Tennessee · Governor
Marsha Blackburn is heavily favored to keep the Tennessee governorship in Republican hands. Predicted margin: R+13.9.
Under each share, its likely range (80 in 100 simulations)
Background
Lee is term-limited: Marsha Blackburn (R) faces Jerri Green (D).
Forecast history
Latest reading · Oct 28 · first published Sep 9 · 80% range · margin points R+22.5 to R+5.3. Methodology
About this series
Reconstructed with the current model Aug 1 – Sep 8 and Sep 16 – Sep 18; published readings Sep 9 – 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 | Margin | Chance | 80% range | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 28 | R+13.9 | R win 96.9% | R+22.5 to R+5.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 27 | R+17.9 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.0 | Published forecast |
| Oct 26 | R+17.9 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 25 | R+17.9 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 24 | R+17.9 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 23 | R+18.0 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 22 | R+18.0 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 21 | R+18.0 | R win 98.3% | R+26.8 to R+9.1 | Published forecast |
| Oct 20 | R+19.4 | R win 98.5% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 19 | R+19.4 | R win 98.5% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 18 | R+19.4 | R win 98.5% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 17 | R+19.5 | R win 98.5% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 16 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 15 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 14 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 13 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.6 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 12 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 11 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 10 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 9 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 8 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 7 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.3 | Published forecast |
| Oct 6 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Oct 5 | R+19.5 | R win 98.5% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Oct 4 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Oct 3 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Oct 2 | R+19.5 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Oct 1 | R+19.6 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 30 | R+19.6 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 29 | R+19.6 | R win 98.6% | R+28.7 to R+10.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 28 | R+21.3 | R win 98.9% | R+30.5 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 27 | R+21.3 | R win 98.8% | R+30.5 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 26 | R+21.3 | R win 98.9% | R+30.5 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 25 | R+21.3 | R win 98.8% | R+30.5 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 24 | R+21.3 | R win 98.9% | R+30.6 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 23 | R+21.3 | R win 98.9% | R+30.6 to R+12.0 | Published forecast |
| Sep 22 | R+27.4 | R win 84.1% | R+37.3 to R+17.5 | Published forecast |
| Sep 21 | R+27.4 | R win 84.1% | R+37.3 to R+17.5 | Published forecast |
| Sep 20 | R+27.4 | R win 84.0% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 19 | R+27.4 | R win 84.1% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 18 | R+21.3 | R win 98.8% | R+30.6 to R+12.0 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 17 | R+21.3 | R win 98.8% | R+30.6 to R+12.0 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 16 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 15 | R+27.3 | R win 99.3% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 14 | R+27.3 | R win 99.3% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 13 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 12 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.3 to R+17.4 | Published forecast |
| Sep 11 | R+27.3 | R win 99.3% | R+37.3 to R+17.3 | Published forecast |
| Sep 10 | R+27.3 | R win 99.3% | R+37.3 to R+17.3 | Published forecast |
| Sep 9 | R+26.4 | R win 99.2% | R+36.3 to R+16.5 | Published forecast |
| Sep 8 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.3 to R+17.3 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 7 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.3 to R+17.3 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 6 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.2 to R+17.3 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 5 | R+26.9 | R win 99.2% | R+36.9 to R+17.0 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 4 | R+27.3 | R win 99.2% | R+37.2 to R+17.3 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 3 | R+27.2 | R win 99.2% | R+37.2 to R+17.3 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 2 | R+27.2 | R win 99.2% | R+37.2 to R+17.2 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Sep 1 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.7 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 31 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.7 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 30 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 29 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 28 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 27 | R+27.4 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 26 | R+27.5 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 25 | R+27.5 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 24 | R+27.5 | R win 99.2% | R+37.8 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 23 | R+27.5 | R win 99.2% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 22 | R+27.5 | R win 99.2% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 21 