HarrisDemocratic40.7%7,881TrumpRepublican57.7%11,181KennedyIndependent0.6%122
R+17.0- Lead
- 3,300
- Total
- 19,374
- vs nation
- R+15.6
- Turnout
- 67.5%
Akashiccounty
Houghton County, MI
Contests in this Place (85 available)
President34 · 1892–2024 · 3 mapped
▦ precinct · ▥ counties · ▢ no spatial detail
President margin by year
Place winner margin
Boundary by 2024 margin · Precinct returns · VEST · MIT Election Lab
The precinct map shows the 2024 presidential vote; the timeline scrubs the county’s overall result across 1892–2024.
President results by year
2024 turnout 67.5% of 28,925 citizens 18+
BidenDemocratic41.9%7,750TrumpRepublican56.1%10,378JorgensenLibertarian1.5%285
R+14.2- Lead
- 2,628
- Total
- 18,501
- vs nation
- R+18.7
- Turnout
- 67.7%
ClintonDemocratic38.2%6,018TrumpRepublican53.8%8,475JohnsonLibertarian5.3%837
R+15.6- Lead
- 2,457
- Total
- 15,761
- vs nation
- R+17.7
- Turnout
- 57.1%
ObamaDemocratic44.3%6,801RomneyRepublican53.4%8,196SteinGreen0.9%141
R+9.1- Lead
- 1,395
- Total
- 15,361
- vs nation
- R+12.9
- Turnout
- —
ObamaDemocratic46.8%7,476McCainRepublican50.7%8,101OtherAll other candidates2.5%395
R+3.9- Lead
- 625
- Total
- 15,972
- vs nation
- R+11.2
- Turnout
- —
KerryDemocratic42.5%6,731BushRepublican56.1%8,889OtherAll other candidates1.5%231
R+13.6- Lead
- 2,158
- Total
- 15,851
- vs nation
- R+11.2
- Turnout
- —
GoreDemocratic40.0%5,688BushRepublican55.5%7,895NaderGreen3.6%518
R+15.5- Lead
- 2,207
- Total
- 14,216
- vs nation
- R+16.0
- Turnout
- —
ClintonDemocratic43.6%5,957DoleRepublican43.5%5,941PerotReform11.6%1,584
D+0.1- Lead
- 16
- Total
- 13,671
- vs nation
- R+8.4
- Turnout
- —
Key facts
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+17.0MIT Election Lab
- Population
- 37,6932024 5-year
- Population density
- 37 / sq mi2024 5-year · TIGER/Line
- Land area
- 1,009 sq miTIGER/Line
- Median household income
- $58,8992024 5-year
- White (non-Hispanic)
- 90.9%2024 5-year
- Black
- 1.1%2024 5-year
- Hispanic / Latino
- 1.8%2024 5-year
- Peak Democratic margin
- D+32.0 in 1964MIT Election Lab
- Peak Republican margin
- R+76.7 in 1924MIT Election Lab
- Most similar
- Marquette County, MI · twin score 78.5
Turnout and midterm durability
Participation measured against the same-year citizen voting-age population. Audited cycles count total general-election participants — ballots or participating voters, not presidential candidate votes. Cycles before 2016 predate that series and are derived from the certified presidential returns instead; they are marked everywhere they appear and are excluded from the figures below.
2004–20248 cycles · 5 audited
- 2024 turnout
- 67.5%19,511 participants ÷ 28,925 CVAP
- 2020→2022 drop-off
- +13.3 ptsVolatile
- Drop-off vs state
- -1.8 ptsPositive means a larger decline than the statewide pattern
- Mechanical 2026
- 54.1%–58.4%Recent-cycle and two-cycle persistence scenarios; not a forecast
Participation by cycle
Presidential Midterm Derived, pre-2016
Select a presidential cycle to show it on the map and results ledger above.
| Cycle | Participants | CVAP | Turnout | Series | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19,511 | 28,925 ± 366 | 67.5% | Audited | A/A | |
| 2022Mid | 15,582 | 28,629 ± 352 | 54.4% | Audited | A/A |
| 18,628 | 27,502 ± 233 | 67.7% | Audited | A/A | |
| 2018Mid | 14,566 | 27,885 ± 176 | 52.2% | Audited | A/A |
| 15,935 | 27,893 ± 207 | 57.1% | Audited | A/A | |
| 15,361 | 27,753 | 55.3% | Derived | — | |
| 15,972 | 27,221 | 58.7% | Derived | — | |
| 15,851 | 26,689 extrapolated | 59.4% | Derived | — |
Sources and methods
Audited cycles (2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2024) count total general-election participants against the same-year CVAP special tabulation, each cell carrying its own numerator and denominator quality grade. Derived cycles (2004, 2008, 2012) come from the certified presidential returns on this page over the ACS 5-year CVAP series, so they measure presidential votes cast rather than ballots — a floor on participation. Where a derived cycle predates the ACS its denominator is extrapolated rather than read, and says so on its own line below. They are shown for the longer arc and are excluded from the drop-off, excess-drop-off, and 2026 scenario figures above.
- 2024: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 311/228.
- 2022: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 306/183.
- 2020: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 301/2.
- 2018: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 297/138.
- 2016: numerator source 158, denominator source 157; total voters participating; eavs-f1a-v1:observed:native; allocation share 0.0%; series 293/111.
- 2012 (derived): Certified presidential returns · ACS 5-year CVAP (B05003); presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count.
- 2008 (derived): Certified presidential returns · ACS 5-year CVAP (B05003); presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count.
