Michigan 2018 Election Results

Governor: 43-54 for Whitmer over Schuette.  Michigan’s governorship usually flips when open.  Schuette ran a lackluster campaign and was dogged by controversies inherited by Snyder and attacks from Calley in a bitter primary.

Senate: 46.3-51.7 for Stabenow over John James.  Much closer than her wins by 21% in 2012 and 16% in 2006.  John James was a good candidate who has a future in the MI GOP.

AG: 46.8-48.5 for Dana Nessel.  Get ready for four years of crazy Dana.

SOS: 45-52 for Benson.  Lang was largely abandoned in this race.

Proposal 1 (marijuana): 56-44  Get ready for legal pot.
Proposal 2 (redistricting): 61-39 This will be a mess with both sides trying to game the system.  Without the governor, Rs wouldn’t have controlled the process, anyhow.
Proposal 3 (voting rules): 67-33 Easy win with no organized opposition.

Supreme Court was 30-25-24 for Clement (moderate R) and Cavanagh (D) with Wilder (conservative R) losing.  Rs have 4-3 majority, but two Rs are unreliable.

Education Boards:  Ds sweep all eight seats.

Congress:
1. 56-44 for Bergman.  If Bergman keeps his term limits pledge, this seat will be open in 2022.
2. 55-43 for Huizinga.  Much closer, but not that close.
3. 55-42 for Amash.  Still secure.
4. 63-37 for Moolenaar.
5. 36-60 Kildee
6. 50.3-45.7 Upton.  Close call.  Upton no longer overperforms.  Does he retire in 2020, or hang on longer?
7. 54-46 Walberg. He will never win big margins, but he has settled in here.
8. 46.8-50.6 for Slotkin (LOSS).  Bishop lost thanks to D turnout in Ingham and Oakland.  Bishop didn’t work the district hard enough.  Maybe Joe Hune could run next time?
9. 37-60 for Andy Levin, an heir force candidate.
10. 60-35 for Mitchell
11. 45-52 for Stevens (LOSS).  Big suburban revolt for Ds in Wayne and Oakland.  Lena Epstein, a Trump sycophant, was a bad candidate here.  Maybe Pat Colbeck could run here?
12. 28-69 for Debbie Dingell
13. 89% for Tlaib (general) and 91% for Jones (special).  Expect a hotly contested primary here in 2020.
14. 15-83 for Lawrence

State Senate.  The GOP lost five seats, ending with a 22-16 majority.  The losses were all in urban/suburban areas.  Good enough to stop Ds from passing any legislation.

7. 47-51 Polhanki.  LOSS for Laura Cox in an upscale suburban seat.  Cox could run for her old house seat, which also went D.
10. 51-46 for MacDonald.  Not the best candidate, but good enough in a Trump-friendly area.
12. 48.6-49.4 for Bayer.  LOSS for McCready.  A libertarian may have cost the moderate McCready.
13. 48.1-51.9 for McMorrow.  LOSS for Knollenberg.  Oakland suburbs here and in 12 swung against the GOP.
15. 51.7-48.3 for Runestad.  Big win for a solid conservative.
17. 58-39 for Dale Zorn.
20. 42-53 for McCann.  LOSS for Margaret O’Brien after her 61-vote win in 2014.
22. 56-42 for Lana Theis.  Big win for conservatives.
24. 54-43 for Tom Barrett.  Big win for conservatives.  Rossman spent a fortune here.
29. 41-56 for Brinks.  LOSS in a district that was on borrowed time thanks to Grand Rapids.
31. 60-40 for Daley.  He lost the primary four years ago.
32. 55-45 for Ken Horn.  Republicans have won the last eight state senate elections in Saginaw!
34. 50.7-46.4 for Bumstead.  Win for a fairly conservative candidate.
38. 55-44 for McBroom.  Dianda was a good candidate, but the UP is too Trump-friendly to win.

There are now three solid conservatives (Runestad, Theis, and Barrett), up from two now.  Mike Shirkey will be the new majority leader, an improvement on the current leader.  Four years from now there will be a new map.  Rs will have to defend open seats in Monroe and Saginaw, but should have a good chance to pick up a seat in Oakland.

State house.  Republicans lost six seats and picked up one, for a net loss of five.  The majority is now 58-52.  Conservative Lee Chatfield will be the new speaker.

