2020 United States Senate election in North Carolina

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
2020 United States Senate election in North Carolina
← 2014 November 3, 2020 2026 →
  x150px x150px
Nominee Thom Tillis Cal Cunningham
Party Republican Democratic
Incumbent U.S. senator

Thom Tillis
Republican


  1. REDIRECT Template:Elections in North Carolina sidebar

Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

The 2020 United States Senate election in North Carolina will be held on November 3, 2020, to elect a member of the United States Senate to represent the State of North Carolina, concurrently with the 2020 U.S. presidential election, as well as other elections to the United States Senate in other states and elections to the United States House of Representatives and various state and local elections. North Carolina is one of just five states holding presidential, gubernatorial, and senatorial elections concurrently in 2020. On March 3, 2020, incumbent Thom Tillis and former State Senator Cal Cunningham won their respective parties' primaries.[1]

Republican primary

Candidates

Nominee

Eliminated in primary

Withdrawn

Declined

Endorsements

Polling

Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Sandy
Smith		 Thom
Tillis		 Garland
Tucker		 Mark
Walker		 Paul
Wright		 Other Undecided
High Point University February 21–28, 2020 247 (LV) – – 69% – – 8% 8%[lower-alpha 2] 16%
444 (RV) – – 58% – – 7% 10%[lower-alpha 3] 26%
Meredith College February 16–24, 2020 353 (LV) ± 3.0% – 53% – – 5% 6%[lower-alpha 4] 36%
SurveyUSA February 13–16, 2020 501 (LV) ± 5.0% – 59% – – 3% 8%[lower-alpha 5] 29%
High Point University January 31 – February 6, 2020 198 (LV) – – 62% – – 7% 5%[lower-alpha 6] 27%
400 (RV) – – 52% – – 6% 5%[lower-alpha 7] 38%
December 20, 2019 Smith withdraws from the race; Wright announces his candidacy
December 16, 2019 Walker announces he will not run[12]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) December 2–4, 2019 500 (LV) ± 4.38% 11%[lower-alpha 8] 63% – – – – 25%
December 2, 2019 Tucker withdraws from the race
FOX News November 10–13, 2019 574 (LV) ± 4.0% 4% 54% 11% – – 5%[lower-alpha 9] 26%
Public Policy Polling August 19–20, 2019 564 (V) – –[lower-alpha 10] 38% 31% – – – 31%
Diversified Research (R)[1][upper-alpha 1] July 8–9, 2019 500 (V) – – 40% 30% – – – 30%
WPA Intelligence (R)[upper-alpha 2] May 19–21, 2019 502 (LV) ± 4.5% 2%[lower-alpha 11] 40% 11% 17% – – 30%
2%[lower-alpha 12] 18% 8% 56% – – 16%
May 6, 2019 Tucker announces his candidacy[13]
Diversified Research (R)[2][upper-alpha 3] Months before May, 2019 –[lower-alpha 13] – – 63% 7% – – – 30%
Hypothetical polling
with only Thom Tillis and Mark Walker
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis		 Mark
Walker		 Undecided
WPA Intelligence (R)[upper-alpha 2] May 19–21, 2019 502 (LV) ± 4.5% 43%[lower-alpha 14] 34% 23%
28%[lower-alpha 15] 64% 8%
21%[lower-alpha 16] 69% 10%
with Thom Tillis and Generic Republican
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis		 Generic
Republican		 Undecided
WPA Intelligence (R)[upper-alpha 2] May 19–21, 2019 502 (LV) ± 4.5% 17%[lower-alpha 17] 18% 52%[lower-alpha 18]
7%[lower-alpha 19] 32% 57%[lower-alpha 20]

Results

File:North Carolina Senate Republican Primary, 2020.svg
Results by county:
  Tillis—80–90%
  Tillis—70–80%
  Tillis—60–70%
Republican primary results[1]
Party Candidate Votes %
Republican Thom Tillis (incumbent) 608,943 78.08%
Republican Paul Wright 58,908 7.55%
Republican Larry Holmquist 57,356 7.35%
Republican Sharon Y. Hudson 54,651 7.01%
Total votes 779,858 100.00%

