Is Michigan being overestimated for the Democrats in 2020?

[Non Swing Voter]

I think people generally underestimate how fast trends occur.  So yes, it's probably being overestimated for Democrats to a degree.  That said, Hillary did stunningly awful here.  It boggles my mind that Russia thought to campaign in Michigan but not Hillary Clinton's campaign, even after they lost the primary to Bernie Sanders there.  Given that a) she won't be on the ballot b) Democrats will be more motivated to juice turnout in Detroit, and c) the suburbs will likely swing back to Democrats to a degree, it's hard to see how Trump wins this state again given the small margin for error.  But yes, I do think it's being overestimated for Democrats, the same way Arizona, Florida and Georgia are currently being underestimated for them.

[Pericles]

It's not overestimated in the sense that it could flip back to Democrats. However, it is overestimated in the sense that many people believe Michigan will revert back to a high Democratic margin (like double-digits) when it will most likely be decided in the more competitive low/mid single-digit range.

Do lots of people actually believe that?

[Gracile]

It's not overestimated in the sense that it could flip back to Democrats. However, it is overestimated in the sense that many people believe Michigan will revert back to a high Democratic margin (like double-digits) when it will most likely be decided in the more competitive low/mid single-digit range.

Do lots of people actually believe that?

Yes, there are more than a few users here suggest that Michigan's 2016 result was a fluke and that it will revert back to giving Democrats absurdly high margins (basically a redux of what happened in Indiana in 2008). However, there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence to indicate that being the case. This thread is one such example:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=332192.0

[Agonized-Statism]

It's not overestimated in the sense that it could flip back to Democrats. However, it is overestimated in the sense that many people believe Michigan will revert back to a high Democratic margin (like double-digits) when it will most likely be decided in the more competitive low/mid single-digit range.

Do lots of people actually believe that?

Yes, there are more than a few users here suggest that Michigan's 2016 result was a fluke and that it will revert back to giving Democrats absurdly high margins (basically a redux of what happened in Indiana in 2008). However, there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence to indicate that being the case. This thread is one such example:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=332192.0

Long term, I think it depends on whether or not Detroit can turn itself around, how it turns itself around, and which party better identifies with the new Detroit. You definitely see a demand for populism now, and it's questionable that the GOP will remain a populist party after Trump. If I had to guess, I'd say the city opts for "woke" progressive-style reforms rather than gentrification, maybe even grows again, and delivers the state back to the Democrats for the most part. Remember that the state voted Republican in good times, Democrat when it got rusty, and Republican only in flukes in the '70s and '80s involving a home state advantage and landslides.

[Calthrina950]

If only someone knew what was going to happen in Oakland County.

I think it swings back toward R in 2020.

Michigan had near-presidential turnout last year. My precinct had 77% turnout, I know because I was a poll worker. Gretchen Whitmer either got more votes than Hillary or a greater percentage than Hillary did in all 83 counties. Trump won here by 10,704 votes. Michigan is safe D in 2020.

Weren't you predicting that Debbie Stabenow was going to destroy John James by 15-20 percentage points last year? Given that James only lost to her by 6% in a Democratic wave environment, and given that every other statewide race was within single digits, I think you may be overconfident. As things stand now, I do believe that Michigan will flip back to the Democrats, but it is not a guaranteed flip, and Trump could still win the state, depending on how things play out during the election. It's this kind of overconfidence that helped to doom Hillary Clinton's campaign last time, and Democrats would be well advised not to repeat this behavior in 2020.

[Bojack Horseman]

If only someone knew what was going to happen in Oakland County.

I think it swings back toward R in 2020.

Michigan had near-presidential turnout last year. My precinct had 77% turnout, I know because I was a poll worker. Gretchen Whitmer either got more votes than Hillary or a greater percentage than Hillary did in all 83 counties. Trump won here by 10,704 votes. Michigan is safe D in 2020.

Weren't you predicting that Debbie Stabenow was going to destroy John James by 15-20 percentage points last year? Given that James only lost to her by 6% in a Democratic wave environment, and given that every other statewide race was within single digits, I think you may be overconfident. As things stand now, I do believe that Michigan will flip back to the Democrats, but it is not a guaranteed flip, and Trump could still win the state, depending on how things play out during the election. It's this kind of overconfidence that helped to doom Hillary Clinton's campaign last time, and Democrats would be well advised not to repeat this behavior in 2020.

