Rhode Island · Governor
Helena Foulkes is favored to win. Projected candidate margin: Helena Foulkes over Ken Block by 15.3 points. No two-party forecast is published for this race: this race is between an independent and a major-party candidate, so the forecast is published per candidate rather than as a two-party margin.
Show all others (1)
Official ballot sources: Ken Block (checked 2026-10-05).
Under each share, its likely range (80 in 100 simulations)
Background
Democrat Helena Foulkes faces Republican Aaron Guckian and independent Ken Block.
Forecast history
Latest reading · Oct 28 · first published Oct 6 · Lead between the top two candidates, in points of all votes. Methodology
Sep 9 – Sep 10: Ken Block was forecast as a third candidate on these days; the days on either side are of the Democrat against the Republican alone.
Sep 19: Ken Block and Aaron Guckian are forecast as candidates from this day; from Sep 11 the readings were of the Democrat against the Republican alone.
About this series
Reconstructed with the current model Aug 1 – Oct 5; published readings Oct 6 – Oct 28. Each reconstructed day is the current model on that day’s own inputs, not a forecast published then. Corrections are dated in the changelog.
Faded: CTMM 2.2 reconstructed history: computed after the fact with each date's available polls and environment, without expert ratings; not an issued forecast. Issued forecasts begin at the launch marker.
CTMM 2.2 readings for 2026-09-16, 2026-09-17, 2026-09-18 were computed after the fact with each day's available inputs: no edition was issued on those days. Not an issued forecast.
Data table
| Date | Lead | Chance | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 28 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 83.6% | Published forecast |
| Oct 27 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 83.9% | Published forecast |
| Oct 26 | D+15.2 | Helena Foulkes win 83.9% | Published forecast |
| Oct 25 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 83.9% | Published forecast |
| Oct 24 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 84.0% | Published forecast |
| Oct 23 | D+15.1 | Helena Foulkes win 83.7% | Published forecast |
| Oct 22 | D+15.2 | Helena Foulkes win 84.2% | Published forecast |
| Oct 21 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 84.1% | Published forecast |
| Oct 20 | D+15.3 | Helena Foulkes win 84.3% | Published forecast |
| Oct 19 | D+16.6 | Helena Foulkes win 84.6% | Published forecast |
| Oct 18 | D+16.5 | Helena Foulkes win 84.5% | Published forecast |
| Oct 17 | D+16.6 | Helena Foulkes win 84.4% | Published forecast |
| Oct 16 | D+16.6 | Helena Foulkes win 84.7% | Published forecast |
| Oct 15 | D+16.6 | Helena Foulkes win 84.7% | Published forecast |
| Oct 14 | D+16.4 | Helena Foulkes win 84.5% | Published forecast |
| Oct 13 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.7% | Published forecast |
| Oct 12 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.9% | Published forecast |
| Oct 11 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.8% | Published forecast |
| Oct 10 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.0% | Published forecast |
| Oct 9 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.8% | Published forecast |
| Oct 8 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.0% | Published forecast |
| Oct 7 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.8% | Published forecast |
| Oct 6 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.1% | Published forecast |
| Oct 5 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 88.9% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Oct 4 | D+20.9 | Helena Foulkes win 88.7% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Oct 3 | D+21.2 | Helena Foulkes win 89.5% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Oct 2 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Oct 1 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.1% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 30 | D+20.9 | Helena Foulkes win 89.1% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 29 | D+21.1 | Helena Foulkes win 89.2% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 28 | D+23.6 | Helena Foulkes win 89.5% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 27 | D+23.5 | Helena Foulkes win 89.5% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 26 | D+23.5 | Helena Foulkes win 89.6% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 25 | D+23.7 | Helena Foulkes win 89.8% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 24 | D+23.5 | Helena Foulkes win 89.6% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 23 | D+26.5 | Helena Foulkes win 92.2% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 22 | D+26.5 | Helena Foulkes win 91.9% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 21 | D+26.5 | Helena Foulkes win 92.0% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 20 | D+26.4 | Helena Foulkes win 91.9% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 19 | D+26.4 | Helena Foulkes win 91.9% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 18 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 17 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 16 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 15 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 14 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 13 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 12 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 11 | D+25.8 | Helena Buonanno Foulkes win 99.3% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 10 | D+25.7 | D win 99.2% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 9 | D+25.7 | D win 99.2% | Recomputed with the current model |