Democratic primary

Candidates

Nominee

Eliminated in primary

Withdrawn

Declined

Endorsements

Polling

Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Cal
Cunningham		 Trevor
Fuller		 Atul
Goel		 Erica
Smith		 Steve
Swenson		 Undecided
High Point University February 21–28, 2020 274 (LV) – 50% 4% 1% 24% 3% 18%
474 (RV) – 42% 5% 1% 24% 4% 4%
Civitas Institute/Spry Strategies February 26–27, 2020 587 (LV) ± 4.1% 45% 2% 1% 23% 1% 28%
NBC News/Marist February 23–27, 2020 568 (LV) ± 5.1% 51% 3% 1% 18% 2% 25%
Public Policy Polling February 23–24, 2020 852 (LV) ± 3.4% 45% 4% 1% 18% 2% 30%
Meredith College February 16–24, 2020 429 (LV) ± 3.0% 43% 2% 1% 14% 2% 36%
Civitas Institute/Spry Strategies February 21–23, 2020 553 (LV) ± 3.8% 48% 1% 0% 21% 1% 29%
SurveyUSA February 13–16, 2020 698 (LV) ± 4.9% 42% 3% 1% 17% 3% 34%
High Point University January 31 – February 6, 2020 224 (LV) – 37% 4% 0% 11% 4% 44%
397 (RV) – 29% 5% 1% 10% 5% 50%
Public Policy Polling February 4–5, 2020 604 (LV) – 29% 3% 2% 10% 4% 52%
Public Policy Polling January 10–12, 2020 509 (LV) – 22% 2% 3% 12% 1% 60%
FOX News November 10–13, 2019 669 (RV) ± 4.0% 13% 10% – 18% – 49%

Results

File:North Carolina Senate Democratic Primary, 2020.svg
Results by county:
  Cunningham—70-80%
  Cunningham—60-70%
  Cunningham—50-60%
  Cunningham—40-50%
  Smith—40-50%
  Smith—50-60%
  Smith—60-70%
  Smith—70-80%
Democratic primary results[1]
Party Candidate Votes %
Democratic Cal Cunningham 717,941 56.93%
Democratic Erica D. Smith 438,969 34.81%
Democratic Trevor M. Fuller 48,168 3.82%
Democratic Steve Swenson 33,741 2.68%
Democratic Atul Goel 22,226 1.76%
Total votes 1,261,045 100.00%

Other candidates

Libertarian Party

Nominee

Constitution Party

Nominee

Independence Party

Withdrawn

Independent write-in candidates

Withdrawn

General election

Predictions

Source Ranking As of
The Cook Political Report[50] Tossup August 17, 2020
Inside Elections[51] Tossup September 18, 2020
Sabato's Crystal Ball[52] Tossup August 5, 2020
Daily Kos[53] Tossup August 31, 2020
Politico[54] Tossup September 9, 2020
RCP[55] Tossup September 17, 2020
Niskanen[56] Likely D (flip) September 15, 2020
DDHQ[57] Lean D (flip) September 16, 2020
538[58] Lean D (flip) September 18, 2020

Endorsements

Fundraising

In the first quarter of 2020, Cunningham outraised Tillis for the first time, receiving $4.4 million compared to the $2.1 million Tillis raised. Tillis's prior fundraising, however, left him with the advantage in cash on hand, with $6.5 million in the bank, compared to Cunningham's $3 million.[95]

Polling

Graphical summary

<templatestyles src="Graph:Chart/styles.css"></templatestyles>

Aggregate polls

Cal Cunningham vs. Thom Tillis
Source of poll aggregation Dates administered Dates updated Cal Cunningham Thom Tillis Other/Undecided[lower-alpha 21] Margin
270 to Win September 15, 2020 - September 19, 2020 September 19, 2020 44.2% 39.2% 10% Cunningham +5.0%
Real Clear Politics August 29. 2020 – September 13, 2020 September 13, 2020 46.1% 42.5% 10% Cunningham +3.6%

