Question 1): What did we learn about the Michigan Democratic and Republican Parties a week ago when they elected their state chairmen for the next two years?
Answer 1): There were no surprises at the Democratic conclave in Detroit, where former state Senator Curtis Hertel was elected after all his early opponents dropped out, but the elevation of current state Senator Jim Runestad of White Lake to the GOP chairmanship was a surprise.
Hertel was endorsed by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and is viewed as the consummate “inside player” who has some chance of unifying the disputatious factions of the Democratic Party. He was given great credit for masterminding a five-seat pick-up by Senate Democrats in 2018, and then helping push them over the finish line to the majority in 2022. However, it’s questionable whether he really deserved such accolades for a variety of reasons, among them “Blue Wave” victories with coattails at the top of the ticket in both 2018 and 2022, plus redrawn legislative district lines in 2022. Then, Hertel proved to be an underwhelming nominee for the Democrats in the open 7th CD last fall. Despite outspending the winner of that race, Republican Tom Barrett, Hertel lost after making a number of early mistakes and then virtually disappearing in the latter stages of the campaign.
By contrast, Runestad was considered a longshot for the Republican chair at the beginning of the three-month behind-the-scenes campaign. The leader of the pack was thought to be firebrand ultra-conservative Meshawn Maddock, who was endorsed by none other than Donald Trump. Also in the field were campaign manager/consultant Scott Greenlee and former ambassador/businessman Joe Cella, who had been a Trump appointee. But Runestad shocked the Michigan world in a tortoise-and-hares race in which he overwhelmed Maddock 2-1 on the final ballot. He becomes the first sitting state legislator to also chair his party’s top state post since 1967-68, when Sander Levin did it for the Democrats.
Back then, Levin, now retired at age 94, was state Senate Minority Leader when Republicans controlled the chamber, 20-18. As state chairman, he nudged the Democrats to statewide victory in 1968, with Hubert Humphrey easily defeating Republican Richard Nixon for President and Democrats regaining control of the state House. He later was a two-time Democratic nominee for governor, losing close elections to Republican incumbent William Milliken in 1970 and 1974. The older brother of U.S. Senator Carl Levin, Sander scored a comeback in 1982 by getting elected to Congress, where he served for more than three decades.
Curtis Hertel has opined that he doesn’t think Runestad can do justice to both jobs at the same time, claiming that each demands 60-hour weeks. But Sander Levin contends that it CAN be done (and he did it) because he was in the Senate minority at the time, just as Runestad is now. No way could he have done it if Dems had been in the Senate majority, but Runestad won’t have to worry about that for the next two years.
At the GOP convention (also in Detroit), how did Runestad pull it off? A number of reasons: 1) He had impeccable conservative credentials, finishing #1 as “most conservative” Republican state senator in a number of analyses; 2) He had no “baggage’ accumulated through intra-party infighting over a number of years, as Maddock did; 3) He had no real enemies in the party, said nothing bad about anybody, and could make a cogent argument that he could best unite the rancorous factions in the state GOP as opposed to bomb-throwers like Maddock and former chair Kristina Karamo, who was ousted from her post after only a year; 5) He has run his own successful insurance business while simultaneously serving in a succession of elected offices in western and northern Oakland County; 6) He’s better positioned to raise money from major Republican donors who have sat on their wallets for a half-dozen years.
Runestad, who just turned 66, obviously starts from a much stronger position than Michigan Republicans were in just two years ago. In 2023, the GOP was coming off an election in which they lost nearly everything. The party was broke and stuck with a new chair (Karamo) who proved to be incompetent and unable to raise money even to keep the headquarters open. They were a state, if not national, laughingstock. But when Pete Hoekstra was subbed in for Karamo, things began to turn around. Republicans wound up with electoral success in 2024 that nobody envisioned a year earlier. Trump won Michigan, and the GOP regained control of the state House, came within a fraction of one percent of winning their first U.S. Senate seat in 30 years, and picked up a U.S. House seat to make the Congressional delegation 7/6, R-D. They also won most of the state education board races (although Democrats still control all four panels) and upped their advantage in some countywide elected offices and seats on county boards of commissioners.
Next year, though, everything is again on the table — Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State (all open, without Democratic incumbents), Congress, and both the state House and Senate, state educational board races, and the Supreme Court. Of course, Donald Trump won’t be on the ballot, for good or ill.
Let the games begin!