| Sep 8 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 7 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 6 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 5 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 4 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 3 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 2 | D+25.7 | Dan McKee win 99.2% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 1 | D+20.3 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 31 | D+20.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 30 | D+20.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 29 | D+20.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 28 | D+20.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 27 | D+20.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 26 | D+20.5 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 25 | D+10.6 | Dan McKee win 91.5% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 24 | D+21.5 | Dan McKee win 98.9% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 23 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.9% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 22 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.9% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 21 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.8% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 20 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 19 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 18 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 17 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 16 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 15 | D+21.4 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 14 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 13 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 12 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 11 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 10 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 9 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 8 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 7 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 6 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 5 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 4 | D+21.3 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 3 | D+21.2 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 2 | D+21.2 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 1 | D+21.2 | Dan McKee win 98.7% | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
The polls
Polling average · 5 polls · newer and larger polls count for more
47.8Helena Foulkes32.4Ken Block18.1Aaron Guckian
| Fieldwork | Added | Pollster | Result | Sample |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| from 2026-10-05 | Embold Research ↗ | 45.9Helena Foulkes32.9Ken Block20.0Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 815 LV | |
| from 2026-10-08 | Emerson College ↗WPRI-TV | 47.6Helena Foulkes37.7Ken Block11.9Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 800 LV | |
| from 2026-09-23 | Opinion Diagnostics ↗ | 48.8Helena Foulkes28.6Ken Block22.6Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 800 LV | |
| from 2026-09-17 | University of New Hampshire ↗ | D+27.0D 44% · R 17% | 596 LV | |
| from 2026-08-20 | University of New Hampshire ↗ | 52.0Helena Foulkes24.7Ken Block19.5Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 739 LV | |
| from 2026-04-13 | Opinion Diagnostics ↗ | 49.3Helena Foulkes26.9Ken Block23.9Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 802 LV | |
| from 2026-09-17 | — | University of New Hampshire Survey Center ↗Not in the average | 50.0Helena Foulkes28.4Ken Block19.3Aaron GuckianEvery candidate named | 598 LV |
How the forecast uses these polls
The polling average above is the polls’ own: every poll in this race’s poll average, newer and larger polls counting for more and each pollster once, with nothing adjusted. What the forecast does with the polls is a separate matter, set out here.
The forecast’s numbers for this race start from a weighted average of the 6 polls above that named every candidate: Helena Foulkes 48.1%, Ken Block 32.0% and Aaron Guckian 18.2%. Newer and larger polls count for more. A poll paid for by a party or a campaign has the gap between Helena Foulkes and Aaron Guckian moved 2.0 points against the side that paid for it. The average is not blended with past results or the national mood, because the contest here is not simply the Democrat against the Republican.
From there the forecast scales the shares to add up to 100%, with 3.0% set aside for candidates the polls do not name, simulates the election many times with every share free to move, and publishes the average result: Helena Foulkes 47.2%, Ken Block 31.9% and Aaron Guckian 17.9%, a lead of 15.3 points for Helena Foulkes.
Democrat-versus-Republican poll average D+26.6Of the Democratic and Republican support in each poll. It is not this race’s headline: the two leading candidates here are not a Democrat and a Republican, and the candidates’ numbers start from the polls of the full field listed above. This average feeds only the forecast’s Democrat-versus-Republican estimate for the race.A poll’s weight halves every 60 days and grows with its sample. Each pollster counts once, at its best release. Every poll counts at its published margin, sponsored or not.In governor races the forecast then counts a poll sponsored by a party or campaign at full weight and moves its margin 2 points against that party, which leaves the average it reads the same for this race. It then applies a fitted correction of 2.5 points toward Republicans for governor races, measured from past polling error, before blending it with its other evidence.7 recorded polls · 6 in the poll average
Weighted average, as the forecast took it: 48.1Helena Foulkes18.2Aaron Guckian32.0Ken Block · 6 polls
Each poll’s figures are shares of the people who picked a candidate. Undecided voters are left out, so the numbers run a little higher than the poll’s own headline figures, and a candidate who has since left the race is not counted.
How the partisan coordinate was built
Tap an input for its calculation and source.
Displayed values are rounded. This is a modeled partisan coordinate. It compares Helena Foulkes (D) with Aaron Guckian (R), not Helena Foulkes with Ken Block.
Helena Foulkes leads Ken Block by 15.3 points (forecast share difference). The named candidate forecast also accounts for the field and election rules; its lead is a separate quantity from the partisan coordinate above.
All calculations & sources
How this state voted, 2024 +13.850 points
The state's presidential margin in 2024 as a share of all votes cast, from our own county sums — the same measurement the model's statewide terrain center is built from. Every pull below is measured from here, not from EVEN, which is why a landslide seat's listed pulls are small numbers and still land where the forecast does.
- 2024 presidential result for this state, as a share of all votes cast, from Call the Map's own county sums.
- Same source as Act I's 2024-president reference mark, so the origin lands on it.
Fitted model, above the terrain shown +5.767 points
What the fitted model adds on top of the starting terrain above — incumbency, past results, campaign finance and the other fitted terms — measured from that terrain rather than from EVEN. It is a comparison with the starting point already shown, not a separate input. The source detail lists the variables the fit uses.
- Fitted baseline 19.617 minus starting point 13.850 = 5.767 points.
- Fitted intercept: -6.136 points.
- 2010 White population share used by the frozen historical fit: observed input 81.272. -0.503 × ((81.272 − 77.922) / 12.864) = -0.131 points.
- gov_midterm_wh: observed input -1.000. -0.987 × ((-1.000 − 0.336) / 0.739) = 1.785 points.
- 2024 presidential lean relative to the national result: observed input 15.663. 4.163 × ((15.663 − -4.415) / 20.258) = 4.126 points.
- Previous governor election margin: observed input 19.060. 1.755 × ((19.060 − -3.131) / 19.227) = 2.026 points.
- gov_inc_running_signed: observed input 0.000. 2.531 × ((0.000 − -0.120) / 0.708) = 0.428 points.
- gov_inc_tenure_signed: observed input 0.000. 3.340 × ((0.000 − -0.143) / 0.902) = 0.529 points.
- The displayed arithmetic is rounded; the fitted terms use full precision. The intercept plus these five terms gives the non-ratings baseline.
- No source-verified current Gallup reading supports the former 40% / July 2026 claim. The current Gallup series ends in 2025; the Presidency Project identifies its 2026 observations as other pollsters. Use the unchanged fitted missing-value rule, not a replacement polling scale.
- Certified 2024 presidential baseline: state D+14.2, national R+1.5; subtracting the national margin gives relative lean +15.7. Source: FEC compilation of certified state results.
Historical error calibration +4.750 points
A prior-election residual correction, when an admitted model publishes one.
- The forecast’s calibration against past governor results. The recorded contribution is +4.8.
This race’s polls +2.530 points
What this race’s own recent polling adds beyond its prior. The forecast weights each poll for recency and sample size and counts each pollster once; the weights listed here are those of the polls’ own average.
- Emerson College (2026-10-11, n=800): D+35.7 · weight 0.63 in the poll average
- Embold Research (2026-10-08, n=815): D+22.0 · weight 0.62 in the poll average
- Opinion Diagnostics (2026-09-25, n=800): D+22.0 · weight 0.53 in the poll average
- University of New Hampshire (2026-09-21, n=596): D+27.0 · weight 0.43 in the poll average
- University of New Hampshire (2026-08-24, n=739): D+25.0 · weight 0.35 in the poll average
- Opinion Diagnostics (2026-04-16, n=802): D+17.0 · weight 0.08 in the poll average
- Democrat-versus-Republican poll average D+26.6, from 6 polls · 6 recorded polls. This is the polls’ own average, each poll at its published margin, the figure this page’s poll summary shows. In governor races the forecast then counts a poll sponsored by a party or campaign at full weight and moves its margin 2 points against that party, which leaves the average it reads the same for this race. It then applies a fitted correction of 2.5 points toward Republicans for governor races, measured from past polling error, before blending it with its other evidence. The forecast gives the polls 98% of the weight against its structural prior for this race, which moves the margin 2.5 points away from Republicans from where it stood before the polls. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-10-11 (17 days old).
