MA-03 through MA-09), each with distinct political character:
| District | 2024 Harris % | Character | Key Towns |
|---|---|---|---|
MA-07 | 79.0% | Urban core, most Democratic | Cambridge, Somerville, Chelsea, Boston |
MA-05 | 71.0% | Affluent suburbs, highly educated | Lexington, Arlington, Belmont, Watertown, Waltham |
MA-04 | 62.1% | Wealthy inner/outer suburbs | Newton, Wellesley, Needham, Dover, Brookline |
MA-08 | 62.0% | South Boston, diverse South Shore | Quincy, Braintree, Brockton, Milton |
MA-06 | 59.0% | North Shore, mixed | Salem, Lynn, Marblehead, Beverly, Peabody |
MA-03 | 58.6% | Merrimack Valley, I-495 suburbs | Lowell, Lawrence, Andover, Chelmsford, Westford |
MA-09 | 53.6% | South Shore, Cape, most competitive | Hingham, Cohasset, Plymouth, Cape Cod |
MA-09 (D+11.2) is the most competitive congressional district in the Boston area, while MA-07 (D+62) is the most Democratic.
🔗Related Resources
For deeper analysis of Massachusetts voting patterns and community research:
- •Interactive Voting Patterns Tool: Explore, filter, and compare all 86 Boston metro towns
- •Electoral Analysis Deep Dive: 25-year analysis of MA voting patterns, education polarization, Gateway City shifts (22,000 words)
- •Town Comparison Tool: Compare demographics, schools, prices, voting patterns side-by-side
- •All Town Profiles: Comprehensive profiles for 86+ communities with honest assessments
- •School Value Analysis: Best schools per dollar—data-driven analysis
- •Terminology Glossary: Definitions for all real estate, political, and demographic terms
⚠️Disclaimers & Limitations
This analysis provides informational context, not political endorsements or predictions.
- •Patterns ≠ Predictions: Community-level voting patterns don't predict individual views. Every town contains diverse perspectives.
- •Aggregate Data Limitations: We analyze town-level results; precinct-level variations exist within large municipalities.
- •Correlation ≠ Causation: Education level correlates strongly with voting but may proxy for urbanization, age, occupation, or cultural values.
- •Presidential vs. Local: Presidential elections reflect national dynamics; local elections often differ significantly.
- •Data Currency: 2024 data from MA Secretary of Commonwealth certified results; 2020 and 2016 from official state databases and media analysis.
- •Third-Party Votes: Small percentages (typically 1-3%) for third-party and write-in candidates included in totals but not shown separately in comparisons.
Data Sources
- Massachusetts Secretary of Commonwealth PD43+ Database (electionstats.state.ma.us)
- Town clerk certified election results (2024, 2020, 2016)
- US Census Bureau American Community Survey (2022-2023)
Secondary Sources:
- Boston Globe town-by-town analysis
- WBUR election mapping
- Secretary Galvin's post-election reports
- Massachusetts Voter Table turnout analysis
Data Quality Notes:
- All 2024 data certified as of December 2024
- Some 2020 figures adjusted from preliminary to certified results
- Congressional district boundaries reflect 2022 redistricting for 2024 data, 2012 redistricting for 2016-2020
Last Updated: January 19, 2026
---
Ready to explore the data? Launch the Interactive Voting Patterns Tool →
Need Custom Analysis?
Want deeper insights for a specific property or neighborhood? Get a custom research report tailored to your needs—from individual property analysis to comprehensive market overviews.
Request Custom Analysis