- Lead
- 13,202
- Total
- 30,717
- vs nation
- R+41.5
- Turnout
- 73.2%
Tuscola County, MI
President margin by year
Place winner margin
President results by year
2024 turnout 73.2% of 42,176 citizens 18+
- Lead
- 11,585
- Total
- 29,445
- vs nation
- R+43.8
- Turnout
- 70.9%
- Lead
- 9,673
- Total
- 25,928
- vs nation
- R+39.4
- Turnout
- 62.1%
- Lead
- 2,815
- Total
- 26,110
- vs nation
- R+14.6
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 237
- Total
- 27,798
- vs nation
- R+8.1
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 2,758
- Total
- 28,338
- vs nation
- R+7.3
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 2,368
- Total
- 24,652
- vs nation
- R+10.1
- Turnout
- —
- Lead
- 1,160
- Total
- 22,641
- vs nation
- R+3.4
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+43.0MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 52,9802024 5-year
- Median household income
- $63,8112024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 91.5%2024 5-year
- Black
- 1.0%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 3.8%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+11.0 in 1964MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+69.3 in 1928MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Sanilac County, MI · twin score 88.4
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
- 73.2%30,890 participants ÷ 42,176 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +13.6 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off versus state
- -1.5 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026 scenario
- 59.6%–63.1%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
| Election | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 · Presidential | 26,144 | 42,131 | 62.1% | A/A |
| 2018 · Midterm | 23,185 | 41,894 | 55.3% | A/A |
| 2020 · Presidential | 29,611 | 41,738 | 70.9% | A/A |
| 2022 · Midterm | 24,201 | 42,216 | 57.3% | A/A |
| 2024 · Presidential | 30,890 | 42,176 | 73.2% | 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
55 precincts · 30,717 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -Millington Township, Precinct 1Millington Township, Precinct 1 | 797 | 1,783 | 34 | 2,614 | 30.5% | 68.2% | R+37.7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -City of Caro, Precinct 1City of Caro, Precinct 1 | 795 | 1,300 | 34 | 2,129 | 37.3% | 61.1% | R+23.7 |
| Precinct -Vassar Township, Precinct 1Vassar Township, Precinct 1 | 604 | 1,475 | 21 | 2,100 | 28.8% | 70.2% | R+41.5 |
| Precinct -Elkland Township, Precinct 1Elkland Township, Precinct 1 | 536 | 1,359 | 27 | 1,922 | 27.9% | 70.7% | R+42.8 |
| Precinct -Fremont Township, Precinct 1Fremont Township, Precinct 1 | 495 | 1,328 | 31 | 1,854 | 26.7% | 71.6% | R+44.9 |
| Precinct -Denmark Township, Precinct 1Denmark Township, Precinct 1 | 440 | 1,307 | 21 | 1,768 | 24.9% | 73.9% | R+49.0 |
| Precinct -Indianfields Township, Precinct 1Indianfields Township, Precinct 1 | 397 | 946 | 16 | 1,359 | 29.2% | 69.6% | R+40.4 |
| Precinct -City of Vassar, Precinct 1City of Vassar, Precinct 1 | 442 | 873 | 18 | 1,333 | 33.2% | 65.5% | R+32.3 |
| Precinct -Tuscola Township, Precinct 1Tuscola Township, Precinct 1 | 343 | 915 | 17 | 1,275 | 26.9% | 71.8% | R+44.9 |
| Precinct -Watertown Township, Precinct 1Watertown Township, Precinct 1 | 365 | 889 | 19 | 1,273 | 28.7% | 69.8% | R+41.2 |
| Precinct -Almer Township, Precinct 1Almer Township, Precinct 1 | 340 | 814 | 18 | 1,172 | 29.0% | 69.5% | R+40.4 |
| Precinct -Dayton Township, Precinct 1Dayton Township, Precinct 1 | 288 | 819 | 14 | 1,121 | 25.7% | 73.1% | R+47.4 |
| Precinct -Juniata Township, Precinct 1Juniata Township, Precinct 1 | 290 | 681 | 9 | 980 | 29.6% | 69.5% | R+39.9 |
| Precinct -Arbela Township, Precinct 1Arbela Township, Precinct 1 | 293 | 649 | 16 | 958 | 30.6% | 67.7% | R+37.2 |
| Precinct -Wells Township, Precinct 1Wells Township, Precinct 1 | 253 | 678 | 14 | 945 | 26.8% | 71.7% | R+45.0 |
| Precinct -Fairgrove Township, Precinct 1Fairgrove Township, Precinct 1 | 224 | 626 | 8 | 858 | 26.1% | 73.0% | R+46.9 |
| Precinct -Koylton Township, Precinct 1Koylton Township, Precinct 1 | 150 | 686 | 7 | 843 | 17.8% | 81.4% | R+63.6 |
| Precinct -Novesta Township, Precinct 1Novesta Township, Precinct 1 | 164 | 641 | 10 | 815 | 20.1% | 78.7% | R+58.5 |
| Precinct -Arbela Township, Precinct 2Arbela Township, Precinct 2 | 270 | 538 | 4 | 812 | 33.3% | 66.3% | R+33.0 |
| Precinct -Kingston Township, Precinct 1Kingston Township, Precinct 1 | 159 | 643 | 9 | 811 | 19.6% | 79.3% | R+59.7 |
| Precinct -Akron Township, Precinct 1Akron Township, Precinct 1 | 184 | 602 | 6 | 792 | 23.2% | 76.0% | R+52.8 |
| Precinct -Ellington Township, Precinct 1Ellington Township, Precinct 1 | 195 | 559 | 11 | 765 | 25.5% | 73.1% | R+47.6 |
| Precinct -Columbia Township, Precinct 1Columbia Township, Precinct 1 | 181 | 560 | 4 | 745 | 24.3% | 75.2% | R+50.9 |
| Precinct -Elmwood Township, Precinct 1Elmwood Township, Precinct 1 | 149 | 450 | 13 | 612 | 24.3% | 73.5% | R+49.2 |
