PNP got 58.56%, PDM got 38,14% and independents got 3.3% of the district votes
Introduction
The Turks and Caicos Islands General Election took place on February 7th, 2024, and the PNP emerged as the winning party winning 16 seats, while the PDM won 2 seats and an independent won 1 seat.
In 2012, 7,245 voters were registered and 85% or 6,221 people voted and 1,024 did not vote.
In 2016, 7, 732 voters registered and 80% or 6,189 voted and 1,543 did not vote.
In 2021, 8,581 voters were registered and 75% or 6,460 people voted and 2,121 persons did not vote.
In 2025, 9,385 voters were registered but only 72%- or 6,759-persons voted, which means 28% or 2,626 persons did not vote.
Therefore since 2016, the voter turnout has been declining. In 2016 and 2021, there was a 5 % decline respectively and in 2025 there was a 3% decline. Ironically, there was a 7% increase in registered voters in 2016, 11% increase in 2021 and 9% increase in 2025.
District Level
In 2012, 49.41% or 3, 074 voted for the PDM, 2,833 or 45.54% voted for the PNP, 4.98% or 310 voted for the PPP and the remaining 4 or 0.06% voted for independents. Even though the PDM had a majority of the popular votes, the PNP had more seats and was able to secure the Government.
In 2016, 51.2% of the voters or 3,169 people voted for the PDM, 42.74% or 2,645 voted for the PNP, 3.93% or 243 voted for the PDA and the remaining 2.13% or 132 people voted for independents. The results indicated that the PDM gained votes while the PNP lost the votes
In 2021, 55.29% of the voters or 3,572 people voted for the PNP while 44.71% or 2,888 people voted for the PDM.
In 2025, 58,56% of the voters or 3,958 people voted for the PNP while 38.14% or 2, 578 individuals voted for the PDM and the remaining 3.3% or 223 voted for the independents. Therefore, there was an increase of 386 voters for the PNP and a decrease of 310 voters for the PDM. The PDM candidate for ED3 at the District Level received 28 votes while the PDMs at Large received 70 votes which means PDM voted for the independent candidate in ED3 and did not support the PDM Candidate in ED3. PNPs also voted for the independent candidate in ED3. The PDM candidate in ED 6 received 359 votes, while the PNP candidate got 358 votes. However, all but two of the PNP Candidates at Large received more votes than Mr. Stubbs. Does this mean that PDMs voted for the At Large Candidates or PNPs voted for the PDM candidate at the district level? The same can be said about ED 8. All but two of the PNP Candidates received more votes than Mr. Howell.
At Large Level
In 2012, Hon Sharlene Cartwright Robinson got 3,427 votes even though the PDM only got 3,074 votes at the district level. This means that individuals who voted for PNP and PPP at the district level also voted for Hon. Sharlene Cartwright Robinson. The same can be said about Hon. Rufus Ewing who got 3,252 votes, Hon Derek Taylor who got 3,191 votes, Hon. Charles Misick who got 3,107 votes and Hon Josephine Connolly who got 3,023. The other PDM candidates who ran at large can got less than the 3,074 votes that the PDM got at the District Level. If all the PDM voters had voted for all of the candidates at the Large Level, the PDM could have gotten two more At large Seats and could have formed the Government.
In 2016, Hon Sharlene Robinson received the most votes again with 3,024. It does not appear PNPs shared their votes this time with Sharlene Robinson. Based on the analysis, the PNPs shared their votes with the former PNP leader Michael Misick who received 1629 votes. This year the only PNP At large candidate that won was Hon Charles Misick who received 2,335 votes which was 21 more than Robert Been. If the PDMs had voted straight down the line, Robert could have won.
In 2021, things completely changed with the PNP winning all the At Large Candidates with Hon. Charles Misick getting 3,594 votes. Based on the results, we can assume that the PNPs voted straight down the line. Some of the PDM again did not vote straight down the line.
In 2025, the PNP continued with their momentum winning all 9 At Large Seats with Hon. E Jay emerging with the highest of 4,614 votes. It is clear based on these results that majority of the PNP voters voted straight down the line. Some PNPs did not vote for all the PNP At-large candidates, as some received fewer than 3,958 votes at the district level. What is interesting in ED2 is that eight of the PDM At Large Candidates received more than the Leader of the Opposition votes. Also, two of the PNP At Large Candidates received more than the PDM candidate.
Conclusion
With a 72% voter turnout, it is evident that the majority favored the PNP’s return to power. At the district level, the PNP received 58.56% of the votes while the PDM only received 38.14. At the At Large Level, the PNP received 62.9% of the votes with Hon. E Jay Saunders receiving 68.26%, Hon Charles Misick with 62.26% and Jamel Robinson with 60%.
It should also be noted that most people that voted were between the ages of 35 and 55 followed by age group of 55 to 64. The smallest segment that voted was between the ages of 18 and 24.