*********************************************
Question 2): Gov. Gretchen Whitmer delivered her State of the State address this past Wednesday, laying out her policy goals while making repeated appeals for bipartisan cooperation.
This was Whitmer’s first State of the State address to the Legislature since Republicans took control of the state House this year and ended the Democrats’ “trifecta” control over the Capitol. Democrats remain in charge in the Senate, but much of Whitmer’s 52-minute speech seemed aimed at winning over the opposition.
After waging war against President Donald Trump for six years, Whitmer has promised to collaborate with his administration on shared goals, identifying support for an advanced manufacturing megasite outside Flint in Genesee County and a fighter mission at Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Macomb County as some of her top federal priorities.
While some Democratic governors have positioned themselves as leaders of the resistance to Trump’s second term, Whitmer has struck a more conciliatory tone in a state she and Trump have each won twice. She reiterated her pledge Wednesday to seek common ground with Trump.
At the same time, Whitmer repeatedly called on lawmakers from both political parties to work together to solve the state’s many challenges.
MIRS newsletter boiled down the substance of the speech to about a dozen nuggets: “Tariffs with Canada are bad. People need help buying homes. Medical debt is a real issue. Affordable childcare is a necessity. Yes to career and technical education. Young men in particular need a career boost. A fighter mission at Selfridge would be nice. State permitting fees must be eased and streamlined. Let’s fix more damn local roads. “SMART” education budget, please. Get cell phones out of classrooms. Time for a vape tax.”
Not all Republicans were buying what Whitmer was trying to sell. For example, State Rep. Jennifer Wortz (R-Quincy) issued this press release: “Masquerading as a partial conservative in one speech won’t undo the six years of damage the governor has inflicted on our state. After hanging out with President Trump (in the White House last week), Gov. Whitmer has been trying to play up her new persona as a conservative policymaker. I hope her shifting political outlook is genuine, but she needs to follow through with real action to help Republicans bring our state back from the brink. The governor’s proposal to restrict kids’ phone use in schools may help them focus better, but that change is only a small step. Our education system is in the bottom 10 in the nation, and we need a real, comprehensive solution to fix the academic crisis she caused with her COVID lockdowns. And we need to fully restore the school safety funding she cut from the budget last year, so we can protect kids who are just trying to learn to read. The governor is trying to make it sound as if she cares about the needs of young men, but she’s making the nod after ignoring or talking down to men and boys the rest of her time in office. This right turn from the governor appears good, but it’s not enough. If the governor wants to earn the trust of Michiganders, she has a long way to go to prove she’s serious about fixing the stagnating economy, failing schools, and crumbling roads, without adding new taxes on hard-working Michigan residents. If she’s willing to work with Republicans to take positive, conservative action — not just sound nice — then people will ‘think Michigan’ when they think of successful states.”
The new Speaker of the state House, Matt Hall (R-Richland Twp/Kalamazoo Co.) had a more conciliatory reaction after Whitmer got him to rise to his feet four times (including a handshake). Hall observed afterwards that young men leaving the Democratic Party is one reason Republicans won the last election, and that Whitmer’s emphasis on men seemed aimed at bringing men back into the Democratic fold.
So, is this a Bright New Day in the state capitol? Will lawmakers from both parties truly work together to find compromise on major issues? Or was Whitmer’s address all optics, and she’s a leopard who can’t change her spots?
Answer 2): It will all come down to the Elephant in the Room — infrastructure. Can Whitmer, House Republicans, and Senate Democrats find common ground on a long-term plan to ‘Fix the Damn Roads’ once and for all?
Yes, the governor once again called on lawmakers to find a road funding solution, but she did so in very general terms after Hall had earlier stolen a march on Whitmer and the Democrats by presenting his own, more specific plan.
Both Whitmer’s and Hall’s plans would ensure 100% of the taxes Michigan drivers pay at the pump go to roads. That involves removing the 6% sales tax on gas, which primarily goes to the school aid fund and replacing it with an equivalent amount of fuel tax. Both leaders’ plans pledge to hold K-12 school funding harmless.
Hall wants to divert toward roads money that has been targeted to support corporations while cutting state government spending. That, he claims, would obviate the need to raise any taxes. For her part, Whitmer proposes higher charges for certain high-tech firms and those that transport heavy loads. There was scattered Republican applause Wednesday when she said spending cuts also need to be part of the plan.
The two sides have a long way to go, but Wednesday was a start. Whitmer knows that if a deal cannot get done, she’ll leave office at the end of next year having failed on her signature campaign promise from 2018.