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 20 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 19 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 18 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 17 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 16 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 15 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+37.9 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 14 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 13 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 12 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 11 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 10 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 9 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 8 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 7 | R+27.5 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 6 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 5 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 4 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 3 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 2 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
| Aug 1 | R+27.6 | R win 99.3% | R+38.0 to R+17.1 | Reconstructed with the stated inputs |
The polls
Poll average R+9.6A 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 puts the average it reads at R+10.0. 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
| Fieldwork | Added | Pollster | Result | Sample |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| from 2026-10-25 | 1h ago | GOTV Polling ↗ | R+5.0D 30% · R 35% | 1,196 Voter type unspecified |
| from 2026-10-10 | Spry Strategies ↗ | R+11.5D 32% · R 43.5% | 635 LV | |
| from 2026-08-15 | Targoz Market Research ↗Beacon Center | R+13.0D 33% · R 46% | 1,149 RV | |
| from 2026-09-09 | TargetSmart ↗The Progress Fund PAC | R+9.0D 36% · R 45% | 600 LV | |
| from 2026-08-15 | Targoz Market Research ↗Beacon Center | R+21.0D 34% · R 55% | 601 LV | |
| from 2026-04-20 | Targoz Market Research ↗ | R+24.0D 27% · R 51% | 1,157 RV | |
| from 2025-08-05 | Quantus Insights ↗ | R+21.0D 28% · R 49% | 600 RV |
Explore each poll’s weight in the average
Poll average R+9.6
- Published result
- R+5.0
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.92 · 39% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 25 Oct–26 Oct
- Sample
- 1,196 UNKNOWN
- Sponsor
- Not listed
- Published result
- R+11.5
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.60 · 25% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 10 Oct–16 Oct
- Sample
- 635 LV
- Sponsor
- Not listed
- Published result
- R+9.0
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.39 · 17% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 9 Sep–12 Sep
- Sample
- 600 LV
- Sponsor
- The Progress Fund PAC
- Published result
- R+13.0
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.45 · 9.6% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 15 Aug–26 Aug
- Sample
- 1,149 RV
- Sponsor
- Beacon Center
- Published result
- R+21.0
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.32 · 6.9% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 15 Aug–26 Aug
- Sample
- 601 LV
- Sponsor
- Beacon Center
- Published result
- R+24.0
- Weight in the poll average
- 0.11 · 2.4% of the average
- Fieldwork
- 20 Apr–27 Apr
- Sample
- 1,157 RV
- Sponsor
- Not listed
- Published result
- R+21.0
- Read by the poll average as
- Not in the poll average
- Weight in the poll average
- 0 · not counted
- Fieldwork
- 5 Aug–7 Aug
- Sample
- 600 RV
- Sponsor
- REP sponsor · organization not listed
Not in the poll average: it is old enough that the poll database records its weight as zero, and the forecast averages only polls the database still weights.
The New York Times polling archive · first recorded by Call the Map 19 AugOpen poll sourceHow the margin was built
Tap an input for its calculation and source.
Displayed values are rounded.
All calculations & sources
How this state voted, 2024 −29.720 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 +10.305 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 -19.415 minus starting point -29.720 = 10.305 points.
- Fitted intercept: -6.136 points.
- 2010 White population share used by the frozen historical fit: observed input 77.671. -0.503 × ((77.671 − 77.922) / 12.864) = 0.010 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 -28.621. 4.163 × ((-28.621 − -4.415) / 20.258) = -4.974 points.
- Previous governor election margin: observed input -31.990. 1.755 × ((-31.990 − -3.131) / 19.227) = -2.635 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 R+30.1, national R+1.5; subtracting the national margin gives relative lean −28.6. Source: FEC compilation of certified state results.
This race’s polls +4.974 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.
- GOTV Polling (2026-10-26, n=1,196): R+5.0 · weight 0.92 in the poll average
- Spry Strategies (2026-10-16, n=635): R+11.5 · weight 0.60 in the poll average
- TargetSmart (2026-09-12, n=600): R+9.0 · weight 0.39 in the poll average
- Targoz Market Research (2026-08-26, n=1,149): R+13.0 · weight 0.45 in the poll average
- Targoz Market Research (2026-08-26, n=601): R+21.0 · weight 0.32 in the poll average
- Targoz Market Research (2026-04-27, n=1,157): R+24.0 · weight 0.11 in the poll average
- … and 1 more below.
- Poll average R+9.6, from 6 polls · 7 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 puts the average it reads at R+10.0. 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 5.0 points away from Republicans from where it stood before the polls. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-10-26 (2 days old).
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.
Historical error calibration −1.234 points
A prior-election residual correction, when an admitted model publishes one.
- The forecast’s calibration against past governor results. The recorded contribution is −1.2.
