By Zachary Gorchow
President of Michigan Operations
Posted: November 7, 2022 12:39 PM

It's Election Eve™, so Gongwer Managing Editor Alethia Kasben and I decided to check in on what we think is happening in this most uncertain election cycle in Michigan.

Zach: Alethia, what feels like the longest election cycle ever is finally almost over. And I still feel very unsure about what to expect tomorrow. We've discussed endlessly all the conflicting forces in this election in Michigan to the point where I'm sick of talking about it but it's still true. As best you can tell, where do you think things stand overall?

Alethia: With so many conflicting trends it feels risky to play the prediction game, but I think the expectation overall is Governor Gretchen Whitmer will win reelection to a second term, though by how much remains unclear. It could be very close or relatively comfortable. The interesting thing about this election is voters generally vote against the party in power in the White House (in 2022, Democrats) especially in a situation right now where many are struggling with higher prices. But Roe v. Wade being overturned this year gave a boost to Democrats. Fundamentally, I think that is still there and can't be ignored.

There are two more Democrats at the top of the ticket. SOS Jocelyn Benson appears another Democrat in Michigan who is almost certain to win. But there is also AG Dana Nessel - and there is some concern there, right?

Zach: Yes, and you can see it from Nessel herself, who was tweeting about her Republican opponent Matt DePerno in all caps at sunrise this morning. This is one of the strangest races I can recall. DePerno has essentially no money, a barebones campaign and plenty of material in the opposition research file. And yet, having a huge financial advantage means nothing if you squander it, and I don't know anyone in either party who thinks Nessel's ads helped her. They might have even hurt her. There's no real consistent reelection message from the incumbent attorney general. DePerno, for all his issues, has basically just become a generic Republican and in a year where Republicans appear poised to do well nationally that works out well for him. Nessel ran almost 7 points behind Whitmer in 2018 and didn't crack 50% in a Democratic wave year so in some ways it's not surprising she's going to have to sweat this one out. But still. An incumbent attorney general hasn't lost since 1954. DePerno is under criminal investigation. He's on videotape clearly saying he opposes all exceptions to abortion even to save the mother's life. Yes, he has tried to walk that back but still. Nessel's had more than her share of gaffes and errors that have taken a toll. She also seems to be acting as her own campaign manager which generally is not a good idea for any candidate at the statewide level. You did a good story Friday about Democrats saying they are not panicking but this will be too close for comfort. That said, if Nessel loses, there will 100% be an avalanche of Democratic criticism about all the mistakes she made. Of course if she wins, all is forgiven.

I agree we want to be careful about the prediction game. What is the scenario where Dixon pulls off the upset? It seems safe to say given the financial disadvantage she has faced, combined with her not really getting any traction until May and that no one has ever defeated a governor seeking a second term since we went to the four-year term it would be the biggest upset in Michigan political history.

Alethia: While I would be surprised if Dixon wins, there would also be a level of, "well, that makes sense." If Republicans turn out strongly, I would say even stronger than in 2020, and independents lean heavily toward Dixon, she could win. Democrats would also have to have a sluggish turnout elsewhere. While that could happen in urban areas like Detroit, I think Kent and Oakland counties are going to give Dems a boost. I don't think Dixon has made inroads with those voters who are motivated by abortion and also turned off by things like fraudulent election claims. I don't know how Dixon can overcome that dynamic.

Zach: Dixon would pretty much have to follow the Trump 2016 path. Turnout in Detroit falls off big time. Rural areas that have been going 65-35 for Republicans of late continue their deepening red shade and go to 75-25 or more. She takes Macomb by at least 8 points. The one thing Dixon does not have going for her in 2022 that Trump had in 2016 was a more pronounced third party candidate field. The third party candidates this year are highly unlikely to combine for 5%+ of the vote like they did in 2016.

Whitmer was so strong through the I-96 and I-94 corridors in 2018. Oakland and Kent being obvious examples. And it's hard to see that changing this time around. The university counties (Ingham, Kalamazoo, Washtenaw).

When you're a challenger like Dixon, you need a couple breaks. And it seems clear she absolutely must have some type of diminished turnout in Detroit as one of those breaks. There's conflicting data on that. Republicans are talking up low Detroit voter interest but that's kind of a biennial talking point for them. Sometimes they are right (2010, 2014, 2016) and sometimes they are wrong (2012, 2018, 2020).

Alethia: Right. And with data showing increased voter registrations and interest from voters motivated by abortion, even if Detroit turnout is low, it could be made up elsewhere.

We could talk about the governor's race all day. But in 2022, there is actually a legitimate race for control of the Legislature, currently controlled by the Republicans. The Senate seems like more of a possibility and a tossup heading into tomorrow. What needs to happen for Democrats to take the chamber that has been in GOP hands for longer than I have been alive?

Zach: Haha

I was in the second grade when the Republicans took control in January 1984 with a pair of special elections. It's been a long run for the Republicans in that chamber to say the least.

There are four seats that are going to decide the Senate. Two in Macomb (Klinefelt vs. MacDonald and Hertel vs. Hornberger), one in the Tri-Cities (McDonald Rivet vs. Glenn) and one in the Grand Rapids region (LaGrand vs. Huizenga). There is definitely some buzz that Republicans have put Darrin Camilleri on his heels a bit in a seat we still have ranked Tilt Democratic, and they have certainly committed massive resources to it but given that Camilleri won his House district three times including twice with Trump easily winning his seat and that his Senate seat has much more Democratic turf, I'm not counting that as one of the four. If Houston James wins, then this whole talk of the Senate being a jump ball was silly, Aric Nesbitt should never be doubted again and the Republicans have 22 seats.