Tillis vs. Cunningham

Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis (R)		 Cal
Cunningham (D)		 Other /
Undecided
Change Research/CNBC September 18–20, 2020 579 (LV) – 43% 48% 9%[lower-alpha 22]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) September 17–20, 2020 612 (LV) ± 3.96% 38% 44% 18%[lower-alpha 23]
Morning Consult September 11–20, 2020 1,604 (LV) ± (2% – 7%) 38% 47% –
Emerson College September 16–18, 2020 717 (LV) ± 3.6% 43% 49% 8%[lower-alpha 24]
Ipsos/Reuters September 11–16, 2020 586 (LV) ± 4.6% 44% 48% 9%[lower-alpha 25]
Siena College/NYT Upshot September 11–16, 2020 653 (LV) ± 4.3% 37% 42% 21%[lower-alpha 26]
Redfield & Wilton Strategies September 12–15, 2020 1,092 (LV) ± 2.97% 38% 49% 13%[lower-alpha 27]
Suffolk University September 10–14, 2020 500 (LV) ± 4.4% 38% 42% 21%[lower-alpha 28]
SurveyUSA September 10–13, 2020 596 (LV) ± 5.6% 40% 47% 13%[lower-alpha 29]
CNN/SSRS September 9–13, 2020 787 (LV) ± 4.4% 46% 47% 7%[lower-alpha 30]
893 (RV) ± 4.1% 44% 46% 10%[lower-alpha 31]
Kaiser Family Foundation/Cook Political Report August 29 – September 13, 2020 1,116 (RV) – 37% 41% 22%[lower-alpha 32]
The Trafalgar Group (R) September 9–11, 2020 1,046 (LV) ± 3.0% 45% 46% 9%[lower-alpha 33]
Rasmussen Reports/Pulse Opinion Research September 7–8, 2020 1,000 (LV) ± 3.0% 44% 47% 10%[lower-alpha 34]
Benenson Strategy Group/GS Strategy Group[upper-alpha 4] August 8 – September 8, 2020 1,600 (LV) ± 2.5% 39% 42% 19%
Change Research/CNBC September 4–6, 2020 442 (LV) ± 4.6% 44% 51% 5%[lower-alpha 35]
Redfield & Wilton Strategies August 30 – September 3, 2020 951 (LV) ± 3.2% 37% 47% 16%[lower-alpha 36]
Monmouth University August 29 – September 1, 2020 401 (RV) ± 4.9% 45% 46% 9%[lower-alpha 37]
401 (LV)[lower-alpha 38] 45% 47% 8%[lower-alpha 39]
401 (LV)[lower-alpha 40] 46% 46% 8%[lower-alpha 41]
FOX News August 29 – September 1, 2020 722 (LV) ± 3.5% 42% 48% 11%[lower-alpha 42]
804 (RV) 40% 47% 13%[lower-alpha 43]
East Carolina University August 29–30, 2020 1,101 (LV) ± 3.4% 44% 44% 12%[lower-alpha 44]
Change Research/CNBC August 21–23, 2020 560 (LV) ± 3.6% 42% 52% 6%[lower-alpha 45]
Morning Consult August 14–23, 2020 1,541 (LV) ± 2.0% 39% 47% 14%
Redfield and Wilton Strategies August 16–18, 2020 856 (LV) ± 3.4% 38% 47% 16%[lower-alpha 46]
East Carolina University August 12–13, 2020 1,255 (RV) ± 3.2% 40% 44% 16%[lower-alpha 47]
Emerson College August 8–10, 2020 673 (LV) ± 3.8% 42% 44% 14%[lower-alpha 48]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) August 6–10, 2020 600 (LV) ± 4.0% 38% 41% 20%[lower-alpha 49]
Change Research/CNBC August 7–9, 2020 491 (LV) ± 4.4% 43% 48% 10%[lower-alpha 50]
Public Policy Polling[upper-alpha 5] July 30–31, 2020 934 (V) ± 3.2% 44% 48% 8%[lower-alpha 51]
Data for Progress July 24 – August 2, 2020 1,170 (LV) ± 3.2% 41% 49% 10%[lower-alpha 52]
CBS News/YouGov July 28–31, 2020 1,152 (RV) ± 3.8% 39% 48% 12%[lower-alpha 53]
HIT Strategies (D)[upper-alpha 6] July 23–31, 2020 400 (RV) ± 4.9% 32% 48% 21%[lower-alpha 54]
Change Research/CNBC July 24–26, 2020 284 (LV) ± 5.6% 40% 52% 8%
Morning Consult July 17–26, 2020 1,504 (LV) ± 3.0% 37% 46% 17%
Cardinal Point Analytics (R) July 22–24, 2020 735 (LV) ± 3.6% 43% 43% 14%[lower-alpha 55]
Public Policy Polling July 22–23, 2020 939 (V) ± 3.2% 40% 48% 13%[lower-alpha 56]
Redfield & Wilton Strategies July 19–23, 2020 919 (LV) ± 3.2% 36% 47% 16%[lower-alpha 57]
Marist College/NBC News July 14–22, 2020 882 (RV) ± 4.0% 41% 50% 10%[lower-alpha 58]
Spry Strategies (R)[upper-alpha 7] July 11–16, 2020 750 (LV) ± 3.5% 40% 40% 20%[lower-alpha 59]
Cardinal Point Analytics (R) July 13–15, 2020 547 (LV) ± 4.2% 44% 47% 9%[lower-alpha 60]
Change Research/CNBC July 10–12, 2020 655 (LV) ± 3.8% 42% 49% 9%[lower-alpha 61]
Public Policy Polling July 7–8, 2020 818 (V) ± 3.4% 39% 47% 15%[lower-alpha 62]
Change Research/CNBC June 26–28, 2020 468 (LV)[lower-alpha 63] ± 3.9% 41% 51% 8%[lower-alpha 64]
East Carolina University June 22–25, 2020 1,149 (RV) ± 3.4% 41% 41% 18%[lower-alpha 65]
Public Policy Polling June 22–23, 2020 1,157 (V) ± 2.9% 40% 44% 16%[lower-alpha 66]
FOX News June 20–23, 2020 1,012 (RV) ± 3.0% 37% 39% 23%[lower-alpha 67]
NYT Upshot/Siena College June 8–18, 2020 653 (RV) ± 4.1% 39% 42% 19%[lower-alpha 68]
Gravis Marketing (R)[upper-alpha 8] June 17, 2020 631 (RV) ± 3.9% 46% 45% 9%
