Houghton County, Michigan
Precinct data
Results by precinct
58 precincts · 19,374 votes
Precinct boundaries and identifiers are cycle-specific. This table does not join rows across years without a validated crosswalk.
| Precinct -City of Houghton, Precinct 2City of Houghton, Precinct 2 | 1,143 | 658 | 47 | 1,848 | 61.9% | 35.6% | D+26.2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Precinct -Portage Township, Precinct 2Portage Township, Precinct 2 | 590 | 811 | 23 | 1,424 | 41.4% | 57.0% | R+15.5 |
| Precinct -Adams Township, Precinct 1Adams Township, Precinct 1 | 507 | 897 | 16 | 1,420 | 35.7% | 63.2% | R+27.5 |
| Precinct -Chassell Township, Precinct 1Chassell Township, Precinct 1 | 388 | 830 | 25 | 1,243 | 31.2% | 66.8% | R+35.6 |
| Precinct -Schoolcraft Township, Precinct 1Schoolcraft Township, Precinct 1 | 425 | 726 | 23 | 1,174 | 36.2% | 61.8% | R+25.6 |
| Precinct -Calumet Township, Precinct 1Calumet Township, Precinct 1 | 435 | 688 | 25 | 1,148 | 37.9% | 59.9% | R+22.0 |
| Precinct -Calumet Township, Precinct 9Calumet Township, Precinct 9 | 407 | 652 | 8 | 1,067 | 38.1% | 61.1% | R+23.0 |
| Precinct -Stanton Township, Precinct 1Stanton Township, Precinct 1 | 290 | 656 | 15 | 961 | 30.2% | 68.3% | R+38.1 |
| Precinct -Calumet Township, Precinct 2Calumet Township, Precinct 2 | 282 | 638 | 9 | 929 | 30.4% | 68.7% | R+38.3 |
| Precinct -City of Hancock, Precinct 2City of Hancock, Precinct 2 | 420 | 408 | 12 | 840 | 50.0% | 48.6% | D+1.4 |
| Precinct -City of Hancock, Precinct 3City of Hancock, Precinct 3 | 399 | 376 | 11 | 786 | 50.8% | 47.8% | D+2.9 |
| Precinct -City of Hancock, Precinct 1City of Hancock, Precinct 1 | 413 | 280 | 17 | 710 | 58.2% | 39.4% | D+18.7 |
| Precinct -Torch Lake Township, Precinct 1Torch Lake Township, Precinct 1 | 254 | 422 | 12 | 688 | 36.9% | 61.3% | R+24.4 |
| Precinct -Franklin Township, Precinct 1Franklin Township, Precinct 1 | 203 | 431 | 6 | 640 | 31.7% | 67.3% | R+35.6 |
| Precinct -Torch Lake Township, Precinct 2Torch Lake Township, Precinct 2 | 200 | 389 | 7 | 596 | 33.6% | 65.3% | R+31.7 |
| Precinct -Osceola Township, Precinct 2Osceola Township, Precinct 2 | 161 | 368 | 5 | 534 | 30.1% | 68.9% | R+38.8 |
| Precinct -Portage Township, Precinct 4Portage Township, Precinct 4 | 168 | 328 | 11 | 507 | 33.1% | 64.7% | R+31.6 |
| Precinct -City of Houghton, Precinct 1City of Houghton, Precinct 1 | 255 | 215 | 6 | 476 | 53.6% | 45.2% | D+8.4 |
| Precinct -Hancock Township, Precinct 1Hancock Township, Precinct 1 | 118 | 236 | 4 | 358 | 33.0% | 65.9% | R+33.0 |
| Precinct -Laird Township, Precinct 1Laird Township, Precinct 1 | 95 | 222 | 3 | 320 | 29.7% | 69.4% | R+39.7 |
| Precinct -Osceola Township, Precinct 1Osceola Township, Precinct 1 | 122 | 173 | 4 | 299 | 40.8% | 57.9% | R+17.1 |
| Precinct -Calumet Township, Precinct 5Calumet Township, Precinct 5 | 160 | 132 | 5 | 297 | 53.9% | 44.4% | D+9.4 |
| Precinct -Osceola Township, Precinct 4Osceola Township, Precinct 4 | 94 | 170 | 7 | 271 | 34.7% | 62.7% | R+28.0 |
| Precinct -Franklin Township, Precinct 2Franklin Township, Precinct 2 | 118 | 122 | 3 | 243 | 48.6% | 50.2% | R+1.6 |
| Precinct -Quincy Township, Precinct 1Quincy Township, Precinct 1 | 59 | 129 | 2 | 190 | 31.1% | 67.9% | R+36.8 |
| Precinct -Elm River Township, Precinct 1Elm River Township, Precinct 1 | 70 | 85 | 3 | 158 | 44.3% | 53.8% | R+9.5 |
| Precinct -Stanton Township, Precinct 2Stanton Township, Precinct 2 | 54 | 38 | 3 | 95 | 56.8% | 40.0% | D+16.8 |
| Precinct -Duncan Township, Precinct 1Duncan Township, Precinct 1 | 26 | 55 | 0 | 81 | 32.1% | 67.9% | R+35.8 |
| Precinct -Duncan Township, Precinct 2Duncan Township, Precinct 2 | 25 | 46 | 0 | 71 | 35.2% | 64.8% | R+29.6 |