3-10. Rs got 2-8% in the all-Detroit districts.
17. 56-44 for Bellino
19. 49.8-50.2 for Pohutski.  LOSS for GOP, win for progressive Ds.  Laura Cox could run for a final term here.
20. 47.3-52.7 for Koleszar.  LOSS for Noble, who had a sick wife and couldn’t campaign much.
23. 44-56 for Camilleri.  Safe D now, competitive when open.
24. 56-44 for Marino
25. 46-54 for Shannon.  Big missed opportunity here.
30. 57-43 for Farrington
38. 49.4-48.1 for Crawford.  Tough open seat in 2020.
39. 54-42 for Berman against indicted embezzler Suidan.
40. 43-57 for Manoogian.  LOSS in the ultimate upscale suburban district.
41. 48.7-51.3 for Kuppa.  LOSS for Teitz in often vulnerable Troy.
44. 58-42 for Maddock, a solid conservative Trump supporter.
60. 23-77 for Hoadley
61. 51.4-48.6 for Brandt Iden, who finally broke 50%.
62. 48.2-51.8 for Haadsma.  LOSS for Rs, which was closer than expected.
63. 57-39 for Matt Hall
66. 57-43 for Beth Griffin
67. 44-54 This district is close, but not winnable.
71. 49.1-50.9 for Witwer.  Tough LOSS in a swing district.
72. 54-43 for Steven Johnson
79. 56-44 for Wendzel
91. 56-44 for VanWoerkem.  Big win in a swing district.
93. 52.5-44.6 for Filler
94. 55-45 for Wakeman
98. 52-48 for Annette Glenn.  Big win for conservatives against big spending utilities.
99. 53.4-46.6 for Hauck
101. 58-42 for O’Malley.  Great candidate in a usually close district.
104. 50.4-49.6 for Larry Inman.  Weak candidate in a vulnerable upscale district.
110. 50.8-49.2 for Gregory Markkanen.  PICKUP for a candidate who raised almost no money in a Trump-friendly district.

My ratings turned out to be pretty accurate.  Every race I had at likely or safe for a party was won by that party.  The only lean races I missed were Wilder, Bishop, Epstein, senate 7 and 12, and house 110.  My state senate tossups had margins of 5, 4, 11, 11.  My state house tossups had margins of 12, .4, 5, 3, 3, 2, 12, 7, and 16.  The closest margin in a race I had at safe was 4 (Upton).

You Betcha! (9)Nuh Uh.(0)

  8 comments for “Michigan 2018 Election Results

  1. KG One
    November 7, 2018 at 10:40 pm

    I really hope that John James considers a run in '20 against Peters

    He already has the organization in place.

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(0)
  2. Sue Schwartz
    November 8, 2018 at 9:38 am

    Trump didn't come to Michigan to stump for John James, Why??? Yet every Sen/Gov candidate he stumped for won. Was it because he was blindsided by his early, mistaken endorsement of Scheutte? Did he realize this from his victory tour in MI when Scheutte was BOOOOOOOED? I say yes. John James, our Star, lost out. We all loose. Message sent loud and clear.

    The lessons learned in 2016 from Trump, fell on deaf ears in the state GOP who remained complacent, if not vengeful. This was most notable at state convention in the nomination of Clements. As a result, we lost an excellent Justice Wilder. Failing to pay attention to the people--that's the lesson Trump taught.

    It was business as usual as evidenced by the Scheutte campaign. Old school campaigning no longer works. The DIMS, on the other hand, took the Trump lessons and ran with it. For two years they plotted, planned, amassed huge sums, and created a well oiled machine. A machine that may have been clogged, if not stopped. IF TRUMP CAME TO MICHIGAN to stump for our star, John James. The rest of the ticket, would have followed.

    Then there's the other silent factor--allegations of sexual abuse we've been bombarded with. In those races involving male/female (Gov. AG, Supreme Court, and US Senate, and many local races) females won. This election may well boil down to merely a battle of the sexes--identity politics at its worse.

    You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(1)
    • Mark
      November 8, 2018 at 1:34 pm

      When Trump came to Michigan a few months back, he praised Schuette as he always praises Repub candidates at the beginning of his presentation. He then asked for Schuette to stand up; Schuette wasn't there even though he had previously received Trump's endorsement. Schuette couldn't be bothered. Schuette then proceeded not to be visible after the primary and that could have hurt down ballot.