Redfield & Wilton Strategies June 14–17, 2020 902 (LV) ± 3.3% 36% 45% 19%[lower-alpha 69]
Public Policy Polling June 2–3, 2020 913 (V) ± 3.2% 41% 43% 16%[lower-alpha 70]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) May 26–28, 2020 500 (LV) ± 4.4% 38% 36% 26%[lower-alpha 71]
Meeting Street Insights (R) May 9–13, 2020 500 (RV) ± 3.8% 44% 46% 8%[lower-alpha 72]
East Carolina University May 7–9, 2020 1,111 (RV) ± 3.4% 40% 41% 19%[lower-alpha 73]
Civiqs/Daily Kos (D) May 2–4, 2020 1,362 (RV) ± 3.0% 41% 50% 9%[lower-alpha 74]
Meredith College April 27–28, 2020 604 (RV) ± 4.0% 34% 44% 22%
SurveyUSA April 23–26, 2020 580 (LV) ± 5.5% 39% 41% 20%[lower-alpha 75]
Public Policy Polling April 14–15, 2020 1,318 (LV) ± 3.4% 40% 47% 13%
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) April 5–7, 2020 500 (LV) ± 4.4% 38% 34% 28%
East Carolina University February 27–28, 2020 1,288 (RV) ± 3.2% 44% 42% 14%
NBC News/Marist February 23–27, 2020 2,120 (RV) ± 2.6% 43% 48% 9%
Public Policy Polling[upper-alpha 9] February 25–26, 2020 [lower-alpha 76] 911 (RV) – 41% 46% 13%
Public Opinion Strategies (R)[upper-alpha 10] January 11–15, 2020 800 (LV) ± 3.5% 48% 44% 8%
ALG Research (D)[upper-alpha 11] January 8–13, 2020 700 (LV) – 42% 44% 13%
Meredith College September 29 – October 7, 2019 996 (RV) ± 3% 33% 33% 32%
Public Policy Polling[upper-alpha 11] September 16–17, 2019 628 (V) ± 3.9% 43% 45% 12%
Fabrizio Ward/AARP July 29–31, 2019 600 (LV) ± 4.0% 41% 42% 17%
Public Policy Polling[upper-alpha 12] June 17–18, 2019 610 (RV) ± 4.0% 40% 41% 19%
Hypothetical polling
with Erica D. Smith
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis (R)		 Erica D.
Smith (D)		 Undecided
Meredith College September 29 – October 7, 2019 996 (RV) ± 3% 33% 34% 17%
Emerson College May 31 – June 3, 2019 932 (RV) ± 3.1% 39% 46% 15%
with Generic Democrat
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis (R)		 Generic
Democrat		 Undecided
Public Policy Polling (D)[upper-alpha 13] June 30 – July 1, 2017 1,102 (V) ± 3.6% 44% 48% 8%
with Thom Tillis and Generic Opponent
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Thom
Tillis (R)		 Generic
Opponent		 Other Undecided
Fabrizio Ward/AARP July 29–31, 2019 600 (LV) ± 4.0% 26% 52%[lower-alpha 77] 3%[lower-alpha 78] 19%
with Generic Republican and Generic Democrat
Poll source Date(s)
administered		 Sample
size[lower-alpha 1]		 Margin
of error		 Generic
Republican		 Generic
Democrat		 Other/Undecided
Ipsos/Reuters September 11–16, 2020 586 (LV) ± 4.6% 47% 48% 5%[lower-alpha 79]
Siena College/NYT Upshot September 11–16, 2020 653 (LV) ± 4.3% 48% 44% 8%[lower-alpha 80]
Emerson College August 8–10, 2020 673 (LV) ± 3.8% 45% 44% 11%[lower-alpha 81]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) August 6–10, 2020 600 (LV) ± 4% 42% 43% 16%[lower-alpha 82]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) May 26–28, 2020 500 (LV) ± 4.38% 43% 40% 17%[lower-alpha 83]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) April 5–7, 2020 500 (LV) ± 4.4% 41% 42% 17%[lower-alpha 84]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released March 17, 2020 –[lower-alpha 85] – 44% 41% 15%[lower-alpha 86]
Climate Nexus Feb 11–15, 2020 675 (RV) ± 3.9% 43% 46% 11%
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released October 17, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 40% 41% 20%[lower-alpha 87]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released September 11, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 37% 42% 21%[lower-alpha 88]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released August 4, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 39% 37% 24%[lower-alpha 89]
Fabrizio Ward/AARP July 29–31, 2019 600 (LV) ± 4.0% 44% 44% 11%[lower-alpha 90]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released June 10, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 38% 38% 24%[lower-alpha 91]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released May 5, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 39% 39% 22%[lower-alpha 92]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released March 17, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 37% 40% 22%[lower-alpha 93]
Harper Polling/Civitas (R) Released February 13, 2019 –[lower-alpha 85] – 37% 38% 25%[lower-alpha 94]

Results

United States Senate election in North Carolina, 2020
Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Republican Thom Tillis (incumbent) {{{change}}}
Democratic Cal Cunningham
Libertarian Shannon Bray {{{change}}}
Constitution Kevin E. Hayes {{{change}}}
Total votes 100.00%

See also

Notes

Partisan clients

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Cite error: Invalid <references> tag; parameter "group" is allowed only.

Use <references />, or <references group="..." />
Voter samples and additional candidates

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Cite error: Invalid <references> tag; parameter "group" is allowed only.

Use <references />, or <references group="..." />

References

<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Cite error: Invalid <references> tag; parameter "group" is allowed only.

Use <references />, or <references group="..." />

External links

  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found. (State affiliate of the U.S. League of Women Voters)
  • Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
Official campaign websites
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  2. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  4. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  5. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  6. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  7. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  8. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  12. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  13. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  14. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  15. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  17. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  19. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  20. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  21. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  23. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  24. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  25. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  26. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 29.3 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  31. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  34. ↑ 34.0 34.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  36. ↑ 36.0 36.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 41.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 43.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  44. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  45. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  46. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  47. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  48. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  49. ↑ 49.0 49.1 49.2 49.3 49.4 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  50. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  51. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  52. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  53. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  54. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  55. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  56. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  57. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  58. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  59. ↑ https://secure.winred.com/thom-tillis/nikki-haley-for-tillis
  60. ↑ 60.0 60.1 https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/57717/thom-tillis
  61. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  62. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  63. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  64. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  65. ↑ 65.0 65.1 65.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  66. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  67. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  68. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  69. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  70. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  71. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  72. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  73. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  74. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  75. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  76. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  77. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  78. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  79. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  80. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  81. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  82. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  83. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  84. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  85. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  86. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  87. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  88. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  89. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  90. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  91. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  92. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  93. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  94. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  95. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.


Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "lower-alpha", but no corresponding <references group="lower-alpha"/> tag was found, or a closing </ref> is missing
Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "upper-alpha", but no corresponding <references group="upper-alpha"/> tag was found, or a closing </ref> is missing

Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=2020_United_States_Senate_election_in_North_Carolina&oldid=726167482"