Anywho. The Dems have long said they think Klinefelt is a lock. But MacDonald is an incumbent and most of the turf here is in Macomb County, which is moving the GOP's way. Some Democrats yelled at me in 2020 for predicting Trump would still comfortably win Macomb even if by a smaller amount than 2016. I never did get any "Hey you were right about that one" comments but that's life in the big city. This is probably going to come down to the handful of precincts in Detroit. If Detroit turnout is strong, Klinefelt should roll.

So if you give the Dems Camilleri and Klinefelt, they are at 18 and in need of one more to get to 19 -- if you assume Whitmer wins and Garlin Gilchrist as lieutenant governor breaks the tie. I think their best shot at seat No. 19 is McDonald Rivet. That's the No. 1 Republican concern for sure. The base numbers there are by far more favorable to the Democrats than the other two seats. It's pretty much all on Saginaw and Buena Vista Township -- two heavily Dem communities that have broken Democratic hearts in the past with a lack of sufficient turnout to turn the Saginaw-area seat.

It still feels like a jump ball. That said, it's very, very hard to bet against the Senate Republicans, and the terrain on which these races are being fought favors them.

Now how about the House?

Alethia: The House is a tougher path for the Democrats to be sure. It is there but a lot needs to go right for them. GOP simply needs fewer seats to win. The battle for House control lies with four seats Downriver, two seats in Oakland County, two seats in Macomb, a seat centered by Marquette in the U.P., a seat in the Traverse City area, Battle Creek and a handful of seats in Grand Rapids.

I think Grand Rapids will be very strong for the Democrats. It is one area where voters seem content to completely shut out the Republicans after being angered by former President Donald Trump. The they need to protect Rep. Alex Garza in a tough Downriver seat, Rep. Nate Shannon in a tough Macomb County seat and keep the Marquette seat. None of those are sure things and they could lose all three. The there is another Democratic incumbent in Battle Creek, Rep. Jim Haadsma. Virtually nothing is happening there outside of Dem spending for their incumbent. But the Republican there did nothing in 2020 and almost won. However, former President Donald Trump was on the ballot then.

Dems have a shot in unseating two Republican incumbents, Rep. Jack O'Malley in the Traverse City area and Rep. Mark Tisdel in Rochester Hills. Both feel tough to me but Democrats are confident there. In particular, Republicans have spent almost $1 million protecting O'Malley which is a lot. Makes me think something could be happening there.

Then we have some open seats in Oakland, Macomb and Downriver. I think Dems get at least one of the four total seats Downriver, maybe two. I think there is a decent shot they win the 61st - the open Macomb seat. But, in the end, my thought is the House stays status quo with a slim Republican majority. But a key Republican said last week she thought they get to 60 seats. As you said last week, we are going to see whose side polling is better.

What do you think about the House?

Zach: I've been thinking something like 58-52 Republican for a while. Things open up for the Democrats if they can save Garza, Shannon and Haadsma and the Marquette seat. Of course, I would also like how things look for me if I win the Powerball.

The Tisdel seat is so interesting beyond its importance to majority. The Democrats felt after the Dobbs decision it would start tipping the election toward them. Well this is the seat where that should show up if they are right. Rochester and Rochester Hills. A swingy, fiscally conservative, socially more liberal area. If Tisdel wins, it feels like Dobbs basically petered out as an issue in the legislative races or at least it wasn't the silver bullet some Democrats thought it was. On the other hand, there's no question if Tisdel loses, it's all because of Dobbs. He was a near lock to win a second term until that decision leaked. Lots at stake there.

If we give the Democrats the following seats -- West Bloomfield, Novi, Plymouth/Northville/Livonia, Troy, Eaton County and Walker/Grand Rapids,

-- that brings them to 44 seats. Let's also give them that Washtenaw/Livingston seat Republicans seem to have written off. That's 45. If we give the Republicans the Sterling Heights/Troy seat, Lake St. Clair, Burton/Davison/Grand Blanc and Bay County, the Republicans are 50. Even if the Democrats take the remaining three Kent County competitive seats, they are at 48 -- still needing eight more and in largely tough regions for them. That's why it's so vital they hang onto those four seats of theirs I mentioned above. They do that, now they're at 52, and there's certainly a path to 56 from there.

Alethia: It is certainly a trickier path compared to the Senate which is simpler but still in tossup status. And that is why we hear a lot of talk about the Senate. Certainly the Dems would love everything but a Senate flip would be a huge win for them and governing next term would be interesting. I think there will be a lot to digest and analyze once this all over. Once all the results are in we could still be left with relative confusion about voters and what they want/think.

Zach: Yes, it feels like there's the potential for conflicting messages out of Tuesday, which fits after having all these conflicting forces going into it. I suppose the takeaway would be a focus on the importance of strong candidates.

Okay, I don't know how much more we can say that hasn't already been said, and I just saw some breaking news coming into Ye Olde Inbox so now we will await results and threaten anyone who starts talking about 2024 with pain and suffering.

Alethia: Indeed, we at least need to get through certification before 2024 comes up.