when did michigan cease being a swing state?

[WalterMitty]

honestly?

1988?

[Kevin]

Well it still is one imo(albeit a D leaning one)

It was fairly close in both 2000 and 2004.

Plus the GOP controls the Governorship, State Legislature, as well other constitutional officers for the state such as AG and SS. Plus a majority of the state's House Seats.

[henster]

Well it still is one imo(albeit a D leaning one)

It was fairly close in both 2000 and 2004.

Plus the GOP controls the Governorship, State Legislature, as well other constitutional officers for the state such as AG and SS. Plus a majority of the state's House Seats.

For now...

[Adam Griffin]

Well it still is one imo(albeit a D leaning one)

It was fairly close in both 2000 and 2004.

Plus the GOP controls the Governorship, State Legislature, as well other constitutional officers for the state such as AG and SS. Plus a majority of the state's House Seats.

honestly?

1988?

Meh, Michigan's 1988 presidential results were the closest to the national result of any state. In 1992, it was grouped in with about a dozen other states that were within a point of the national result. It didn't begin pulling away until 1996; I'd argue that 2000 was the breakaway year. In 2000, 2004 & 2012, the state was consistently about three points more Democratic than the nation as a whole (2.90, 2.97 and 3.03 points, respectively).

[ElectionsGuy]

The Bush years is when it went off track to the left (and it has stayed that way). But as others have said, you can make an argument for it not being a swing state, because republicans control the state currently. However they were the result of the 2010 wave.

[Kevin]

Well it still is one imo(albeit a D leaning one)

It was fairly close in both 2000 and 2004.

Plus the GOP controls the Governorship, State Legislature, as well other constitutional officers for the state such as AG and SS. Plus a majority of the state's House Seats.

honestly?

1988?

Meh, Michigan's 1988 presidential results were the closest to the national result of any state. In 1992, it was grouped in with about a dozen other states that were within a point of the national result. It didn't begin pulling away until 1996; I'd argue that 2000 was the breakaway year. In 2000, 2004 & 2012, the state was consistently about three points more Democratic than the nation as a whole (2.90, 2.97 and 3.03 points, respectively).

And your point being?

Pres. election results are only one part of a state's overall political lean.

The Democrats making gains here in 2014 is a unsubstantiated claim at best given that the 2014 Midterms (so far) are shaping up in the GOP's favor.

[WalterMitty]

i was referring to presidential races.

michigan, in my estimation, is not a swing state in presidential elections, and hasnt been for quite a few cycles now.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I'd say its had a Democratic lean since 1960. And 1988 is a poor benchmark of a Starr's ability to go Republican.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

2008 election.

[pbrower2a]

The Bush years is when it went off track to the left (and it has stayed that way). But as others have said, you can make an argument for it not being a swing state, because republicans control the state currently. However they were the result of the 2010 wave.

2010 was simply a disaster for the Democratic Party -- and a great year for the cunning, ruthless, devious Hard Right that now has a Machiavellian contempt for democracy.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Michigan ceased being a swing state around the time that school busing issues that dominated suburban Detroit in the 1970s and early 1980s ceased being paramount as the Detroit suburbs integrated.  White flight from Detroit happened a long time ago; what has happened since the 1980s from Detroit is black flight, which has changed the demographics of Detroit's suburbs.

[DS0816]

Michigan first voted in 1836. It achieved statehood in 1837. From 1836 to 2012, Michigan has had 45 presidential elections in participation.

The longest unbroken string of presidential elections in which Michigan carried for the winner was 6. And those were with the Republican victories of 1860 to 1880.

Michigan was a base state for the Republican Party in which it carried for all of the party's winners from 1860 to 1956. Richard Nixon, with his first election in 1968, became the first from his party to win the presidency without the state in his and the party's column. Michigan got back on board for the winning Republicans of the 1970s and 1980s. And it became, without doubt, a Democratic base state when won over (with a host of others) in 1992 as Bill Clinton unseated George Bush. But when you look back at the Democratic presidential victories beginning with the 1960s, all with exception of Jimmy Carter carried the state … and carried Michigan with margins which exceed their national numbers. (Call it the "native son" favoritism pointed out by one forum member in reference to the 1976 unseated Republican president Gerald Ford.)

Michigan gave margins very close to the national numbers in 1984 and 1988. You can trace the "swing state" reputation to those two election cycles. But those who cling to that period, two decades-plus later, have lost touch.

[dmmidmi]

Michigan was right around the national average in 1988 and 1992. But by 1996, it was 2-3% more Democratic, and it has more or less stayed that way since.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

It hasn't.  It was close in 2000 and 2004, and Obama only carried it by a wider margin because of strong Dem years nationally.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Michigan was pretty close in 2004.

[MATTROSE94]

Michigan was pretty close in 2004.

It actually was, as Bush only lost it by about 4 points. If John McCain recieved the Republican nomination in 2000 and was running for re-election in 2004, he would have easily carried the state against John Kerry.

[IceSpear]

It hasn't.  It was close in 2000 and 2004, and Obama only carried it by a wider margin because of strong Dem years nationally.

Kerry won it by 3 points while Bush won by 3 points nationally. That's not a swing state, it's a lean D state.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Somewhere between 2004 and 2006. When Devos and Dubya who were making MI into a battleground failed to use the troubled economy in MI to their advantage and Granholm who was the weakest incumbant survived. MI since then, have been reliably Democratic.

[dmmidmi]

Michigan was pretty close in 2004.

It actually was, as Bush only lost it by about 4 points. If John McCain recieved the Republican nomination in 2000 and was running for re-election in 2004, he would have easily carried the state against John Kerry.

You're not serious, right?

[Mr. Illini]

It wasn't that close in '04.

I'd say either 1996 or 2000.

[DS0816]

Michigan was pretty close in 2004.

It actually was, as Bush only lost it by about 4 points. If John McCain recieved the Republican nomination in 2000 and was running for re-election in 2004, he would have easily carried the state against John Kerry.

No.

Michigan is not going to carry for the Republicans in a presidential election while that party's base of support is from the eleven states of the Old Confederacy. (This keeps in mind bellwether status of Florida and Virginia, and that North Carolina is on the way.)