      Another factor in my view is that the real White Boy Rick was no where to be found stumping, to my knowledge, for any Repub candidate. There seem to be a considerable number of Real WBR voters that might have been persuaded to come out and vote. I even heard WBR's "buddy" Frank Beckman make essentially the same point on his broadcast yesterday. Not like Frank to ever criticize his "buddy".

      You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Corinthian Scales
      November 8, 2018 at 8:06 pm

      Oh hogwash. Prop 1-18 brought out a lot of dregs that vote Democrat.

      End of story.

      You Betcha! (3)Nuh Uh.(1)
  3. JD
    November 8, 2018 at 1:07 pm

    Anybody who has payed even the slightest attention to crony non-competitive giveaway legislation rammed through since the Republicans have been it total control knows full well that losing anything but the House and Senate by large margins would have been unacceptable to those still in power. The Snyder era legislation passed easily with but not a 'peep' from the grassroots (see "no vote of the people required" pension obligation bonds about to pop, the less than vocal or organized challenges to the MEDC or their satellites, the elimination of reporting rules statewide, etc.) will define this long dead experiment. The business-as-usual about to take place under a slightly more constrained Whitmer era will involve but a few new Democrats replacing TeaPartiers in state Republican's ears who obviously should have never been awarded the opportunity given but their footnote in history less than a decade later.

    Again, we are dealing with legislators merely holding the door open for generations currently making their escape from this state with invaluable/desperately needed treasure which should have been clawed back from them through constitutional changes *decades* ago. The Pension Obligation Bond mandates sitting like a ticking time bomb and constantly renewed since the lame duck of 2012 WILL be shoved in to action SOON crippling our grandchildren's future. Throw in developers and the uber wealthy forever confiscating whatever is 'left' of our children's Michigan legacy through non-elected/TeaParty approved "Authorities" or "Foundations'" replacing local government?

    Game (already) over for our kids no matter what the aftermath of future Michigan elections bring until drastic changes are made in transparency (dead last in the nation), record retention, agency reporting and just plain (true) grassroots movements with basic math/timetables included.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Jason
      November 8, 2018 at 1:27 pm

      Not a peep? Plenty.. One can complain however till the cows come home.

      I have personally fought the POB effort in TC multiple times. Folks have to deal with each effort locally. The results are in for many communities that used the option with mixed results depending on when they 'bought in' but borrowing money to pay 'owed' money is strangely enticing for some community leaders who want a better can-kicking mechanism.

      OK.. so we've talked about your pet peeve. Happy?

      You Betcha! (4)Nuh Uh.(0)
  4. JD
    November 11, 2018 at 8:37 am

    With all due respect, the Pension Obligation Bond issue was stripped from being a locally controllable issue which "folks have to deal with locally" through the law's immediate statewide effect in 2012 and subsequent renewals. I would rate being dead last in the nation in basic transparency and FOIA/OMA law (i.e.. almost $20,000 charged to preserve orchestrated Right To Work violence/resulting inaction footage long destroyed due to retention laws) far more crippling to Michigan children's ability to be taught grassroots activism. Wait...I forgot...we don't teach our kids to be activists...the other side does (sorry).

    I would also argue that these fast upcoming POBs (with no vote of the public required) do not "borrow money to pay money".
    These massive individual payments **come directly out of each year's tax roles and taxpayer pockets** in the form of bond payments guaranteed by tax dollars. When they (we) need more money to cover their Cadillac benefits and fake overtime induced bloated paychecks...yet another Bond is gladly issued with principle and interest payed immediately to the issuer at tax time.

    When our kids witness Mom and Dad attempting to model grassroots activism while obviously fearful of becoming too vocal regarding the basic laws (slop) which their local Boss Hog lives both in and by?

    Those kids are more likely to model Boss Hog or take the much easier route of simple social justice advocate with better-than-you arrogance being much more natural and frankly enjoyable than demanding transparency changes or heaven forbid the ensuing 'work' necessarily involved).

    Elections matter yet this one really didn't due to corruption being so entrenched and the laws supporting same remaining untouched. You don't end up dead last in transparency and win a participation trophy.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)
    • Jason
      November 11, 2018 at 1:23 pm

      Preaching to the choir.. which is sadly a little of what we do here. But until you have a suggestion of which steps to take, it sounds like endless complaining.

      As an aside, if Voters wish to engage, they can challenge a bond with a vote. There initiative procedure used to override local governing board decisions. It just depends on who has the motivation to notify, gather signatures and file.

      I guess you are the guy where you live.

      You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *