Call
the Map
Forecast6 days out
← HouseNovember 3, 2026

ME-02 · U.S. House

Matthew Dunlap is slightly favored to take Maine’s 2nd congressional district in the final ranked-choice round. Predicted margin: D+0.8.

Matthew Dunlap (D)56 in 10048.945.2–52.5
Paul LePage (R)44 in 10048.144.4–51.8

Under each share, its likely range (80 in 100 simulations) · ranked-choice transfers are not modeled; the two-candidate forecast is read as the final round

Background

Open after Golden retired (announced Nov 2025); Dunlap won a contested D primary (RCV, Jun 9); LePage unopposed for the GOP, Trump-endorsed.

Tilt DOpen seat

Forecast history

Steady0.0 pts · Oct 26 → Oct 28ME-02 U.S. House: steady — the published margin moved 0.0 points between the Oct 26 and Oct 28 editions (3 of 47 stored editions). This is movement of the published forecast between editions.
D+5EVENAug 1Nov 3 · Election Day

Latest reading · Oct 28 · first published Sep 9 · 80% range · margin points R+6.6 to D+8.1. 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
DateMarginChance80% rangeReading
Oct 28D+0.8D win 55.8%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 27D+0.8D win 55.7%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 26D+0.8D win 55.7%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 25D+0.7D win 55.6%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 24D+0.7D win 55.6%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 23D+0.7D win 55.6%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 22D+0.7D win 55.5%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 21D+0.7D win 55.5%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 20D+0.7D win 55.4%R+6.6 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 19D+0.7D win 55.3%R+6.7 to D+8.1Published forecast
Oct 18D+0.7D win 55.3%R+6.7 to D+8.0Published forecast
Oct 17D+0.7D win 55.3%R+6.7 to D+8.0Published forecast
Oct 16D+0.4D win 53.4%R+6.9 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 15D+0.4D win 53.3%R+6.9 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 14D+0.4D win 53.3%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 13D+0.4D win 53.2%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 12D+0.4D win 53.1%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 11D+0.4D win 53.1%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 10D+0.4D win 53.1%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 9D+0.4D win 53.1%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 8D+0.4D win 53.0%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 7D+0.4D win 53.0%R+7.0 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 6D+0.4D win 52.9%R+7.0 to D+7.7Published forecast
Oct 5D+0.4D win 52.4%R+7.0 to D+7.7Published forecast
Oct 4D+0.4D win 52.4%R+7.0 to D+7.7Published forecast
Oct 3D+0.3D win 52.6%R+7.0 to D+7.7Published forecast
Oct 2D+0.4D win 52.4%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Oct 1D+0.3D win 52.5%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 30D+0.3D win 52.2%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 29D+0.3D win 52.2%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 28D+0.3D win 52.6%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 27D+0.3D win 52.3%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 26D+0.3D win 52.5%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 25D+0.3D win 52.3%R+7.1 to D+7.8Published forecast
Sep 24R+1.7R win 61.6%R+9.3 to D+5.9Published forecast
Sep 23R+1.7R win 61.7%R+9.3 to D+5.9Published forecast
Sep 22R+1.4R win 59.4%R+9.1 to D+6.4Published forecast
Sep 21R+1.4R win 59.4%R+9.1 to D+6.4Published forecast
Sep 20R+1.4R win 59.2%R+9.1 to D+6.4Published forecast
Sep 19R+1.4R win 59.4%R+9.1 to D+6.4Published forecast
Sep 18R+1.4R win 58.8%R+9.1 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 17R+1.4R win 59.0%R+9.1 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 16R+1.4R win 59.0%R+9.2 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 15R+1.1R win 57.0%R+9.1 to D+7.0Published forecast
Sep 14R+1.1R win 57.1%R+9.1 to D+7.0Published forecast
Sep 13R+1.1R win 57.2%R+9.1 to D+7.0Published forecast
Sep 12R+1.1R win 57.3%R+9.2 to D+6.9Published forecast
Sep 11R+1.1R win 57.7%R+9.2 to D+6.9Published forecast
Sep 10R+1.2R win 57.7%R+9.2 to D+6.9Published forecast
Sep 9R+1.3R win 58.2%R+9.3 to D+6.8Published forecast
Sep 8R+1.2R win 57.6%R+9.3 to D+6.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 7R+1.3R win 57.9%R+9.3 to D+6.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 6R+1.3R win 57.9%R+9.3 to D+6.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 5R+1.3R win 58.1%R+9.4 to D+6.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 4R+1.3R win 58.3%R+9.4 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 3R+1.3R win 58.4%R+9.4 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 2R+1.4R win 58.5%R+9.4 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 1R+1.4R win 58.5%R+9.4 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 31R+1.4R win 58.6%R+9.4 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 30R+1.4R win 58.7%R+9.5 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 29R+1.4R win 58.7%R+9.5 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 28R+1.4R win 58.8%R+9.5 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 27R+1.4R win 58.8%R+9.5 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 26R+1.5R win 59.0%R+9.5 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 25R+1.5R win 59.0%R+9.6 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 24R+1.5R win 59.1%R+9.6 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 23R+1.5R win 59.2%R+9.6 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 22R+1.5R win 59.3%R+9.6 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 21R+1.5R win 60.1%R+9.6 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 20R+1.5R win 60.2%R+9.6 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 19R+1.6R win 60.3%R+9.6 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 18R+1.6R win 60.3%R+9.7 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 17R+1.6R win 60.4%R+9.7 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 16R+1.6R win 60.5%R+9.7 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 15R+1.6R win 60.5%R+9.7 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 14R+1.6R win 60.8%R+9.7 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 13R+1.6R win 60.9%R+9.7 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 12R+1.7R win 60.9%R+9.7 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 11R+1.7R win 61.0%R+9.8 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 10R+1.7R win 61.1%R+9.8 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 9R+1.7R win 61.2%R+9.8 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 8R+1.7R win 61.2%R+9.8 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 7R+1.7R win 61.3%R+9.8 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 6R+1.8R win 61.5%R+9.9 to D+6.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 5R+1.8R win 61.6%R+9.9 to D+6.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 4R+1.8R win 61.7%R+9.9 to D+6.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 3D+3.2D win 68.2%R+5.6 to D+11.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 2D+3.1D win 68.1%R+5.6 to D+11.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 1D+3.1D win 68.1%R+5.6 to D+11.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs

