Call
the Map
Forecast6 days out
← SenateNovember 3, 2026

Michigan · U.S. Senate

Abdul El-Sayed is slightly favored to keep Michigan’s Senate seat in Democratic hands. Predicted margin: D+1.3.

Abdul El-Sayed (D)59 in 10049.545.6–53.3
Mike Rogers (R)41 in 10048.244.4–52.0

Under each share, its likely range (80 in 100 simulations)

Background

Open even-PVI swing state: Abdul El-Sayed (D) faces Mike Rogers (R).

Tilt DOpen seat

Forecast history

Steady-0.1 pts · Oct 26 → Oct 28Michigan U.S. Senate: steady — the published margin moved -0.1 points between the Oct 26 and Oct 28 editions (3 of 47 stored editions). This is movement of the published forecast between editions.
D+4EVENAug 1Nov 3 · Election Day

Latest reading · Oct 28 · first published Sep 9 · 80% range · margin points R+6.4 to D+8.9. 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+1.3D win 58.7%R+6.4 to D+8.9Published forecast
Oct 27D+1.3D win 58.9%R+6.4 to D+8.9Published forecast
Oct 26D+1.4D win 59.6%R+6.2 to D+9.0Published forecast
Oct 25D+1.2D win 58.5%R+6.4 to D+8.8Published forecast
Oct 24D+1.2D win 58.6%R+6.4 to D+8.9Published forecast
Oct 23D+1.3D win 59.1%R+6.3 to D+8.9Published forecast
Oct 22D+1.3D win 59.2%R+6.3 to D+8.9Published forecast
Oct 21D+1.3D win 59.4%R+6.3 to D+9.0Published forecast
Oct 20D+1.6D win 61.5%R+6.0 to D+9.3Published forecast
Oct 19D+1.7D win 61.6%R+5.9 to D+9.3Published forecast
Oct 18D+1.7D win 61.8%R+5.9 to D+9.3Published forecast
Oct 17D+1.7D win 61.9%R+5.9 to D+9.3Published forecast
Oct 16D+1.7D win 61.9%R+5.9 to D+9.3Published forecast
Oct 15D+1.7D win 62.1%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 14D+1.8D win 62.3%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 13D+1.8D win 62.4%R+5.8 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 12D+1.8D win 62.6%R+5.8 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 11D+1.8D win 62.7%R+5.8 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 10D+1.9D win 62.9%R+5.8 to D+9.5Published forecast
Oct 9D+1.8D win 62.3%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 8D+1.8D win 62.3%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 7D+1.7D win 62.0%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Oct 6D+1.9D win 63.2%R+5.7 to D+9.5Published forecast
Oct 5D+1.9D win 63.1%R+5.7 to D+9.5Published forecast
Oct 4D+1.9D win 63.3%R+5.7 to D+9.5Published forecast
Oct 3D+1.9D win 63.4%R+5.7 to D+9.6Published forecast
Oct 2D+2.0D win 63.5%R+5.7 to D+9.6Published forecast
Oct 1D+2.0D win 63.6%R+5.7 to D+9.6Published forecast
Sep 30D+2.1D win 64.6%R+5.5 to D+9.7Published forecast
Sep 29D+1.7D win 61.6%R+6.0 to D+9.3Published forecast
Sep 28D+1.7D win 61.8%R+5.9 to D+9.3Published forecast
Sep 27D+1.7D win 62.1%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Sep 26D+1.8D win 62.3%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Sep 25D+1.7D win 61.8%R+6.0 to D+9.3Published forecast
Sep 24D+1.5D win 60.7%R+6.1 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 23D+1.7D win 62.0%R+5.9 to D+9.4Published forecast
Sep 22D+1.5D win 60.4%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 21D+1.5D win 60.4%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 20D+1.5D win 60.4%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 19D+1.5D win 60.5%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 18D+1.6D win 60.8%R+6.1 to D+9.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 17D+1.6D win 61.0%R+6.1 to D+9.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 16D+1.5D win 60.2%R+6.2 to D+9.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 15D+1.5D win 60.1%R+6.2 to D+9.1Published forecast
Sep 14D+1.5D win 60.4%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 13D+1.5D win 60.4%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 12D+1.5D win 60.5%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 11D+1.5D win 60.6%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 10D+1.5D win 60.6%R+6.2 to D+9.2Published forecast
Sep 9D+1.2D win 58.3%R+6.5 to D+8.9Published forecast
Sep 8D+1.2D win 58.6%R+6.5 to D+8.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 7D+1.2D win 58.7%R+6.5 to D+8.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 6D+1.3D win 58.8%R+6.4 to D+9.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 5D+1.6D win 60.9%R+6.1 to D+9.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 4D+1.5D win 60.5%R+6.2 to D+9.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 3D+1.5D win 60.6%R+6.2 to D+9.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 2D+1.6D win 60.8%R+6.1 to D+9.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 1D+1.4D win 59.6%R+6.3 to D+9.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 31D+1.1D win 57.4%R+6.7 to D+8.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 30D+0.8D win 55.5%R+7.0 to D+8.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 29D+0.5D win 53.5%R+7.3 to D+8.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 28D+0.5D win 53.6%R+7.2 to D+8.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 27D+0.5D win 53.8%R+7.2 to D+8.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 26D+0.6D win 53.8%R+7.2 to D+8.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 25D+0.6D win 54.1%R+7.2 to D+8.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 24D+0.7D win 54.7%R+7.1 to D+8.4Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 23D+0.7D win 55.1%R+7.0 to D+8.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 22D+0.8D win 55.3%R+7.0 to D+8.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 21D+0.2D win 51.6%R+7.5 to D+8.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 20D+0.3D win 51.9%R+7.5 to D+8.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 19D+0.2D win 51.2%R+7.6 to D+8.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 18R+0.9R win 56.4%R+8.7 to D+6.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 17R+1.1R win 57.5%R+8.8 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 16R+1.1R win 57.3%R+8.8 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 15R+1.0R win 57.0%R+8.8 to D+6.7Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 14R+1.2R win 58.3%R+8.9 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 13R+1.2R win 58.1%R+8.9 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 12R+0.8R win 55.7%R+8.9 to D+7.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 11R+0.8R win 55.5%R+8.9 to D+7.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 10R+0.8R win 55.3%R+8.8 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 9R+0.8R win 55.0%R+8.8 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 8R+0.7R win 54.8%R+8.7 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 7R+0.7R win 54.6%R+8.7 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 6R+0.7R win 54.7%R+8.7 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 5R+0.7R win 54.5%R+8.6 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 4R+0.6R win 54.3%R+8.6 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 3R+0.6R win 54.1%R+8.5 to D+7.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 2R+0.5R win 53.0%R+8.7 to D+7.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 1R+0.5R win 52.9%R+8.8 to D+7.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs

The polls

Poll average D+2.7A 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 Senate races the forecast then counts a poll sponsored by a party or campaign at a quarter of its weight and moves its margin 2 points against that party, which puts the average it reads at D+2.6. It then applies a fitted correction of 1.6 points toward Republicans for Senate races, measured from past polling error, before blending it with its other evidence.54 recorded polls · 53 in the poll average

FieldworkAddedPollsterResultSample
from 2026-10-191d agoGlengariff Group, Inc. ↗D+6.3D 51.4% · R 45.1%600 LV
from 2026-10-022d agoMichigan State University Institute for Public Policy and Social Research/YouGov ↗D+2.5D 48% · R 45.5%836 LV
from 2026-10-202d agoRedBox Research (D) ↗D+5.0D 49% · R 44%2,696 LV
from 2026-10-215d agoInsiderAdvantage ↗D+1.2D 47.2% · R 46%1,200 LV
from 2026-10-157d agoMarist University ↗D+2.0D 50% · R 48%1,185 LV
from 2026-10-12Rasmussen Reports (R) ↗D+2.0D 46% · R 44%798 LV
from 2026-10-06The Tyson Group ↗R+2.0D 44% · R 46%600 LV
from 2026-09-24The Tyson Group ↗D+1.0D 44% · R 43%600 LV
Explore each poll’s weight in the average

8 of 54 matching · 54 total

Poll average D+2.7

RedBox Research (D)23 Oct · 2,696 LV · added 26 Oct
Glengariff Group, Inc.22 Oct · 600 LV · added 27 Oct
InsiderAdvantage22 Oct · 1,200 LV · added 23 Oct
Michigan State University Institute for Public Policy and Social Research/YouGov19 Oct · 836 LV · added 27 Oct
Marist University18 Oct · 1,185 LV · added 21 Oct
Rasmussen Reports (R)14 Oct · 798 LV · added 17 Oct
InsiderAdvantage10 Oct · 1,200 LV · added 12 Oct
The Tyson Group8 Oct · 600 LV · added 16 Oct
Explore all 54 polls for this race

How the margin was built

Tap an input for its calculation and source.

Toward D+9.8
Toward R−8.5
Forecast marginD+1.3

Displayed values are rounded.

All calculations & sources

How this state voted, 2024 −1.410 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 +6.499 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 5.089 minus starting point -1.410 = 6.499 points.
  • For orientation, the presidential results here: 2024 R+1.4, 2020 D+2.8.
  • The work: the +5.1 D fundamentals push is the sum of the dynamic formula's surviving variables for this race — each one's own contribution is listed below.
  • 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)
  • 9-term formula, held-out validated.

National environment +3.197 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 +3.2 D.
  • 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: +3.2 of this margin.

Structural safeguards +0.064 points

Bounded corrections that keep the model consistent with structural facts.

  • Applied only when a safe state's dynamic fundamentals point in the same direction as its strong presidential lean but are materially compressed toward zero.
  • The 25% correction toward that lean improved safe-race MAE in strict expanding-window validation without changing a historical call.
  • The disclosed adjustment is +0.1 D.

This race’s polls −7.084 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.

  • RedBox Research (D) (2026-10-23, n=2,696): D+5.0 · weight 0.94 in the poll average
  • InsiderAdvantage (2026-10-22, n=1,200): D+1.2 · weight 0.88 in the poll average
  • Glengariff Group, Inc. (2026-10-22, n=600): D+6.3 · weight 0.62 in the poll average
  • Michigan State University Institute for Public Policy and Social Research/YouGov (2026-10-19, n=836): D+2.5 · weight 0.71 in the poll average
  • Marist University (2026-10-18, n=1,185): D+2.0 · weight 0.83 in the poll average
  • Rasmussen Reports (R) (2026-10-14, n=798): D+2.0 · weight 0.65 in the poll average
  • … and 48 more below.
  • Poll average D+2.7, from 53 polls · 54 recorded polls. This is the polls’ own average, each poll at its published margin, the figure this page’s poll summary shows. In Senate races the forecast then counts a poll sponsored by a party or campaign at a quarter of its weight and moves its margin 2 points against that party, which puts the average it reads at D+2.6. It then applies a fitted correction of 1.6 points toward Republicans for Senate 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 7.1 points toward Republicans from where it stood before the polls. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-10-23 (5 days old).

Votes for other candidates −0.030 points

Every step above is measured between the two major-party candidates alone, as if nobody else were on the ballot. The forecast sets 2.3% 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 factorContribution
This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted.−7.08
FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race.+5.09
National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin.+3.20
Structural terrain safeguardA bounded pull toward presidential terrain in heavily partisan states.+0.06
Other factors+0.00

Where the votes are

The map of this race loads here.

Recent elections

ElectionResultVotes cast
2020 · U.S. Senate ↗D+1.75,479,720
2014 · U.S. Senate ↗D+13.33,121,771
2008 · U.S. Senate ↗D+28.84,848,620
2002 · U.S. Senate ↗D+22.73,129,287

