- Lead
- 1,084
- Total
- 62,772
- vs nation
- R+0.3
- Turnout
- 82.3%
Grand Traverse County, MI
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 82.3% of 76,857 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 1,819
- Total
- 60,236
- vs nation
- R+7.5
- Turnout
- 83.0%
- Lead
- 6,448
- Total
- 51,985
- vs nation
- R+14.5
- Turnout
- 74.2%
- Lead
- 5,659
- Total
- 48,197
- vs nation
- R+15.6
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,458
- Total
- 48,733
- vs nation
- R+10.3
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 9,190
- Total
- 46,191
- vs nation
- R+17.4
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 7,987
- Total
- 38,229
- vs nation
- R+21.4
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 3,368
- Total
- 33,329
- vs nation
- R+18.6
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+1.7MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 96,1662024 5-year
- Median household income
- $81,6472024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 90.5%2024 5-year
- Black
- 0.8%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 3.4%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+9.3 in 1964MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+67.1 in 1904MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Emmet County, MI · twin score 94.9
Midterm durability
Total general-election participants divided by same-year citizen voting-age population. These are total ballots or participating voters—not presidential candidate votes.
- 2024 total turnout
- 82.3%63,221 participants ÷ 76,857 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +13.5 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off versus state
- -1.7 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 68.8%–73.0%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 52,440 | 70,709 | 74.2% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 49,507 | 71,719 | 69.0% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 60,668 | 73,093 | 83.0% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 52,760 | 75,861 | 69.5% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 63,221 | 76,857 | 82.3% | A/A |
Sources and methods
- 2016: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 293/111.
- 2018: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 297/138.
- 2020: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 301/2.
- 2022: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 306/183.
- 2024: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 311/228.
Precinct data
Results by precinct
75 precincts · 62,772 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Long Lake Pct 3Long Lake Pct 3 | 1,162 | 1,436 | 33 | 2,631 | 44.2% | 54.6% | R+10.4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Peninsula Twp Pct 1Peninsula Twp Pct 1 | 1,314 | 1,086 | 26 | 2,426 | 54.2% | 44.8% | D+9.4 |
| Precinct -Peninsula Twp Pct 2Peninsula Twp Pct 2 | 1,330 | 1,018 | 24 | 2,372 | 56.1% | 42.9% | D+13.2 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 5Garfield Twp Pct 5 | 1,235 | 1,023 | 35 | 2,293 | 53.9% | 44.6% | D+9.2 |
| Precinct -Long Lake Pct 1Long Lake Pct 1 | 1,079 | 1,010 | 41 | 2,130 | 50.7% | 47.4% | D+3.2 |
| Precinct -Long Lake Pct 2Long Lake Pct 2 | 938 | 1,128 | 38 | 2,104 | 44.6% | 53.6% | R+9.0 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 2Garfield Twp Pct 2 | 1,038 | 943 | 30 | 2,011 | 51.6% | 46.9% | D+4.7 |
| Precinct -Acme Twp Pct 1Acme Twp Pct 1 | 1,007 | 960 | 36 | 2,003 | 50.3% | 47.9% | D+2.3 |
| Precinct -Whitewater Twp Pct 1Whitewater Twp Pct 1 | 741 | 1,212 | 37 | 1,990 | 37.2% | 60.9% | R+23.7 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 1Garfield Twp Pct 1 | 917 | 1,034 | 26 | 1,977 | 46.4% | 52.3% | R+5.9 |
| Precinct -Blair Twp Pct 2Blair Twp Pct 2 | 638 | 1,145 | 28 | 1,811 | 35.2% | 63.2% | R+28.0 |
| Precinct -East Bay Twp Pct 4East Bay Twp Pct 4 | 902 | 837 | 36 | 1,775 | 50.8% | 47.2% | D+3.7 |
| Precinct -Green Lake Twp Pct 1Green Lake Twp Pct 1 | 738 | 993 | 24 | 1,755 | 42.1% | 56.6% | R+14.5 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 6Garfield Twp Pct 6 | 883 | 839 | 27 | 1,749 | 50.5% | 48.0% | D+2.5 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct 1Traverse City Pct 1 | 1,146 | 574 | 26 | 1,746 | 65.6% | 32.9% | D+32.8 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct10Traverse City Pct10 | 1,083 | 626 | 22 | 1,731 | 62.6% | 36.2% | D+26.4 |
| Precinct -East Bay Twp Pct 2East Bay Twp Pct 2 | 751 | 929 | 30 | 1,710 | 43.9% | 54.3% | R+10.4 |