- 2004 (derived): Certified presidential returns · extrapolated CVAP denominator; presidential votes cast — a floor on participation, not a ballot count; 2004 predates the ACS, so the denominator is a linear back-extrapolation from the 2008 and 2012 CVAP values, not a read figure.
Interactive election map
One map. Every available contest.
Explore precinct resultsSearch, sort, compare years, or export CSV · 58 precincts
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 |
| Adams Township 00001061-00320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Calumet Charter Township 00001061-12600-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Calumet Charter Township 00002061-12600-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Calumet Charter Township 00005061-12600-00005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Calumet Charter Township 00009061-12600-00009 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Chassell Township 00001061-14920-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Duncan Township 00001061-23340-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Duncan Township 00002061-23340-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Elm River Township 00001061-25660-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Franklin Township 00001061-30300-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Franklin Township 00002061-30300-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Hancock City 00001061-36300-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Hancock City 00002061-36300-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Hancock City 00003061-36300-00003 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Hancock Township 00001061-36320-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Houghton City 00001061-39360-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Houghton City 00002061-39360-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Laird Township 00001061-44220-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Osceola Township 00001061-61260-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Osceola Township 00002061-61260-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Osceola Township 00004061-61260-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Portage Charter Township 00002061-65540-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Portage Charter Township 00004061-65540-00004 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Quincy Township 00001061-66680-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Schoolcraft Township 00001061-71840-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Stanton Township 00001061-76200-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Stanton Township 00002061-76200-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Torch Lake Township 00001061-80120-00001 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
| Torch Lake Township 00002061-80120-00002 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | — | No votes |
presidential history
Party record book
Houghton County, MI · the strongest Democratic and Republican presidential performances recorded here, measured three ways.
1892–2024 · 34 presidential cycles
Highest vote share
Largest share of the presidential candidate vote cast here.
Democratic
Lyndon B. Johnson1964
66.0%
9,761 votes · D+32.0
Runner-up · Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1936 · 54.9%
Republican
Calvin Coolidge1924
83.0%
13,833 votes · R+76.7
Runner-up · Warren G. Harding, 1920 · 80.2%
Most votes
Largest number of votes cast for the party’s presidential nominee here.
Democratic
Franklin D. Roosevelt1936
11,642votes
54.9% of the vote · D+10.8
Runner-up · Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1940 · 10,815 votes
Republican
Warren G. Harding1920
14,938votes
80.2% of the vote · R+63.6
Runner-up · Calvin Coolidge, 1924 · 13,833 votes
Best relative to the U.S.
This Place’s margin against the national margin in the same election — positive when it leaned toward the party more than the country did.
Democratic
Lyndon B. Johnson1964
+9.4pts D vs U.S.
Place D+32.0 · U.S. D+22.6
Runner-up · George McGovern, 1972 · +6.1 pts
Republican
Calvin Coolidge1924
+51.6pts R vs U.S.
Place R+76.7 · U.S. R+25.2
Runner-up · Theodore Roosevelt, 1904 · +45.7 pts
current representation
Current officeholders
REd McBroomState Senate · 38
RGreg MarkkanenState House · 110
Seats representing Houghton County, MI. A county elects none of these itself — they are the members for the 1 congressional, 1 state senate and 1 state house districts it falls inside, so parts of the county are represented by different members.
U.S. House elections · 2 House
Senate and governor results are in the Office selector at the top of this page.
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 | 41.1%7,655 | 58.9%10,954 | 18,609 |
| 2020 | R | 39.0%6,997 | 61.0%10,960 | 17,957 |
voter registration
Registered voters
Total registered voters, over time
Registered voters
| Year | Total registered |
|---|---|
| 2016 | 24,944 |
| 2018 | 24,370 |
| 2020 | 26,737 |
| 2022 | 27,149 |
| 2024 | 27,942 |
domestic migration
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
20112025
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.
Political twins — counties
The counties whose fingerprint — 2000–2024 trajectory, demographics, ancestry, religion — sits closest to this one, and why.
Marquette County
Michigan
78.5twin score
college share% Evangelical% White≠ 2000 margin
Clay County
South Dakota
73.7twin score
% Evangelicalcollege share% unaffiliated≠ 2008 margin
Story County
Iowa
72.4twin score
median age% Evangelical% unaffiliated≠ college share
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 →
Cite this page
All citations released under CC BY 4.0. Attribution: Akashic Intelligence.
Houghton County, Michigan. Akashic. https://akashic.app/county/26061/. Accessed May 20, 2026. License: CC BY 4.0.
License: CC BY 4.0
Embed this page
A live widget for your site — no API key, attribution built in, CC BY 4.0. All widgets & sizes →
Cities & towns in Houghton County
Michigan at the ballot boxAll elections →
Frequently asked questions
How did Houghton County, Michigan vote in 2024?
In 2024, Houghton County, Michigan voted Republican by 17.0 points (R+17.0), carried by the Republican candidate. Out of 19,374 votes cast, 7,881 went Democratic and 11,181 went Republican.
When did Houghton County, Michigan last vote Democratic?
The most recent presidential election in which Houghton County, Michigan voted Democratic was 1996.
How many people live in Houghton County, Michigan?
Houghton County, Michigan has a population of 37,693 according to the 2024 American Community Survey 5-year estimates from the US Census Bureau.
What is the median household income in Houghton County, Michigan?
Median household income in Houghton County, Michigan is $58,899 — below the national median of $80,734. The Michigan state median is $72,875.
What is the political history of Houghton County, Michigan?
Akashic tracks 38 presidential elections in Houghton County, Michigan from 1876 to 2024. Of those, 7 went Democratic and 26 went Republican.