Michigan 2020 Election Results

President:  50.6-47.9 Biden over Trump.  The raw margin was about 146,000.  Close, but not quite enough.

Senate: 49.8-48.3 for Peters over John James.  The raw margin was about 84,000.  That’s probably too large a margin to be due to voter fraud, but any credible allegations of fraud should be investigated.

Proposal 1 (natural resources): 84% yes.

Proposal 2 (privacy): 89% yes.  A rare moment of bipartisan agreement.

Supreme Court:  32% McCormick, 20% Welch for the two winning Ds.  17% Kelly, 14% Swartzle for the two Rs.  Ds take a 4-3 majority on the court.  This will have bad consequences.

State Board of Education:  Ds took both slots, with a 45K vote margin between the second and third candidates.
University of Michigan:  D Mark Bernstein was reelected.  R Sarah Hubbard snagged the second slot with a 12K vote margin over the other D.
Michigan State:  R Pat O’Keefe took the top slot, and D Rema Vassar took second.  D incumbent Brian Mosallam took third, and R Tonya Schuitmaker was fourth.
Wayne State:  R former SOS Terri Land was first, and D Sherley Stancato was second.

Congress:

1. 61-37 for Bergman.  If Bergman keeps his term limits pledge, this seat will be open in 2022.
2. 59-38 for Huizinga.
3. 53-47 for Meijer.  Kent has trended in the wrong direction.  Hopefully Meijer locks it down.
4. 65-32 for Moolenaar.
5. 42-54 for Kildee.  Closer due to Trump’s appeal to blue collar workers.
6. 56-40 Upton.  A better result against the far-left Hoadley.  If Upton is thinking about retirement, 2022 would be a good year to do so.
7. 59-41 Walberg. This is Walberg’s best margin yet in what was once a swing district.
8. 47.3-50.9 for Slotkin.  A stronger candidate could have won.  This district will likely change significantly in redistricting.
9. 38-58 for Andy Levin.
10. 66-34 for McClain.
11. 47.8-50.2 for Stevens.  Esshaki did well under the circumstances.  This district probably gets chopped up in redistricting.
12. 31-66 for Debbie Dingell.
13. 19-78 for Tlaib.
14. 19-79 for Lawrence.

State house.  Republicans lost two seats and picked up two, for no net change.  The majority is now 58-52.  Conservative Jason Wentworth will be the new speaker.

3-9. Rs got 2-7% in the all-Detroit districts.
13. 42-58 for Tullio Liberati.  This district might be worth contesting in the future.
19. 49.8-50.2 for Pohutski (258 votes).  The same margin as in 2018.  Rs should contest this again.
20. 45-55 for Koleszar.  This upscale suburban district was lost in 2018.
23. 47.5-52.5 for Camilleri.  This district must be contested in 2022, when it will be open.
25. 47-53 for Shannon.  This could have been won with a better candidate.
31. 44-56 for Sowerby.  This could be worth more effort in the future.
38. 48.4-51.6 for Breen.  LOSS in an open suburban seat that was close in 2018.
39. 52-47 for Berman against a far-left candidate.  This was heavily targeted by Ds.
40. 42-58 for Manoogian.  This upscale suburban district swung hard in 2018 after long being safe R.
41. 45-55 for Kuppa.  Lost in 2018, but may be worth contesting again.
43. 60-40 for Schroeder.  Some pundits absurdly thought this would be close.
44. 60-40 for Maddock.
45. 52.3-47.7 for Tisdel.  Close win in a district heavily targeted by Ds.
48. 50.5-49.5 for David Martin.  PICKUP in a blue collar suburban Flint district against far-left incumbent Sheryl Kennedy.
50. 46-54 for Sneller.  Close due to Trump performing well in suburban Flint.
59. 64-36 for Carra.  Possibly the most conservative new member.
60. 25-75 for Rogers.  She previously lost the 61st in 2006 and 2008.
61. 46-54 for Morse.  LOSS in an open suburban seat that was close in 2018.
62. 48.7-51.3 for Haadsma.  Another close loss for Dave Morgan.
63. 61-36 for Matt Hall.
66. 59-41 for Beth Griffin.  The D here got some hype, but it wasn’t close.
67. 46-54 for Hope.  This district is sometimes close, but never close enough.
71. 47.3-51.2 for Witwer.  This district was lost in 2018.
72. 55-45 for Steven Johnson.
73. 57-42 for Posthumus.  MIRS had a poll that showed a 1 point race.
79. 57-43 for Wendzel.  The D candidate got a lot of hype here.
91. 60-40 for VanWoerkem.  Big win in a former swing district.
96. 57-43 for Timothy Beson.  PICKUP in a blue collar Bay County against an incumbent who renounced his pro-life position.
98. 59-41 for Annette Glenn.  Much bigger margin than in 2018, when utilities spent heavily.
99. 61-37 for Hauck.
104. 51-47 for John Roth.  Better candidate than the scandal-plagued incumbent.
109. 42-57 for Cambensy.  This district may be worth targeting when open.
110. 58-41 for Markkanen.  This was a surprise pickup in 2018.

In 2022, Rs should target districts 19, 23, 25, 38, 50, 62, and 71.  Of course, there will be a new district map, so some district boundaries or numbers will change.

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 house 48 and 96.  My state house tossups had margins of 0.4, 3.2, 5, 8, and 4.  My lean R races had margins from 4 to 24.  My lean D races had margins of 10, 6, -1, 1, and -14.  The closest margin in a race I had at safe was 5 (house 23).  My lean ratings for Congress had margins of 6, 16, 3.6.

You Betcha! (2)Nuh Uh.(0)

  1 comment for “Michigan 2020 Election Results

  1. Sue Schwatrz
    November 6, 2020 at 9:10 am

    My take: Dems targeted school boards all over the state. This is where the real money is. We're in bigger trouble than we know.

    Interesting the vote totals between the Supreme Court a non-partisan (pretend) race, and state school boards. Could this be result of straight-party ballots?

    138K obiden votes shows up at 3:30 a.m.? Suspect. Difference of 8000? Suspect.

    Postal workers ordered to back date ballots, 1 Milllion more voters than registered. No accounting of how many validly printed ballots existed. sharpies being used, voting machines with odometers showing years of ballots put through the machine (there's no logical reason for this and it cannot be zeroed out). Secret meetings held to stop counts. . .

    I somehow do not feel that the outcome is real and accurate. Then there's the very passive MIGOP. . .

    You Betcha! (6)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.