The polls

Poll average D+1.5A 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 House 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 D+0.3.9 recorded polls · 8 in the poll average

FieldworkAddedPollsterResultSample
from 2026-10-12Tulchin Research ↗D+4.0D 50% · R 46%500 LV
from 2026-09-27Tulchin Research ↗D+2.0D 50% · R 48%500 LV
from 2026-09-17University of New Hampshire ↗D+6.0D 51% · R 45%622 LV
from 2026-08-11DCCC Targeting Team ↗R+1.0D 48% · R 49%621 LV
from 2026-09-08Impact Research ↗House Majority PACEVEND 49% · R 49%500 LV
from 2026-02-12University of New Hampshire ↗R+1.0D 46% · R 47%520 LV
from 2026-07-11Tulchin Research ↗D+1.0D 49% · R 48%600 LV
from 2026-04-26co/efficient ↗NRCCR+10.0D 40% · R 50%918 LV
Explore each poll’s weight in the average

8 of 9 matching · 9 total

Poll average D+1.5

Tulchin Research14 Oct · 500 LV · added 16 Oct
Tulchin Research30 Sep · 500 LV · added 2 Oct
University of New Hampshire21 Sep · 622 LV · added 24 Sep
Impact Research12 Sep · 500 LV · added 19 Sep
DCCC Targeting Team13 Aug · 621 LV · added 22 Sep
Tulchin Research16 Jul · 600 LV · added 1 Sep
co/efficient28 Apr · 918 LV · added 1 Sep
University of New Hampshire16 Feb · 520 LV · added 1 Sep
Explore all 9 polls for this race

How the margin was built

Tap an input for its calculation and source.

Toward D+13.4
Toward R−12.6
Forecast marginD+0.8

Displayed values are rounded. This is the model coordinate before ranked-choice transfers.

Winning chances include ranked-choice transfers; this walk is on first choices, before them.

All calculations & sources

This district's measured terrain −8.948 points

Call the Map's partisan lean on the CURRENT district lines, before any current-cycle evidence. Every pull below is measured from here — not from EVEN.

  • Call the Map partisan lean, district geography bound to this forecast edition.
  • Prior source: observed_unchanged_lines.

Fitted model, above the terrain shown +11.311 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 2.363 minus starting point -8.948 = 11.311 points.
  • One fitted structural total; this edition does not split it into partisan lean and incumbency.
  • Fundamentals: +2.4 — the district's structural lean before this year's polling, money and candidate quality are added.
  • This edition publishes that as one fitted total. It does not break it into a partisan-lean and an incumbency term, so this page does not invent that split.
  • fundamentals core = 25-term dynamic formula (mass fit over the master feature matrix, held-out-cycle validated; see matrix/feature_dictionary.md + mass_fit_report.json)
  • 40-term formula, held-out validated.

National environment +2.071 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.

  • Three-source blend, updated 2026-10-14: 53% generic-ballot aggregates (D+7.7) · 28% special-election overperformance (D+9.0 across 46 specials) · 20% approval-implied (D+9.1 from net approval -24.3).
  • Latest polls — generic ballot 2026-10-14 (14 days old), approval 2026-10-14 (14 days old).
  • Generic-ballot average D+7.7 · support factor 0.87 (the share of that channel's capacity the admitted polls carry) — separate inputs; their product is a capacity diagnostic, not a margin.
  • Weights are the 55/25/20 capacities scaled by each channel's evidence and renormalized, so thin polling widens the interval instead of pulling the center toward zero — 12% of the weight is carried that way.
  • Blended national environment: D+8.3.
  • Applied at full strength to this chamber's races.
  • This step’s recorded contribution to the margin is +2.1.
  • Blended national environment: D+8.3 (updated 2026-10-14).
  • Effective poll weight 88%; fundamentals share 12%, carried by the interval (×1.06) rather than by the center.
  • The support factor is the share of the generic-ballot capacity the admitted polls carry; average × support is a capacity diagnostic, not a margin, and is not what the row above multiplies.
  • Applied at full strength to this chamber: +2.1 of this margin.

This race’s polls −3.649 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.

  • Tulchin Research (2026-10-14, n=500): D+4.0 · weight 0.52 in the poll average
  • Tulchin Research (2026-09-30, n=500): D+2.0 · weight 0.44 in the poll average
  • University of New Hampshire (2026-09-21, n=622): D+6.0 · weight 0.44 in the poll average
  • Impact Research (2026-09-12, n=500): ±0.0 · weight 0.36 in the poll average
  • DCCC Targeting Team (2026-08-13, n=621): R+1.0 · weight 0.28 in the poll average
  • Tulchin Research (2026-07-16, n=600): D+1.0 · weight 0.20 in the poll average
  • … and 3 more below.
  • Poll average D+1.5, from 8 polls · 9 recorded polls. This is the polls’ own average, each poll at its published margin, the figure this page’s poll summary shows. In House 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 D+0.3. The forecast gives the polls 88% of the weight against its structural prior for this race, which moves the margin 3.6 points toward Republicans from where it stood before the polls. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-10-14 (14 days old).

Votes for other candidates −0.024 points

Every step above is measured between the two major-party candidates alone, as if nobody else were on the ballot. The forecast sets 3.0% 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.

These are the fitted model’s named contributions to the partisan coordinate, before the candidate-field calculation.

Named factorContribution
This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted.−3.65
FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race.+2.36
National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin.+2.07
Other factors0.00

Where the votes are

The map of this race loads here.

Recent elections

ElectionResultVotes cast
2024 · U.S. House ↗Ranked-choice electionRanked-choice election. The retained party totals alone do not establish the final-round winner.402,936
2022 · U.S. House ↗Ranked-choice electionRanked-choice election. The retained party totals alone do not establish the final-round winner.656,104
2020 · U.S. House ↗Ranked-choice electionRanked-choice election. The retained party totals alone do not establish the final-round winner.380,324
2018 · U.S. House ↗Ranked-choice electionRanked-choice election. The retained party totals alone do not establish the final-round winner.281,371

Historical district boundaries may differ. Margins are the Democrat’s share of all votes cast minus the Republican’s.

The money

The tick marks cash on hand. A missing filing stays blank rather than becoming $0.

One more fundraising reportCall the Map · $325

The candidates are comfortably out-fundraising the website covering them. A little rude, perhaps, but statistically unsurprising.

Received so far
$325
Measured compute
$26,188.58

Ko-fi and Buy Me a Coffee supports are counted as each one arrives. Measured compute prices model runs at standard published API rates; it is not what I paid. Hosting, data and subscriptions, the domain and my own time are not counted. Donations buy gratitude, never a forecast adjustment.

Supporters are listed by first name and last initial; a username alone is shortened to its first eight characters. Want your full name shown? Say so in your message. Give privately, or leave the name blank, and you are listed as Anonymous, with the platform and date. Supporters who give a name may also be thanked by name in the newsletter.

Thank you to Tom H., ColoradoFlyer, Chris, EW, gbaileym…, True Independent, MT V., JBL, Erin G., Caroline M., Melanie, MKV and 7 more.

See the public support ledger →

Outside spending

Separate from what the campaigns raised

For and against Matthew Dunlap$1.6M

10 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
National Nurses United for Patient Protection$436K$0
REAL CHANGE PAC$292K$0
America PAC$0$229K
CFFE PAC$210K$0
Poverty To Prosperity$0$190K
MAGA INC.$0$105K
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$0$60K
Community Change Voters$45K$0
Progressive Turnout Project$15K$0
THE CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS DBA AMERICANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY$0$4K

For and against Paul LePage$3.9M

6 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
HMP$0$3.4M
Poverty To Prosperity$290K$0
America PAC$154K$0
THE CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS DBA AMERICANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY$46K$0
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$34K$0
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA POLITICAL VICTORY FUND$9K$0

Includes primary spending. Opposition is recorded against its named target; no benefit to another candidate is assumed.

$1.9M in outside spending on earlier candidates.

FEC filings · through 06/30/2026 · Definitions & method

Race context

2024 presidential vote here
397,438
2024 presidential margin
R+9.2between the two parties

Population profile

White alone · 93.1%636,724 of 683,804 · Residents2022 Census · matched race geography

Coverage

Forecast as of October 28, 2026: Call the Map currently has Matthew Dunlap ahead of Paul LePage by D+0.8, with a 56 in 100 chance in the final round. This is an open seat. That result would keep the seat with Democrats. The current poll average is D+1.5; 9 public polls are recorded.