| 0610032000001061-00320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0611260000001061-12600-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0611260000002061-12600-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0611260000005061-12600-00005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0611260000009061-12600-00009 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0611492000001061-14920-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0612334000001061-23340-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0612334000002061-23340-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0612566000001061-25660-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613030000001061-30300-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613030000002061-30300-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613630000001061-36300-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613630000002061-36300-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613630000003061-36300-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613632000001061-36320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613936000001061-39360-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0613936000002061-39360-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0614422000001061-44220-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616126000001061-61260-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616126000002061-61260-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616126000004061-61260-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616554000002061-65540-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616554000004061-65540-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0616668000001061-66680-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0617184000001061-71840-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0617620000001061-76200-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0617620000002061-76200-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0618012000001061-80120-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
| 0618012000002061-80120-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | Even |
Presidential margin, 1892–2024
Democratic minus Republican, by election
| Year | Margin (D minus R) |
|---|---|
| 1892 | −9.8% |
| 1896 | −48.5% |
| 1900 | −51.2% |
| 1904 | −65.4% |
| 1908 | −54.1% |
| 1912 | −9.7% |
| 1916 | −25.5% |
| 1920 | −63.6% |
| 1924 | −76.7% |
| 1928 | −25.9% |
| 1932 | −21.5% |
| 1936 | +10.8% |
| 1940 | −1.0% |
| 1944 | +5.0% |
| 1948 | −15.0% |
| 1952 | −19.5% |
| 1956 | −16.7% |
| 1960 | +1.6% |
| 1964 | +32.0% |
| 1968 | +2.5% |
| 1972 | −17.0% |
| 1976 | −4.5% |
| 1980 | −6.5% |
| 1984 | −14.6% |
| 1988 | −4.3% |
| 1992 | +6.5% |
| 1996 | +0.1% |
| 2000 | −15.5% |
| 2004 | −13.6% |
| 2008 | −3.9% |
| 2012 | −9.1% |
| 2016 | −15.6% |
| 2020 | −14.2% |
| 2024 | −17.0% |
U.S. Senate
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 24,944 |
| 2018 | 24,370 |
| 2020 | 26,737 |
| 2022 | 27,149 |
| 2024 | 27,942 |
Who moves in and out
Net migration over time, and who arrivals are — where they came from and what those places vote
−39 net domestic migration · 2025
Net −2,550 over 2011–2025 · gain loss
Arrivals reported $52,774 in average income, against $71,960 for residents who stayed — 27% lower. (IRS SOI, 2022–23)
The places arrivals came from lean D+2.9 on average — 20 points more Democratic-leaning than Houghton County, MI itself (R+17.0).
Where arrivals came from lean of each source
- Marquette County, MI36D+8.7
- Baraga County, MI24R+29.8
- Wayne County, MI22D+29.0
Where departures went households, 2022–23
- Marquette County, MI69
- Oakland County, MI40
- Baraga County, MI31
- Wayne County, MI23
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 | −181 |
| 2012 | −263 |
| 2013 | −269 |
| 2014 | −409 |
| 2015 | −365 |
| 2016 | −65 |
| 2017 | −212 |
| 2018 | −336 |
| 2019 | −335 |
| 2021 | +233 |
| 2022 | +98 |
| 2023 | −239 |
| 2024 | −168 |
| 2025 | −39 |
Once anchored by copper mining and a polyglot immigrant workforce, Houghton County has moved steadily toward Republican margins over recent cycles, with 2024's R+17 reflecting broader rural U.P. realignment rather than any single-election swing.
Across the recorded series it reached a Democratic high of 32.0 points in 1964 and a Republican high of 76.7 points in 1924. Between 2020 and 2024 the county moved 2.8 points toward the Republican candidate; the 2024 margin was 17.0 points.
A population of 37,693, a 91% non-Hispanic-white share, and a median household income of $58,899 describe the county. The county's voting pattern over the last decade is most similar to that of Marquette County and Clay 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 →
Houghton County, Michigan. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/26061/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.