*********************************************
Gov. Whitmer’s SotS speech was a proffer for her upcoming Presidential campaign, not a serious effort to promote progress in Michigan. She hopes no one will remember her previous six years.
True enough. She’s been running for her next job for quite some time now.
Whitmer is better off running for U.S. Senate to fill the vacancy from Gary Peters’ impending retirement.
The Dems have really no serious candidate for the seat.
Nice article and cogent analysis, Bill.
Methinks Curtis Hertel might not have you on his Christmas card list this year.
Most of Mr. Hertel’s problems/opportunities will come as the elections – and the money needed to compete in them – draw closer. And he has a much tougher job than his GOP counterpart. The Hertel-led party has to defend all the current Democratic seats – Governor/Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, a couple of state Supreme Court (SCOMI) seats and a US Senate seat without the benefit of any incumbents. That’s hard enough. But he has to do it without divisive primaries, which may be a wee bit harder than it was to scare off his own opponents for Chair. Then there is the 200+ lbs. gorilla in the room – Mike Duggan – who seems, at least with early his pronouncements, to be appealing to corporate (and non-woke) Democrats and pro-business Republicans who are not super keen on Donald Trump. A three-way race for Governor has to rank about #1 on his list of things he does NOT want. And that can influence all the other down ballot races much like Ross Perot did nationally in 1992. I do not envy his task.
As for Mr. Runestad, he has some of the same problems, but without the burden of defending incumbents. A three-way race for governor may help him, depending on his party’s nominees. His biggest challenges are to make sure his potential candidates get VALID signatures on nomination petitions; that the state convention does not turn into a screaming food fight; and that the fringe (or true believers, or extremists or fanatics or whatever term you wish to use) decide that if you’re not “pure” you’re not good enough. Dumping the good in pursuit of the perfect is a recipe for electoral disaster.
Either way, it should be fun to watch and provide plenty of fodder for future TBRs.
As for question #2, it all comes down to money. Hall seems to think he can find the money in existing revenues. Good luck, but that means cutting something and he has been a wee bit reticent about identifying what he would eliminate. And I do mean eliminate. Cutting some budgets by say 15 or 20% does not always work. For those who think it does, try reducing your family income by 15 – 20% while running your household as if you have not lost any money.
As for the governor, if the money was there and available, I suspect she would have spent it on the roads already.
As Dave Waymire has pointed out in these pages in his replies, Michigan is the fifth least taxed state in country (state and local taxes). Will Michiganders be willing to move up that list to 7th or 10th on that list to fix the roads? I haven’t the foggiest idea. But this, too, will be fodder for more TBRs. As they used to say when I was a child, film at 11.
Tim/
“. . . and that the fringe (or true believers, or extremists or fanatics or whatever term you wish to use) decide that if you’re not “pure” you’re not good enough. Dumping the good in pursuit of the perfect is a recipe for electoral disaster.”
Perhaps so, Mr. Sullivan, but in which direction are you looking? The “fringe” that insists on a little fidelity when it comes to leadership at the top of the ticket, ie, DJT? Or, the “fringe” that finds DJT so odious that the GOP be dammed, they’ll grow a callus on their wallet-side before contributing a dime?
How did Amb-elect Hoekstra do regarding getting the donor class to cough-up the dough last election? Perhaps Sen Runestad can begin with those who did contribute as a base?
Not sure if my first attempt at comment was recorded. My computer skills are “a work in progress” much like Ray Oyler’s hitting was with the Detroit Tigers.
I’m drawing on my memories of the Poli Sci classes I took nearly 50 years ago at U of M and EMU. And this applies to all political parties and candidates.
If candidate “X” agrees with you 80 or so percent of the time and is more electable to a larger swath of the population, that’s B-, a passing grade. Holding out for a candidate that is 100% (or near that) but who appeals to far fewer people usually gets the other side’s candidate elected. And that candidate most likely will NOT vote on your side of the issues 80% of the time. More likely the result is they will vote your way maybe 20% of the time, if you’re lucky. And that is a failing grade. Accepting the good is usually better than getting stuck with the bad.
The issue is do you prefer a politician with you 80% of the time or one with you 20% of the time. Tactical voting is not always satisfying, but it is tactical. A B- is better than an F. Admittedly, it does get harder if the 80% drops to around 60, then you’re on the cusp of a failing grade.
