What does Michigan mean?

Inside the numbers.

On Tuesday, President Joe Biden won the state of Michigan in his largely drama-free march to the Democratic presidential nomination.

But, something happened in that vote that’s worth digging into.

First, here’s how the vote shook out:

Joe Biden 617,728 81.1%

Uncommitted 100,960 13.3%

Marianne Williamson 22,797 3.0%

Dean Phillips 20,449 2.7%

What you will immediately notice is that more than 100,000 Michiganders voted for “uncommitted.” And there’s a reason for that: There was a concerted campaign — organized, largely, under the banner of a group called “Listen to Michigan” — that urged an “uncommitted” vote as a way to signal protest to Biden’s handling of the war happening in Israel and Gaza.

As the Detroit News put it:

Activists led by Arab American and Muslim community organizers spent the last three weeks urging Democrats in the state to select "uncommitted" on the ballot to register their anger at Biden's disregard for calls within the party for a cease-fire and restrictions on military aid for Israel.

“Our movement emerged victorious tonight and massively surpassed our expectations,” organizer Layla Elabed said in a statement.

Now, expectations are a funny thing. Because the protest group said that anything more than 10,000 votes for “uncommitted” would amount to a victory. Which, on its face, would mean that getting 10x that number of votes is MASSIVE.

Except a look back at past Michigan results suggests that the protest group was purposely low-balling their totals.

Here’s the Detroit Free-Press on past “uncommitted” votes:

The last time Michigan saw a significant push for voters to vote “uncommitted” was 2008 when Barack Obama took his name off the primary ballot because that year's early primary date violated Democratic National Committee rules. Obama's withdrawal prompted some Democratic leaders to urge Obama supporters to vote "uncommitted." That year, 238,168 — or just over 40% — of participants in Michigan's 2008 presidential primary voted “uncommitted.”

When Obama ran again in 2012 — the most recent contest in which a Democratic presidential incumbent sought reelection — 20,833 — or nearly 11 percent of voters in the Democratic presidential primary voted "uncommitted."

So, yeah. “Uncommitted” got, roughly, the same percentage of the vote in 2024 as it did in 2012 when there was no organized effort behind it.

Now, at the same time, what the vote DID make clear is that in the heavily Arab-American portions of Michigan, there is considerable discontent in regards Biden’s positioning in the Middle East.

In Dearborn, for example, where Arab American are close to a majority of the city’s population, “uncommitted” beat Biden by more than 15 points. In the broader Wayne County, of which Dearborn is a part, “uncommitted” took 17% of the overall primary vote.

In Washtenaw County, which includes Ann Arbor, the home of the University of Michigan, “uncommitted” also took 17%.

Which is not nothing. I like how Nate Cohn of the New York Times put it:

Having one in eight Democrats vote uncommitted in an uncontested primary is not wholly unusual. As recently as the last time a Democratic president sought re-election, in 2012, 11 percent of Michigan Democratic caucusgoers voted for “uncommitted” instead of for Barack Obama.

Having three in four Democratic primary voters in Arab American communities do it, on the other hand, is an eye-popping figure. It goes well beyond the norm, and it’s a powerful indication that the war in Gaza poses serious political risks to President Biden.

I agree wholeheartedly.

No matter what the Biden people say today, make no mistake: They would have MUCH rather seen “uncommitted” fizzle out — taking 5% of the overall vote (or less). Or not have there be an “uncommitted” movement at all!

At the same time, it’s not clear to me what all this result actually means for the general election.

Here’s what we know: Michigan is going to be a swing state in November — as it was in 2016 and 2020.

A reminder of the results in those two elections is, I think, useful:

2016

Donald Trump 2,279,543 (47%)

Hillary Clinton 2,268,839 (47%)

2020

Joe Biden 2,804,045 (51%)

Donald Trump 2,649,864 (48%)

The central question when considering those results is what do the 100,000 (or so) people who voted “uncommitted” do in the general election.

Let’s say, for example, they stay home. Biden’s winning margin in Michigan in 2020 was 154,181. Which is more than the 100,960 people who voted “uncommitted” on Tuesday. #Math

What if they all decide to vote for Trump? Well, assuming they ALL voted for Biden last time, then Trump would win Michigan by 47,000 votes.

Of course, this is based on turnout from the LAST election, not this coming election. And it’s impossible to say how many of Tuesday’s “uncommitted” voters were Biden voters (or Trump voters) in 2020.

That’s the problem with this protest vote. What it tells us is that there is a chunk of Michigan voters who are unhappy enough with Biden — presumably over his policies in the Middle East — that they are willing to turn out to vote solely in order to cast a protest ballot against him in the primary.

But, that is not — to my mind — terribly predictive of how they will behave in the general election when the choice is, really, between Biden and Trump.

Trump’s position on Israel and Gaza has been, uh, hard to define. “The Israeli situation is so horrible, what's happened,” Trump has said. He has vowed to “get it solved very fast.”

Which, uh, ok.

Wrote Vox about Trump’s views on the region:

Everything we know about the former president, from his extensive policy record on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to his top advisers’ statements on the war, suggests he would have no qualms about aligning himself completely with Israel’s far-right government. While Biden has pushed Israel behind the scenes on issues like food and medical aid to civilians — with some limited success — it’s hard to imagine Trump even lifting a finger in defense of Gazan civilians whom he wants to ban from entering the United States.

It’s hard for me to imagine that the Arab-American community in Michigan (or anywhere else) would find much comfort in that positioning from Trump.

I also find it hard to believe that the Arab community in the U.S. would move en masse to Trump this fall. No matter how much they dislike Biden’s positioning, Trump’s seems even more antithetical to their aims in the region.

Could they, on the other hand, simply stay home — sitting this election out as a continuing protest against Biden? That I could see.

If that DID come to pass, it could be very problematic for the incumbent. As NPR noted of the 2020 election in the state:

Michigan's large Arab American and Muslim American populations turned out big for Biden in 2020, helping him clinch the battleground and solidify his win over Donald Trump for the presidency. AP reported that 64% of Muslims nationwide supported Biden in 2020, while 35% supported Trump. And in heavily Arab American counties in Michigan, voters went for Biden by a little less than 70%.

Look. Michigan is likely to be very close this November — more like the 2016 result than the 2020 one to my mind. When we are talking about a margin that could be as slim as 20,000 votes either way, every vote counts. Which means, to me, that Joe Biden and his team have some work to do in Michigan before the fall campaign.