Next year will see a competitive race for an open US Senate seat in Michigan. Ahead of the election both the Republicans and Democratic parties will hold competitive primaries. Marjorie Sarbaugh-Thompson and Lyke Thompson take a close look at Michigan’s 2026 elections, commenting that the vote share for third party candidates will be crucial to who wins the state’s open Senate seat.

• This article is part of our new ‘The 2026 Midterms’ series curated by Peter Finn (Kingston University). The series will explore the run up to the 2026 US midterm elections at the state and national level. If you are interested in contributing to the series, contact Peter Finn (finn@kingston.ac.uk).

Back and forth. Back and forth. Michigan swings. And it could do so again in the 2026 midterm elections.

Prior to 2016, Michigan was part of the Democratic Party’s Blue Wall of support in the upper Midwest, having voted for the party consistently since 1992. In 2016, Donald Trump upset Hillary Clinton, winning by 10,704 votes—his narrowest victory in any US state. Subsequently, Michigan helped seal Biden’s national win by a nearly three percent or 164,892 vote margin of victory. In 2024 Michigan once more supported Trump with an 80,103 margin of victory.

In a key 2026 contest for an open US Senate seat, Michigan could swing again. Michigan Democrats have held onto both of the state’s US Senate seats since 2000 when Debbie Stabenow narrowly beat incumbent Spencer Abraham by 67,259 votes. Although Stabenow won subsequent elections by larger margins, her fellow Democrat, Gary Peters, after a decisive win in 2014, faced a more competitive contest in 2020, winning by only 92,335 votes. This was surprising given Biden’s larger margin of victory. In 2024 Elissa Slotkin, Stabenow’s successor, maintained Michigan Democrats’ hold on the US Senate seat by a mere .03 percent or a 19,006-vote victory over Republican Mike Rogers. This was the closest US Senate margin of victory in 2024 and a rare bright spot for Democrats nationally and in the state. So, despite Democrats’ apparent dominance in US Senate races, their margins of victory in recent years have swung between narrow and comfortable.

The 2026 Senate race 

The 2026 US Senate race in Michigan promises to be close and could end Democrats’ streak of victories. In January 2025, incumbent Gary Peters announced that he would not run for reelection. That threw open the flood gates for other candidates to jump into the race. But initially Democratic candidates appeared reluctant to dip a toe into the waters.

In February rumors circulated that former US Secretary of Transportation, Pete Buttigieg, was considering running, but after about six weeks of deliberation, he opted out. Despite an effort by the advocacy group MoveOn to draft current Lieutenant Governor Garlin Gilchrist to run for the senate seat, he decided to enter the Democratic primary contest for governor, pitting himself against current Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who had previously announced her gubernatorial campaign.

Finally, in April, Democratic candidates started jumping into the race. The first to announce was a 38-year-old Michigan State Senator, Mallory McMorrow, from suburban Detroit. McMorrow’s political experience consists of two terms in the Michigan State Senate. She promises to bring fresh ideas from outside the beltway to Washington. Abdul El-Sayed, former Wayne County Health Director, joined the race in mid-April. He ran for several national and statewide positions in the past, including the Democratic Primary for Michigan Governor in 2018 (Gretchen Whitmer won). A week later, US Representative Haley Stevens, the only candidate with national experience, joined the field. The former Speaker of the Michigan State House, Joe Tate, joined the race in May, bringing the total to four candidates competing in the Democratic primary.

“Nerdcamp 2014” (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by 21innovate

On the Republican side, former US House Representative Mike Rogers is the only officially declared major candidate. In mid-April he announced that he would again seek a Michigan Senate seat after his razor thin loss to Slotkin in 2024. The National Review reported in May that current US Representative Bill Huizinga was considering a run for the Senate seat. Interestingly, there are rumors that Trump’s co-campaign manager, Chris LaCivita is dissuading potential donors from supporting Huizenga. Huizinga was Trump’s choice to take over the Republican State Committee from election denier Kristina Karamo during the 2024 election.

Trump’s shifting loyalty appears to reflect the Republican Party’s judgment that Mike Rogers, who narrowly lost to Slotkin in 2024, has the best chance to wrestle this open US Senate seat away from the Democrats in 2026. Officially Trump has not endorsed either Rogers or Huizinga. If Huizinga does run, the Republican primary could be competitive. Rogers would likely be seen as the safer choice for the pragmatists in the Republican Party given his recent statewide campaign, but Huizinga has a more conservative reputation and earned political capital as Republican state party chair after delivering Michigan for Trump in 2024.

Early polling by the Detroit Regional Chamber for the primary elections and possible general election pairings indicate that name recognition is low for most of the candidates, with the exception of Rogers, who benefits from his recent statewide race for US Senate in 2024. That said, it appears that Stevens is a slightly stronger Democratic contender who could give Rogers serious competition in a general election contest. This of course assumes that she wins the Democratic Primary, which, according to the same poll, could be quite competitive. Moreover, if Rogers remains the only declared candidate in the Republican Primary, Michigan’s open primary election rules mean that anyone can vote in the Democratic Primary. So, Republicans could vote in the Democratic Primary for the candidate they believe Rogers would be most likely to beat—a form of partisan mischief that is not unheard of in open primary elections.

Third parties and ballot initiatives 

Another wild card is the third parties that have affected both the presidential and senate campaigns in the past and could determine the midterms as well. In the 2016 presidential election in Michigan, Green Party candidate Jill Stein, received 51,463 votes—more than four times the size of Trump’s margin of victory. In 2024, four third-party candidates won more votes than Slotkin’s margin of victory; three of those four political parties (US Taxpayers, Libertarians, and Natural Law) likely took votes from Rogers, contributing to Slotkin’s victory.

And as if that is not enough uncertainty, numerous ballot initiatives may be presented to voters in 2026. As many as six or seven by recent counts have a realistic chance of qualifying for the ballot, with one already confirmed and processes already having begun for three more. Michigan is one of only 21 US states that allows citizens to put legislation directly onto the ballot. These initiatives have to gather large numbers of citizen signatures and jump through complex and costly legal processes. Whether an initiative will qualify for a place on the ballot might not be settled until a few months before a general election.

These direct democracy opportunities for voters to pass laws or constitutional amendments typically increase turnout, which is often crucial in midterm elections. For example, a 2022 ballot initiative to enshrine abortion access in the state constitution probably helped Democrats to win both chambers of the state legislature and one of the state’s competitive US House seats by motivating large numbers of pro-choice voters to participate in a mid-term election. Ballot initiatives also tend to attract donors with deep pockets, both those supporting and opposing the initiatives.

So, it’s back and forth voters go on the Michigan swing, and where it will stop no one knows.

• Subscribe to LSE USAPP’s email newsletter to receive a weekly article roundup.
• Please read our comments policy before commenting. 
• Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP – American Politics and Policy, nor the London School of Economics.