It would have been 15-20% if she’d actually campaigned and not let him portray himself as some honorable non-partisan military man and attacked him for what he really is: a right wing hack and Trump lapdog.

[Calthrina950]

If only someone knew what was going to happen in Oakland County.

I think it swings back toward R in 2020.

Michigan had near-presidential turnout last year. My precinct had 77% turnout, I know because I was a poll worker. Gretchen Whitmer either got more votes than Hillary or a greater percentage than Hillary did in all 83 counties. Trump won here by 10,704 votes. Michigan is safe D in 2020.

Weren't you predicting that Debbie Stabenow was going to destroy John James by 15-20 percentage points last year? Given that James only lost to her by 6% in a Democratic wave environment, and given that every other statewide race was within single digits, I think you may be overconfident. As things stand now, I do believe that Michigan will flip back to the Democrats, but it is not a guaranteed flip, and Trump could still win the state, depending on how things play out during the election. It's this kind of overconfidence that helped to doom Hillary Clinton's campaign last time, and Democrats would be well advised not to repeat this behavior in 2020.

It would have been 15-20% if she’d actually campaigned and not let him portray himself as some honorable non-partisan military man and attacked him for what he really is: a right wing hack and Trump lapdog.

I'm not so sure about this. Michigan has been affected by the same trends of polarization that have taken place throughout the country. A majority of Senatorial incumbents did worse last year than in 2012. This is to say nothing of the downballot races. Yes, Democrats won all of them (in Michigan), but by lower margins than had been observed historically. If Stabenow had really invested in her campaign, she may have won by low double digits, but it still would have been a closer victory than in 2006 or 2012.

And the polls that we are seeing now for Peters' race next year suggests another single-digit race. Peters will win, but I wouldn't be surprised if James made it as close as he did in 2018. And attacking James as a "right-wing hack" and "Trump lapdog" wouldn't drive him under 40%. Too many of Michigan's voters are partisan Republicans for that to be possible now.

[MT Treasurer]

It would have been 15-20% if she’d actually campaigned and not let him portray himself as some honorable non-partisan military man and attacked him for what he really is: a right wing hack and Trump lapdog.

Yeah, because (1) there are surely that many swing voters nowadays and (2) I’m suuuuure Democratic outside groups never ran a single ad in that race.

[Frenchrepublican]

If only someone knew what was going to happen in Oakland County.

I think it swings back toward R in 2020.

Michigan had near-presidential turnout last year. My precinct had 77% turnout, I know because I was a poll worker. Gretchen Whitmer either got more votes than Hillary or a greater percentage than Hillary did in all 83 counties. Trump won here by 10,704 votes. Michigan is safe D in 2020.

Weren't you predicting that Debbie Stabenow was going to destroy John James by 15-20 percentage points last year? Given that James only lost to her by 6% in a Democratic wave environment, and given that every other statewide race was within single digits, I think you may be overconfident. As things stand now, I do believe that Michigan will flip back to the Democrats, but it is not a guaranteed flip, and Trump could still win the state, depending on how things play out during the election. It's this kind of overconfidence that helped to doom Hillary Clinton's campaign last time, and Democrats would be well advised not to repeat this behavior in 2020.

It would have been 15-20% if she’d actually campaigned and not let him portray himself as some honorable non-partisan military man and attacked him for what he really is: a right wing hack and Trump lapdog.

Before writing posts, you should try to look at facts and datas.

She outspent James by nearly $ 5M and her total spendings were close $16.8M

https://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary?cycle=2018&id=MIS2

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

MI is over estimated as much as Ohio is over estimated for R's, both states arent slam dunks for either party. Purple states are going go with the winner no matter who they are. Since 2008, the winner of the Prez election has swept, not split; OH, IA, PA, WI and PA. Trump is endangered just like Bush W, before Bin Laden tape saved him from certain defeat

[Bojack Horseman]

It would have been 15-20% if she’d actually campaigned and not let him portray himself as some honorable non-partisan military man and attacked him for what he really is: a right wing hack and Trump lapdog.

Yeah, because (1) there are surely that many swing voters nowadays and (2) I’m suuuuure Democratic outside groups never ran a single ad in that race.