Now I understand there are issues that are paramount to some voters, issues atop their political version of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that determine who they vote for. And that is fine as politics is really about making choices. I am old enough to remember if you were voting for a Pro-Life or pro second amendment candidate, you were voting for Democrat like Bill Ryan or Tom Brown.
I acknowledge there are even personal reasons for voting one candidate or the other. I personally never voted or campaigned against family (blood or by marriage) or friends of the family, regardless of politics or party in any election, something I hope to continue as long as God lets me vote.
As for Hoekstra’s fundraising, I don’t know how well, or poorly he did. I do know the Democrats outspent the GOP about 3:1 in the state House and they lost the majority. In 2022, the GOP was outspent by a lot more than 3:1, but I do not know if this improvement reflects on Democratic donor fatigue or good fundraising by Hoekstra or both. I don’t know if the outcome is due to a Trump effect down ballot, smarter investing of monies in certain races, Democratic pressure from its fringe to get candidates to take positions that were out of touch with their districts, or just better candidates more attune to the district, I don’t know. If there has been anything written on it, I have not seen it.
But in the end, the choice is the voters. What are they willing to live with and tolerate in their candidates. And that is something I can only answer for myself.
Tim/
Several points:
(A) Ray Oyler was taken in the expansion draft by the 1969 Seattle Pilots where he would make his home, later working for the Mariners team in a coaching capacity before tragically succumbing to a heart attack at 43 years old;
(B) if there had been a “Trump down-ballot effect” Mike Rogers would have won his U.S. Senate race – he finished well behind the Trump vote total in Michigan – Mike Rogers shook my hand as he sponsored a free breakfast for MIGOP convention attendees last Saturday – so I am assuming he is thinking about another Senate bid – but needs a better campaign organization to win in 2026;
(C) in the 58th Michigan House District long-term Democratic incumbent Nate Shannon was shellacked in November of 2024 by GOP nominee Ron Robinson, a USMC vet who never ran for office before and who was outspent 5-1 – the Macomb County district was pro-Trump and a political re-alignment was occurring – the Dems had held this district since the 1990s;
(D) downriver a 22-year old Grosse Ile right-wing GOP political activist, Rylee Linting, beats a Dem incumbent in a crucial state House race to gain Republican control of the Legislature – again political realignment is happening – the 13th Congressional District committee made inroads and helped a Trump-oriented candidate with aggressive campaigning……..
The GOP made serious inroads into Wayne and Macomb Counties with a Trump platform that was largely anti-immigrant and still drew many minorities to its ranks.
Robinson and Linting were aided in their campaigns by MIGOP and other GOP committees in their attempts to flip the seats in those Michigan House districts.
The fact Ron Robinson won was not a great surprise – but his 6% margin of victory was.
Longtime GOP state committeeman Ron Singer from Warren almost beat Mai Xiong in a Michigan House race where he was vastly outspent There was a clear indication that the Republicans were gaining electoral popularity throughout Macomb County this election cycle.
You did it Bill- the brilliant mind can crystallize things (Issues) down to the fewest words.
Curtis Hertel has directly told me, and no surprise, he is focusing on primarily supporting women candidates for the Democrats.
Off The Record discussion was very doubtful of a Road Funding Plan-no Republicans in the Senate will vote for same-Winnie Brinks would have to have all Dems voting for a TAX INCREASE.
I don’t know if Jim Runestadt can sensitively craft a delicate compromise and consensus on issues-similar to the capability of Wm. Milliken.
Finally, Aric Nesbitt is the favorite to win the Republican nomination for Governor and it may be a clear path-even if long shot John James decides to run for Governor.
Aric Nesbitt has little name ID in SE Michigan but he may be coming to Plymouth-Livonia with me. Further, after the Primary, Nesbitt will need to be moderately-conservative on some issues. HE IS VERY CAPABLE.
Duggan & Benson can be beat, but Nesbitt will need an LT from SE Michigan-preferably Wayne County with a candidate who knows where Biddle Avenue is in Wyandotte.
I can’t thank you enough for this Post-Q & A Column-You Bill Ballenger are the BEST.
Curtis Hertel was cited in a Jewish Insider article several days ago for placing a Palestinian-American law student from Ann Arbor, Hind Omar, on his slate for a post on the Michigan Democratic Party executive board.
Omar had been a vocal supporter of the Gazans and critical of Israel in the recent war and the appointment of Omar raised eyebrows.
