The races that decide the chamber
Each card shows our forecast for the key 2026 races — who wins, in what share of 50,000 simulations, and the median margin — built from the weighted polling average, fundamentals and the national environment. Click a card to chart the race; toggle the experimental NYT vibes adjustment or compare against Polymarket and Kalshi. For the chamber-control total, see the Senate Forecast.
Dots are each candidate’s weighted polling average; the bands are the average’s confidence interval, which narrows as more polls arrive. Races with at least five polls, closest dozen shown.
Our forecast has Barry Moore winning over Everett Wess in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of R+16.8 (80% range R+23.6 to R+10.1).
Our forecast has Mary Peltola winning over Dan Sullivan in 54% of simulations, with a median margin of D+0.5 (80% range R+6.2 to D+7.2).
Our forecast has Tom Cotton winning over Hallie Shoffner in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of R+15.8 (80% range R+22.5 to R+9.0).
Our forecast has John Hickenlooper winning over Mark Baisley in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+15.4 (80% range D+8.7 to D+22.2).
Our forecast has Ashley Moody winning over Angie Nixon in 87% of simulations, with a median margin of R+5.8 (80% range R+12.6 to D+0.9).
Our forecast has Jon Ossoff winning over Mike Collins in 92% of simulations, with a median margin of D+7.4 (80% range D+0.6 to D+14.1).
Our forecast has Jim Risch winning over Todd Achilles in 98% of simulations, with a median margin of R+12.5 (80% range R+19.1 to R+5.8).
Our forecast has Juliana Stratton winning over Don Tracy in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+16.1 (80% range D+9.3 to D+22.9).
Our forecast has Ashley Hinson winning over Josh Turek in 58% of simulations, with a median margin of R+1.0 (80% range R+7.8 to D+5.8).
Our forecast has Adam Hamilton winning over Roger Marshall in 58% of simulations, with a median margin of D+1.0 (80% range R+5.8 to D+7.7).
Our forecast has Andy Barr winning over Charles Booker in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of R+15.4 (80% range R+22.1 to R+8.6).
Our forecast has Julia Letlow winning over Jamie Davis in 87% of simulations, with a median margin of R+5.9 (80% range R+12.6 to D+0.9).
Our forecast has Troy Jackson winning over Susan Collins in 76% of simulations, with a median margin of D+3.5 (80% range R+3.3 to D+10.2).
Our forecast has Ed Markey winning over John Deaton in >99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+26.7 (80% range D+20.1 to D+33.6).
Our forecast has Abdul El-Sayed winning over Mike Rogers in 57% of simulations, with a median margin of D+0.9 (80% range R+5.8 to D+7.7).
Our forecast has Peggy Flanagan winning over Michele Tafoya in 84% of simulations, with a median margin of D+5.1 (80% range R+1.7 to D+11.9).
Our forecast has Cindy Hyde-Smith winning over Scott Colom in 79% of simulations, with a median margin of R+4.0 (80% range R+10.7 to D+2.7).
Our forecast has Kurt Alme winning over Seth Bodnar in 96% of simulations, with a median margin of R+10.2 (80% range R+17.0 to R+3.5).
Our forecast has Pete Ricketts winning over Dan Osborn in 79% of simulations, with a median margin of R+4.0 (80% range R+10.8 to D+2.7).
Our forecast has Chris Pappas winning over John E. Sununu in 91% of simulations, with a median margin of D+7.0 (80% range D+0.2 to D+13.8).
Our forecast has Ben Ray Luján winning over Larry Marker in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+17.0 (80% range D+10.2 to D+23.8).
Our forecast has Roy Cooper winning over Michael Whatley in 95% of simulations, with a median margin of D+9.1 (80% range D+2.4 to D+15.9).
Our forecast has Sherrod Brown winning over Jon Husted in 61% of simulations, with a median margin of D+1.3 (80% range R+5.6 to D+8.0).
Our forecast has Kevin Hern winning over N'Kiyla Jasmine Thomas in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of R+15.4 (80% range R+22.1 to R+8.6).
Our forecast has Jack Reed winning over Raymond McKay in >99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+27.0 (80% range D+20.2 to D+33.7).
Our forecast has Darline Graham winning over Annie Andrews in 74% of simulations, with a median margin of R+3.1 (80% range R+9.9 to D+3.6).
Our forecast has Mike Rounds winning over Brian Bengs in 98% of simulations, with a median margin of R+12.9 (80% range R+19.7 to R+6.2).
Our forecast has Bill Hagerty winning over Marquita Bradshaw in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of R+15.4 (80% range R+22.2 to R+8.7).
Our forecast has James Talarico winning over Ken Paxton in 63% of simulations, with a median margin of D+1.6 (80% range R+5.1 to D+8.4).
Our forecast has Mark Warner winning over Bert Mizusawa in 99% of simulations, with a median margin of D+15.4 (80% range D+8.6 to D+22.2).
How the NYT “vibes” component works
The vibes layer is an experimental adjustment on top of the base polling average. It tries to capture momentum and scandal effects that polls pick up only with a lag:
- We pull each candidate’s recent New York Times coverage (Archive API) and extract every sentence that mentions them.
- A sentiment model scores each mention, producing a five-point tone bucket from overwhelmingly negative (−2) to overwhelmingly positive (+2), plus a 0–1 scandal-severity score from curated triggers (indictment, ethics investigation, resignation, …).
- Each candidate’s effect on the margin is
0.4 × tone − 2.5 × scandalpoints; the race adjustment is the Democrat’s effect minus the Republican’s, capped at ±3 points so vibes can nudge — never overturn — what the polls say.
The coefficients are conservative priors, not fitted values; they will be backtested as labelled cycles accumulate. When coverage data hasn’t been fetched yet, the toggle is disabled and the base average is shown.
A work in progress from the team at Policy y Peaches. Learn more here.
Last updated: Nov 6, 2026, 5:15 PM