Structural safeguards −0.344 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 −0.3.
Votes for other candidates +0.280 points
Every step above is measured between the two major-party candidates alone, as if nobody else were on the ballot. The forecast sets 2.0% of the vote aside for other candidates and write-ins, so as a share of every vote cast the gap between the two is smaller by that much. This step is exactly that: the two-party margin times the share going to other candidates. It is the same arithmetic that turns the two-party margin into the two shares printed at the top of the page.
The components this edition publishes for this race, in points. “Other factors” closes the sum to the two-party structural lean exactly. The margin the page prints is a share of every vote cast, so the “Votes for other candidates” row carries the exact difference between the two-party lean and that margin; with it, the walk sums to the printed margin exactly.
| Named factor | Contribution |
|---|---|
| FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race. | −19.41 |
| This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted. | +4.97 |
| National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin. | +1.83 |
| Historical calibrationThe House lane's calibration against certified past cycles. | −1.23 |
| Structural terrain safeguardA bounded pull toward presidential terrain in heavily partisan states. | −0.34 |
| Other factors | 0.00 |
Where the votes are
The map of this race loads here.
Race context
- Turnout, 2018 midterm
- 44.5% 2,267,428 ballots
- Turnout, 2022 midterm
- 33.3% 1,756,397 ballots
- 2024 presidential margin
- R+30.1between 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
1 story · 12 quotes
- Following Tuesday's Tennessee Press Association/@mtsuofficial.bsky.social gubernatorial forum, independent candidate Lauren Pinkston and Democrat Green answered questions.
Here are the biggest takeaways from a post-forum availability with the candidates. From Gary Davis, MTSU student journalist. ↗
Tennessee Lookout · Official · 1h ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - U.S. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, the Republican nominee and favorite to win Tennessee's gubernatorial race, declined to participate in a Tuesday forum, continuing a trend among Tennessee GOP candidates of avoiding appearing on stage against their campaign opponents. @friedmanadam5.bksy.social reports. ↗
Tennessee Lookout · Official · 3h ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Last night, the Tennessee Press Association held the 1st gubernatorial forum to occur in Tennessee in 8 years. Sen. Marsha Blackburn, GOP frontrunner for seat occupied by 2nd term GOP Gov. Bill Lee, was a no-show
tennesseelookout.com/2026/10/27/t... @tennesseelookout.com @friedmanadam5.bsky.social ↗
Anita Wadhwani · Analysis · 9h ago
curated election analyst · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Three candidates for Tennessee governor participated in a forum Tuesday without Marsha Blackburn. In the only event where candidates shared the stage before Election Day, they shared little new information, false claims and jabs at Blackburn.
✍️ @sarahgracetaylor.bsky.social ↗
Nashville Banner · Analysis · 11h ago
curated election analyst · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Three of the four major Tennessee gubernatorial candidates appeared at a forum one week before the 2026 election and answered questions on a range of topics, including private school vouchers, data centers and toll lanes. From @friedmanadam5.bsky.social ↗
Tennessee Lookout · Official · 23h ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - We are in closing statements at the 2026 gubernatorial forum and ohhh Jerri Green just said "we can't kumbaya our way out of fascism." ↗
Holly McCall · Commentary · 1d ago
curated political commentary · recent Bluesky post · named-race match - Closing statements: David Hatley takes on Jerri Green: "She voted for data centers in Memphis, she voted to pull ICE." (Note: I'm not sure that statement about data centers is correct.) Hatley also says "the one leading in polls" isn't here, referring to Sen. Marsha Blackburn. ↗
Holly McCall · Commentary · 1d ago
curated political commentary · recent Bluesky post · named-race match · election-topic match - First photos from the Tennessee Press Association & @mtsuofficial.bsky.social 2026 Gubernatorial Forum with Democratic candidate and Memphis City Councilmember Jerri Green and independent candidates David Hatley and Lauren Pinkston. Photos by Lookout photojournalist John Partipilo. ↗
Tennessee Lookout · Official · 1d ago
curated state newsroom · recent Bluesky post · named-race match
Forecast as of October 28, 2026: Call the Map currently has Marsha Blackburn ahead of Jerri Green by R+13.9, with a 97 in 100 chance to win. This is an open seat. That result would keep the seat with Republicans. The current poll average is R+9.6; 7 public polls are recorded.