James ran 2.5% better than Schuette did, so yes her lack of campaigning is what caused such a close race. I only ever saw one ad for her run during the entire campaign and I didn’t see it very often. It was ads for governor and US House that bombarded the airwaves here in metro Detroit. She spent most of her money and time campaigning for Whitmer, Benson, Nessel, Slotkin, and Stevens.

[MT Treasurer]

James ran 2.5% better than Schuette did, so yes her lack of campaigning is what caused such a close race.

Or maybe it’s because Michigan isn’t some deep blue state, Stabenow has always lucked out by running in Democratic wave years and isn’t actually some unbeatable goddess, James ran a better campaign than Schuette, and Snyder's unpopularity/the Flint water crisis/other local issues dragged down Schuette but not James? Just my two cents.

[SN2903]

Slotkin won by 4% in a district Trump won by 7% and Stevens won by 7% in a district Trump won by 4%. Both outran Hillary's margin by 11%, and Slotkin did so against an incumbent.

you can't judge a midterm electorate for a presidential electorate

https://twitter.com/tbonier/status/1126663776999227392

Yep the electorate was much more elitist in 2018. Those voters will be back in 2020 esp. with this impeachment thing. It will fire them up to vote against the establishment.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Slotkin won by 4% in a district Trump won by 7% and Stevens won by 7% in a district Trump won by 4%. Both outran Hillary's margin by 11%, and Slotkin did so against an incumbent.

you can't judge a midterm electorate for a presidential electorate

https://twitter.com/tbonier/status/1126663776999227392

Yep the electorate was much more elitist in 2018. Those voters will be back in 2020 esp. with this impeachment thing. It will fire them up to vote against the establishment.

It's a pretty elitist attitude for you to classify the majority of voting Americans as "elitist."  

[538Electoral]

We won't know. I lean towards yes but let's wait until November 2020.

[pbrower2a]

Only if Donald Trump comes out of the impeachment process with complete vindication.

This is about like saying that the Detroit Tigers will be in contention by 2022 if they have the the new Ted Williams, the new Ernie Banks, the new Gary Carter, and the new Warren Spahn, and the new Walter Johnson in their minor league system.   

[Hammy]

Only if Donald Trump comes out of the impeachment process with complete vindication.

This is about like saying that the Detroit Tigers will be in contention by 2022 if they have the the new Ted Williams, the new Ernie Banks, the new Gary Carter, and the new Warren Spahn, and the new Walter Johnson in their minor league system.  

This is why impeachment is a dangerous idea regarding the election this close--Dems are setting it in stone that we're headed into 2020 with an acquittal just before the election at this rate.

To the question, yes. The entire election is being grossly overestimated for Dems, this being one of the reasons--and before anybody brings up 2000, keep in mind the impeaching party lost the popular vote--something Dems can't afford to do as long as land area has more say than actual people.

[Mister Mets]

Polls do consistently show John James competitive in the Senate race, so that's a sign this state isn't one Democrats are guaranteed to flip.

[pbrower2a]

Polls do consistently show John James competitive in the Senate race, so that's a sign this state isn't one Democrats are guaranteed to flip.

There are no guarantees a year before the election. We have only historical precedents, and with the elections of 1996, 2004, and 2012 we have two analogies suggesting that Trump will win (slight gains in the popular vote from the first election to the second) and one in which the President loses about 2% in the popular vote. In an even swing, Donald Trump cannot win if he loses so much as 0.8% in the popular vote from 2016.

We have never had a President like Donald Trump, someone so ill-prepared for the Presidency and who has never grown into the role. I see chaos in his administration, a well-founded perception of corruption among multitudes of potential voters, and demographic change not to the advantage of the President and his party. If we do not have an economic meltdown, we have a return of inflation as the President tries to buy re-election with loose fiscal and monetary policy.

On the other hand I can imagine this President arranging a war to connect patriotism to loyalty to the Leader while ensuring easy, fat profits for economic warmongers. The problem: the senior military officers aren't going to risk committing crimes against peace or signing off on war crimes on behalf of the President.

Rigging the election? States run the elections, and even if President Trump can be assured of winning states in which Republicans hold the state apparatus of voting, there are now enough states (now including Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) that he will have to win the hard way. But trying such is itself risky should he lose.