In fact the Hertel slate was mostly female, black and or Asian or Arab-American.
Curtis Hertel was trying to create a unity slate within the Michigan Democratic Party.
Very few attendees were enthused about Hertel taking over the reins of the Michigan Democrats – however his “rainbow slate” of LGBT activists, pro-Gaza demonstrators, and other fringe elements seemed to satisfy everyone enough to hand him the chairman’s seat.
Would most have preferred Al Williams? Sure, but the hypertechnical requirements to get on the convention ballot was too much for Williams or anyone else.
Reminded one of Rule 42 of Alice of Wonderland.
Several points on the recent conventions – I was at the Huntington Center last Friday night for the District Caucuses and Saturday for the GOP Michigan Convention – the Dems were only a few blocks away holding their own convention:
(A) private polling of delegates taken before the convention showed Runestad and Cella as the preferred candidates;
(B) the first ballot at the GOP convention showed Sen. Runestad with 46% of the delegate vote, Meshawn with 31% and Joe C. with 23% – Cella after his 3rd place finish immediately gave an enthusiastic endorsement of Runestad, which sealed the win for the Runestad campaign;
(C) Joe Cella – who had served as an ambassador in the Trump45 State Department – was largely unknown to most grassroots GOP activists – whereas Runestad had significant name recognition withmany Oakland County delegates;
(D) Meshawn Maddock’s pending criminal matter in Lansing over the Electoral College issues likely harmed her chances as it did Matt DePerno two years earlier when he sought the GOP chairmanship under the cloud of a criminal matter with a Trump endorsement as Meshawn had – incumbent MIGOP vice-chair Marian Sheridan lost her re-election last Saturday bid and she is a co-defendant in the pending Lansing cases filed by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel that have been languishing in District Court;
(E) A significant number of legislators – including Rep. Jim DeSana – appeared at Runestad’s Friday evening pre-convention party to campaign for him;
(F) Runestad had the largest pre-convention party event and shook hands with numerous attendees, including myself – he had sent out mailings to delegates and had a significant campaign staff supporting his candidacy.
This GOP convention was not rancorous as the 2022 one had been in which Kristina Karamo was elected. One positive circumstance was the increased number of minority delegates seated – including black, Asian Indian and Arabic. Runestad’s running mate, Bernadette Smith, became the first black co-chair of the MIGOP organization, and Krish Patel, the youth vice-chair winner is the first Asian Indian vice-chair in the party’s history.
There was an overriding enthusiasm at this recent MIGOP convention over the Trump victory and that was a key convention theme.
In my opinion, no one in the Republican Party in Michigan believes the criminal charges against Meshawn, Marian Sheridan and the others have any merit.
The sad part is the pendency of these charges have created a distraction such that it is believed that Nessel’s prosecution will prevent these so-called fake electors” from effectively performing their duties for the state party. As such Meshawn and Marian lost their respective races for the MIGOP leadership.
Consider these losses a victory for Dana Nessel and her witch-hunt against 2020 GOP presidential electors.
It all comes down to WHO CAN WIN TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2026. ? and it won’t be a Right/ Wing fanatic.
Please heed the words of Federal Judge Gerald Rosen – the Detroit bankruptcy judge – when answering the question of : what is the next biggest problem for the people of Michigan: EDUCATION K through 12
The LaunchMichigan dashboard suggests Michigan’s teachers unions have done an excellent job of creating the next generation of Democratic voters:
* Seven out of eight Michigan districts do worse than national comparison districts in math.
* 70 percent of Michigan districts underperform in reading compared to similar districts in top-performing states.
* 71 percent of Michigan districts underperform their national comparison districts in
graduation rate.
Public schools, where kids count, but can they read? The national debt is big. How big? Well, if you had thirty-six trillion dollars in one hundred dollar bill denominations all in one pile, it would weigh three-hundred and sixty thousand tons. The shadow alone would cover a lot of ground! Shouldn’t there be a line -by-line account in every department? I think this subject should be the main topic of any political discourse. Our elected officials are letting us down.
Robinson and Linting were aided in their campaigns by MIGOP and other GOP committees in their attempts to flip the seats in those Michigan House districts.
The fact Ron Robinson won was not a great surprise – but his 6% margin of victory was.
Longtime GOP state committeeman Ron Singer from Warren almost beat Mai Xiong in a Michigan House race where he was vastly outspent There was a clear indication that the Republicans were gaining electoral popularity throughout Macomb County this election cycle.