| Precinct -Paradise Twp Pct 1Paradise Twp Pct 1 | 521 | 1,104 | 31 | 1,656 | 31.5% | 66.7% | R+35.2 |
| Precinct -East Bay Twp Pct 1East Bay Twp Pct 1 | 793 | 819 | 25 | 1,637 | 48.4% | 50.0% | R+1.6 |
| Precinct -East Bay Twp Pct 5East Bay Twp Pct 5 | 712 | 868 | 31 | 1,611 | 44.2% | 53.9% | R+9.7 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct 3Traverse City Pct 3 | 1,139 | 442 | 23 | 1,604 | 71.0% | 27.6% | D+43.5 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct 8Traverse City Pct 8 | 1,079 | 463 | 28 | 1,570 | 68.7% | 29.5% | D+39.2 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct 7Traverse City Pct 7 | 966 | 553 | 31 | 1,550 | 62.3% | 35.7% | D+26.6 |
| Precinct -Traverse City Pct 9Traverse City Pct 9 | 985 | 541 | 23 | 1,549 | 63.6% | 34.9% | D+28.7 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 4Garfield Twp Pct 4 | 871 | 642 | 33 | 1,546 | 56.3% | 41.5% | D+14.8 |
| Precinct -Green Lake Twp Pct 2Green Lake Twp Pct 2 | 608 | 849 | 20 | 1,477 | 41.2% | 57.5% | R+16.3 |
| Precinct -East Bay Twp Pct 3East Bay Twp Pct 3 | 701 | 713 | 28 | 1,442 | 48.6% | 49.4% | R+0.8 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 3Garfield Twp Pct 3 | 685 | 588 | 24 | 1,297 | 52.8% | 45.3% | D+7.5 |
| Precinct -Paradise Twp Pct 2Paradise Twp Pct 2 | 433 | 841 | 14 | 1,288 | 33.6% | 65.3% | R+31.7 |
| Precinct -Garfield Twp Pct 7Garfield Twp Pct 7 | 631 | 587 | 35 | 1,253 | 50.4% | 46.8% | D+3.5 |
| Precinct -Blair Twp Pct 3Blair Twp Pct 3 | 506 | 684 | 15 | 1,205 | 42.0% | 56.8% | R+14.8 |
| Precinct -Acme Twp Pct 2Acme Twp Pct 2 | 559 | 624 | 20 | 1,203 | 46.5% | 51.9% | R+5.4 |
| Precinct -Blair Twp Pct 4Blair Twp Pct 4 | 460 | 693 | 17 | 1,170 | 39.3% | 59.2% | R+19.9 |
| Precinct -Green Lake Twp Pct 3Green Lake Twp Pct 3 | 499 | 596 | 21 | 1,116 | 44.7% | 53.4% | R+8.7 |
| Precinct -Mayfield Twp Pct 1Mayfield Twp Pct 1 | 308 | 774 | 19 | 1,101 | 28.0% | 70.3% | R+42.3 |
| Precinct -Fife Lake Twp Pct 1Fife Lake Twp Pct 1 | 303 | 731 | 16 | 1,050 | 28.9% | 69.6% | R+40.8 |
| Precinct -Blair Twp Pct 1Blair Twp Pct 1 | 346 | 652 | 28 | 1,026 | 33.7% | 63.5% | R+29.8 |
| Precinct -Grant Twp Pct 1Grant Twp Pct 1 | 218 | 620 | 6 | 844 | 25.8% | 73.5% | R+47.6 |
| Precinct -Union Twp Pct 1Union Twp Pct 1 | 114 | 246 | 3 | 363 | 31.4% | 67.8% | R+36.4 |
| 0550020000001055-00200-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0550020000002055-00200-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0550888000001055-08880-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0550888000002055-08880-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0550888000003055-08880-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0550888000004055-08880-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0552380000001055-23800-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0552380000002055-23800-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0552380000003055-23800-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0552380000004055-23800-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0552802000001055-28020-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000001055-31580-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000002055-31580-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000003055-31580-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000004055-31580-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000005055-31580-00005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553158000006055-31580-00006 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553424000001055-34240-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553496000001055-34960-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0553496000002055-34960-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0554924000001055-49240-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0554924000002055-49240-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0554924000003055-49240-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0555248000001055-52480-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0556232000001055-62320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0556232000002055-62320-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0556334000001055-63340-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0556334000002055-63340-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000001055-80340-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000003055-80340-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000007055-80340-00007 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000008055-80340-00008 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000009055-80340-00009 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558034000010055-80340-00010 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558132000001055-81320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 0558704000001055-87040-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −25.6% |