Structural safeguards +1.844 points
Bounded corrections that keep the model consistent with structural facts.
- The forecast’s fitted center calibration for governor races, measured on past cycles. The recorded contribution is +1.8.
National environment +1.832 points
The contribution to this race’s margin, not the national polling margin itself. The race’s loading, reference level and polling blend determine how much of the national climate reaches its final forecast.
- The national environment in this edition is D+8.4. This row is its contribution to the race’s prior, not a claim that the country is D+1.8.
- This step’s recorded contribution to the margin is +1.8.
- The elasticity is fitted on the pooled panel of contested governor races (2010–2024) with cycle-clustered standard errors; it is a measured response to the national environment, not a judgment floor.
These are the fitted model’s named contributions to the partisan coordinate, before the candidate-field calculation.
| Named factor | Contribution |
|---|---|
| FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race. | +19.62 |
| Historical calibrationThe House lane's calibration against certified past cycles. | +4.75 |
| This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted. | +2.53 |
| Structural terrain safeguardA bounded pull toward presidential terrain in heavily partisan states. | +1.84 |
| National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin. | +1.83 |
| Other factors | 0.00 |
Where the votes are
The map of this race loads here.
Recent elections
| Election | Result | Votes cast |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 · Governor ↗ | D+19.1 | 357,670 |
| 2018 · Governor ↗ | D+15.5 | 376,401 |
| 2014 · Governor ↗ | D+4.5 | 318,605 |
| 2006 · Governor ↗ | R+2.0 | 386,809 |
Margins are the Democrat’s share of all votes cast minus the Republican’s.
Race context
- Turnout, 2018 midterm
- 47.0% 381,267 ballots
- Turnout, 2022 midterm
- 43.7% 361,449 ballots
- 2024 presidential margin
- D+14.2between the two parties
Turnout is ballots cast statewide as a share of the voting-eligible population. Source: University of Florida Election Lab ↗
Population profile
U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates ↗
Coverage
4 quotes
- Gov. McKee's chief of staff and deputy chief of staff "knew or should have known that they should not retaliate against Mr. Sanchez for exercising his constitutional right,” U.S. District Court Chief Judge John McConnell Jr. wrote.
@nancyklavin.bsky.social rhodeislandcurrent.com/2026/10/28/p... ↗
Rhode Island Current · Official · 5h ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - GOP gubernatorial candidate has less than $3,000 cash on hand — a tiny fraction of what Democratic nominee and frontrunner Helena Buonanno Foulkes has available. By @nancyklavin.bsky.social rhodeislandcurrent.com/2026/10/28/c... ↗
Rhode Island Current · Official · 6h ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Rhode Island’s Medicaid program director, will serve as interim secretary of the Executive Office of Health and Human Services starting Oct. 29, Gov. Dan McKee announced Tuesday. By @nancyklavin.bsky.social
rhodeislandcurrent.com/2026/10/27/m... ↗
Rhode Island Current · Official · 1d ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Three RI gubernatorial candidates spar over tax returns, transparency and polls in their final debate before the Nov. 3 general election, moderated by @wpri12.bsky.social's @timwhiteri.bsky.social & @tednesi.bsky.social. By @nancyklavin.bsky.social rhodeislandcurrent.com/2026/10/21/n... ↗
Rhode Island Current · Official · Oct 21
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match · election-topic match
Forecast as of October 28, 2026: Call the Map currently has Helena Foulkes ahead of Ken Block by 15.3 points, with an 84 in 100 chance to lead. The seat is currently held by a Democrat. That result would keep the seat with Democrats. The forecast reads 6 polls that named every candidate in this race, listed under “The polls”. The current poll average of the Democrat against the Republican is D+26.6; 6 public polls are recorded.