| Precinct -Gilford Township, Precinct 1Gilford Township, Precinct 1 | 114 | 355 | 3 | 472 | 24.2% | 75.2% | R+51.1 |
| Precinct -Wisner Township, Precinct 1Wisner Township, Precinct 1 | 94 | 288 | 7 | 389 | 24.2% | 74.0% | R+49.9 |
| 1570072000001157-00720-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1570162000001157-01620-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1570322000001157-03220-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1570322000002157-03220-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1571342000001157-13420-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1571342000002157-13420-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1571742000001157-17420-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1571998000001157-19980-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572160000001157-21600-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572530000001157-25300-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572530000002157-25300-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572538000001157-25380-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572572000001157-25720-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1572710000001157-27100-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1573076000001157-30760-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1573216000001157-32160-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1574044000001157-40440-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1574214000001157-42140-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1574340000001157-43400-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1574388000001157-43880-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1575424000001157-54240-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1575424000002157-54240-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1575942000001157-59420-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578094000001157-80940-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578184000001157-81840-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578186000001157-81860-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578446000001157-84460-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578528000001157-85280-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| 1578808000001157-88080-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −19.3% |
| 1896 | −8.9% |
| 1900 | −26.9% |
| 1904 | −50.2% |
| 1908 | −44.6% |
| 1912 | −17.7% |
| 1916 | −30.3% |
| 1920 | −68.3% |
| 1924 | −68.8% |
| 1928 | −69.3% |
| 1932 | −9.1% |
| 1936 | −22.2% |
| 1940 | −51.2% |
| 1944 | −53.6% |
| 1948 | −49.4% |
| 1952 | −56.5% |
| 1956 | −51.4% |
| 1960 | −38.0% |
| 1964 | +11.0% |
| 1968 | −33.2% |
| 1972 | −37.6% |
| 1976 | −20.5% |
| 1980 | −25.2% |
| 1984 | −40.4% |
| 1988 | −14.3% |
| 1992 | +2.0% |
| 1996 | +5.1% |
| 2000 | −9.6% |
| 2004 | −9.7% |
| 2008 | −0.9% |
| 2012 | −10.8% |
| 2016 | −37.3% |
| 2020 | −39.3% |
| 2024 | −43.0% |
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.
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 | 40,793 |
| 2018 | 40,621 |
| 2020 | 42,995 |
| 2022 | 43,128 |
| 2024 | 43,832 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−13 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −2,960 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $45,556 in average income, against $60,132 for residents who stayed — 24% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean R+14.0 on average — 29 points more Democratic-leaning than Tuscola County, MI itself (R+43.0).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Genesee County, MI217D+4.2
- Saginaw County, MI151R+3.3
- Lapeer County, MI119R+39.8
- Huron County, MI92R+40.6
- Bay County, MI79R+14.7
- Sanilac County, MI66R+47.7
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Saginaw County, MI181
- Genesee County, MI180
- Lapeer County, MI100
- Bay County, MI94
- Huron County, MI65
- Oakland County, MI54
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 | −274 |
| 2012 | −746 |
| 2013 | −506 |
| 2014 | −297 |
| 2015 | −196 |
| 2016 | −414 |
| 2017 | −387 |
| 2018 | −140 |
| 2019 | −281 |
| 2021 | −45 |
| 2022 | +156 |
| 2023 | +108 |
| 2024 | +75 |
| 2025 | −13 |
Tuscola County, anchored by agriculture and small manufacturing in the Thumb region, delivered a 43-point Republican margin in 2024—among the widest gaps in a state defined by its competitive statewide contests.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 11.0 points in 1964 and a Republican high of 69.3 points in 1928. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 3.6 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 43.0 points.
A population of 52,980, a 92% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $63,811 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Sanilac County and St. Clair 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 →
Tuscola County, Michigan. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/26157/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.