| 1896 | −17.8% |
| 1900 | −40.3% |
| 1904 | −67.1% |
| 1908 | −35.7% |
| 1912 | +1.0% |
| 1916 | −1.6% |
| 1920 | −52.9% |
| 1924 | −64.4% |
| 1928 | −49.5% |
| 1932 | +6.2% |
| 1936 | +1.9% |
| 1940 | −28.9% |
| 1944 | −34.7% |
| 1948 | −38.8% |
| 1952 | −54.6% |
| 1956 | −47.2% |
| 1960 | −27.6% |
| 1964 | +9.3% |
| 1968 | −29.0% |
| 1972 | −31.8% |
| 1976 | −29.5% |
| 1980 | −29.7% |
| 1984 | −42.3% |
| 1988 | −25.8% |
| 1992 | −7.2% |
| 1996 | −10.1% |
| 2000 | −20.9% |
| 2004 | −19.9% |
| 2008 | −3.0% |
| 2012 | −11.7% |
| 2016 | −12.4% |
| 2020 | −3.0% |
| 2024 | −1.7% |
U.S. House
Each row shows U.S. House votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
| Year | Vote lead | Democratic | Republican | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | R | 48.3%29,052 | 51.7%31,157 | 60,209 |
| 2020 | R | 43.8%25,578 | 56.2%32,768 | 58,346 |
U.S. Senate
Each row shows U.S. Senate votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Governor
Each row shows Governor votes counted inside this Place. “Vote lead” is the local lead here, not necessarily the winner of the full contest.
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 73,819 |
| 2018 | 74,888 |
| 2020 | 81,090 |
| 2022 | 82,357 |
| 2024 | 84,004 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
+406 net domestic migration · 2025
Net +7,199 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $92,255 in average income, against $97,867 for residents who stayed — 6% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+4.5 on average — 2.8 points more Republican-leaning than Grand Traverse County, MI itself (R+1.7).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Leelanau County, MI252D+7.8
- Benzie County, MI149R+8.7
- Oakland County, MI130D+10.6
- Kalkaska County, MI122R+42.9
- Wexford County, MI112R+34.6
- Kent County, MI107D+5.4
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Leelanau County, MI245
- Kalkaska County, MI182
- Benzie County, MI179
- Wexford County, MI165
- Kent County, MI142
- Antrim County, MI89
Migration is one input to a place’s political change, not its cause — a shift can also come from residents changing their minds, generational turnover, or turnout. These figures describe the places people moved between; they do not measure how any mover voted.
| Year | Net domestic migration |
|---|---|
| 2011 | +1,264 |
| 2012 | +670 |
| 2013 | +787 |
| 2014 | +554 |
| 2015 | +601 |
| 2016 | +320 |
| 2017 | −227 |
| 2018 | +703 |
| 2019 | +517 |
| 2021 | +697 |
| 2022 | +525 |
| 2023 | +187 |
| 2024 | +195 |
| 2025 | +406 |
Grand Traverse County, anchored by Traverse City and its growing professional class, has shifted markedly toward competitive status over the past decade, compressing a presidential margin that once ran well into double digits.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 9.3 points in 1964 and a Republican high of 67.1 points in 1904. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 1.3 points toward the Democratic candidate; the 2024 margin was 1.7 points.
A population of 96,166, a 91% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $81,647 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Emmet County and Midland County.
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Twin score (0–100) = weighted cosine between tier-standardized fingerprints: presidential margins 2000–2024 with 12-yr trend and elasticity, ACS income, age, education, population and race, top reported ancestries, and religious adherence — chips name the closest-shared dimensions and the widest gap. Re-weight the groups in the twins explorer.
Browse places by community — income, education, race & ethnicity, language — all community cuts →
Compare two places, side by side
Twelve curated comparisons line up election history, demographics, and the divergence story for two places at a glance. Browse all comparisons →
Grand Traverse County, Michigan. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/26055/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.