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 Abdul El-Sayed$85.2M

57 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
UNITED DEMOCRACY PROJECT (UDP)$0$20.2M
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$0$19.4M
Americans for Prosperity Action, Inc. (AFP Action) DBA CVA Action and DBA LIBRE Action$0$8.5M
SLF PAC$0$8.3M
WinSenate$4.8M$0
America PAC$0$3.5M
TOGETHER FOR MICHIGAN$0$3.4M
The Sentinel Action Fund$0$2.8M
AB PAC$1.6M$0
GLCF, INC.$0$1.4M
RJC Victory Fund$0$1.3M
FIGHTING FOR MICHIGAN PAC$807K$0
CFFE PAC$756K$0
Lower Costs Now$735K$0
American Principles Project PAC$0$611K
LCV Victory Fund$590K$0
AMERICAN PRIORITIES (AP)$510K$0
National Nurses United for Patient Protection$490K$0
BlackPAC$485K$0
Relentless PAC$469K$0
UNITY & JUSTICE FUND$446K$0
Progress Action Fund$419K$0
Working Families Party PAC$414K$0
MAGA INC.$0$354K
Somos PAC$321K$0
Common Defense Action Fund$290K$0
Progressive Turnout Project$270K$0
HIGH PLAINS PAC$0$258K
AMERICA NEXT INC$0$250K
WORKERS VOTE$169K$0
Forward Blue PAC$166K$0
A Stronger Michigan$0$150K
MoveOn.Org Political Action$131K$0
Community Change Voters$106K$0
End Citizens United$101K$0
The Front Line Action$0$92K
Planned Parenthood Votes$88K$0
Field Team 6 Inc.$66K$0
CATHOLICVOTE.ORG CANDIDATE FUND$0$60K
For Michigan Action Fund$60K$0
CITIZENS AGAINST AIPAC CORRUPTION$58K$0
HUNTER ACTION FUND (HAF)$0$45K
ASIAN AMERICANS VOICES FUND$32K$0
BUILDING MICHIGAN PAC$0$31K
For Our Future$29K$0
THE CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS DBA AMERICANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY$0$28K
SF SOLIDARITY PAC$27K$0
Neighbor Voices$26K$0
MILLIONS OF MICHIGANIANS$25K$0
DEMOCRATIC MESSAGING PROJECT$20K$0
EMGAGE FEDERAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE$17K$0
United We Can$11K$0
Indivisible Action$8K$0
RED SENATE$0$6K
Working America$5K$0
Thomas Paine Society, L.L.C.$4K$0
Gun Rights America$0$4K

For and against Mike Rogers$68.8M

34 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
WinSenate$0$17.5M
Americans for Prosperity Action, Inc. (AFP Action) DBA CVA Action and DBA LIBRE Action$14.5M$0
GLCF, INC.$10.7M$0
Defend The Vote$0$4.6M
The Sentinel Action Fund$3.1M$0
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$2.9M$0
America PAC$2.5M$0
Lower Costs Now$0$2.3M
EDF Action Votes$0$1.8M
LCV Victory Fund$0$1.5M
TOGETHER FOR MICHIGAN$1.2M$0
Giffords PAC$0$1.0M
AFSCME WORKING FAMILIES FUND$0$1.0M
FIRST PRINCIPLES DIGITAL$811K$0
FIGHTING FOR MICHIGAN PAC$0$746K
Senate Leadership Fund$645K$0
Progress Action Fund$0$354K
HIGH PLAINS PAC$258K$0
BLACK VOTERS MATTER ACTION PAC$0$250K
Working Families Party PAC$0$250K
MILLIONS OF MICHIGANIANS$0$164K
Forward Blue PAC$0$147K
AMERICAN PRIORITIES (AP)$0$138K
End Citizens United$0$101K
DRIVING FORCE ACTION$98K$0
RED SENATE$78K$0
For Michigan Action Fund$0$50K
Neighbor Voices$0$49K
Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. Political Action Committee (ABC PAC)$46K$0
HUNTER ACTION FUND (HAF)$45K$0
THE CONSERVATIVE CAUCUS DBA AMERICANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY$15K$0
Guardrails Action Inc.$0$8K
Working America$0$5K
NRA VICTORY FUND, INC.$2K$0

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

$35.7M in outside spending on earlier candidates.

FEC filings · through 07/15/2026 · Definitions & method

Race context

Turnout, 2018 midterm
56.6% 4,341,340 ballots
Turnout, 2022 midterm
58.9% 4,500,400 ballots
2024 presidential margin
R+1.4between the two parties

Turnout is ballots cast statewide as a share of the voting-eligible population. Source: University of Florida Election Lab ↗

Population profile

White alone · 75.7%7,617,085 of 10,057,921 · Residents2022 Census · matched race geography

Coverage

8 stories · 11 quotes

All coverage and full posts on the Wire →

Forecast as of October 28, 2026: Call the Map currently has Abdul El-Sayed ahead of Mike Rogers by D+1.3, with a 59 in 100 chance to win. This is an open seat. That result would keep the seat with Democrats. The current poll average is D+2.7; 54 public polls are recorded.