Call
the Map
Forecast6 days out
← SenateNovember 3, 2026

South Carolina · U.S. Senate

Darline Graham is favored to keep South Carolina’s Senate seat in Republican hands. Predicted margin: R+4.3.

Annie Andrews (D)23 in 10047.243.4–51.0
Darline Graham (R)77 in 10051.547.7–55.2
Other (O)—1.3
Show all others (2)

Mark Hackett · Kasie Whitener

Other is a combined forecast; individual estimates are not published.

Ballot eligibility alone supplies no quantitative estimate. Other is a collective share, not any named candidate’s forecast. Official ballot sources: Mark Hackett (checked 2026-08-31); Kasie Whitener (checked 2026-08-31).

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

Background

Sen. Lindsey Graham died July 11, 2026, after winning the GOP nomination. Gov. McMaster appoints an interim senator through January 3; a special Republican primary chose Darline Graham to face Annie Andrews in November. The seat was already on the 2026 ballot — it now runs as an open seat.

Lean ROpen seat

Forecast history

Moving D · mild+0.7 pts · Oct 26 → Oct 28South Carolina U.S. Senate: moving toward the Democrat, mild — the published margin moved +0.7 points between the Oct 26 and Oct 28 editions (3 of 47 stored editions). This is movement of the published forecast between editions.
EVENR+5R+10Aug 1Nov 3 · Election Day

Latest reading · Oct 28 · first published Sep 9 · 80% range · margin points R+11.8 to D+3.3. 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
DateMarginChance80% rangeReading
Oct 28R+4.3R win 77.3%R+11.8 to D+3.3Published forecast
Oct 27R+4.2R win 74.0%R+12.8 to D+4.5Published forecast
Oct 26R+4.9R win 75.9%R+14.3 to D+4.4Published forecast
Oct 25R+4.9R win 75.9%R+14.3 to D+4.4Published forecast
Oct 24R+4.9R win 76.0%R+14.3 to D+4.4Published forecast
Oct 23R+5.1R win 76.4%R+14.5 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 22R+5.1R win 76.4%R+14.5 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 21R+5.1R win 76.5%R+14.4 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 20R+5.1R win 76.6%R+14.4 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 19R+5.1R win 76.6%R+14.4 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 18R+5.1R win 76.5%R+14.5 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 17R+5.1R win 76.5%R+14.4 to D+4.3Published forecast
Oct 16R+5.1R win 76.6%R+14.4 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 15R+5.1R win 76.7%R+14.4 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 14R+5.1R win 76.8%R+14.4 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 13R+5.1R win 76.8%R+14.4 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 12R+5.1R win 77.0%R+14.4 to D+4.1Published forecast
Oct 11R+5.2R win 76.9%R+14.7 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 10R+5.2R win 76.9%R+14.7 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 9R+5.2R win 77.0%R+14.7 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 8R+5.2R win 77.1%R+14.6 to D+4.2Published forecast
Oct 7R+5.2R win 77.1%R+14.6 to D+4.1Published forecast
Oct 6R+5.3R win 77.3%R+14.6 to D+4.1Published forecast
Oct 5R+5.3R win 77.4%R+14.6 to D+4.1Published forecast
Oct 4R+5.3R win 77.4%R+14.6 to D+4.0Published forecast
Oct 3R+5.3R win 77.5%R+14.6 to D+4.0Published forecast
Oct 2R+5.8R win 79.1%R+15.3 to D+3.7Published forecast
Oct 1R+5.8R win 79.1%R+15.3 to D+3.7Published forecast
Sep 30R+5.8R win 79.1%R+15.2 to D+3.7Published forecast
Sep 29R+5.8R win 79.2%R+15.2 to D+3.6Published forecast
Sep 28R+5.8R win 79.3%R+15.2 to D+3.6Published forecast
Sep 27R+6.7R win 81.9%R+16.3 to D+2.9Published forecast
Sep 26R+6.7R win 81.9%R+16.3 to D+2.9Published forecast
Sep 25R+6.7R win 82.0%R+16.3 to D+2.9Published forecast
Sep 24R+6.7R win 82.1%R+16.2 to D+2.9Published forecast
Sep 23R+6.7R win 82.1%R+16.2 to D+2.9Published forecast
Sep 22R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.2 to D+2.8Published forecast
Sep 21R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.2 to D+2.8Published forecast
Sep 20R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.2 to D+2.8Published forecast
Sep 19R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.2 to D+2.8Published forecast
Sep 18R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.1 to D+2.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 17R+6.7R win 82.3%R+16.1 to D+2.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 16R+6.7R win 82.4%R+16.1 to D+2.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 15R+6.7R win 82.7%R+16.1 to D+2.7Published forecast
Sep 14R+6.7R win 82.7%R+16.1 to D+2.7Published forecast
Sep 13R+6.7R win 82.7%R+16.1 to D+2.7Published forecast
Sep 12R+6.7R win 82.7%R+16.1 to D+2.6Published forecast
Sep 11R+6.7R win 82.8%R+16.0 to D+2.6Published forecast
Sep 10R+6.7R win 83.0%R+16.1 to D+2.6Published forecast
Sep 9R+10.7R win 90.1%R+21.3 to R+0.1Published forecast
Sep 8R+10.8R win 90.4%R+21.4 to R+0.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 7R+10.8R win 90.4%R+21.4 to R+0.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 6R+10.8R win 90.5%R+21.4 to R+0.2Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 5R+10.8R win 90.5%R+21.4 to R+0.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 4R+10.8R win 90.5%R+21.4 to R+0.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 3R+10.8R win 90.6%R+21.3 to R+0.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 2R+10.8R win 90.6%R+21.3 to R+0.3Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Sep 1R+11.1R win 91.0%R+21.6 to R+0.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 31R+11.1R win 91.0%R+21.5 to R+0.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 30R+5.8R win 73.4%R+18.1 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 29R+5.7R win 73.3%R+18.0 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 28R+5.8R win 73.5%R+18.0 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 27R+5.7R win 73.4%R+18.0 to D+6.6Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 26R+5.8R win 73.6%R+18.1 to D+6.5Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 25R+6.9R win 76.0%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 24R+6.9R win 76.0%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 23R+6.9R win 76.0%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 22R+6.9R win 76.0%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 21R+7.0R win 76.2%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 20R+6.9R win 76.1%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 19R+6.9R win 76.0%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 18R+6.9R win 76.0%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 17R+6.9R win 76.0%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 16R+6.9R win 76.1%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 15R+6.9R win 75.9%R+19.9 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 14R+7.0R win 76.3%R+20.1 to D+6.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 13R+7.0R win 76.4%R+20.1 to D+6.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 12R+7.0R win 76.2%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 11R+7.0R win 76.3%R+20.0 to D+6.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 10R+7.0R win 76.3%R+20.0 to D+6.0Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 9R+7.0R win 76.2%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 8R+7.0R win 76.2%R+20.0 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 7R+7.0R win 76.2%R+20.1 to D+6.1Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 6R+7.2R win 76.8%R+20.2 to D+5.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 5R+7.2R win 76.8%R+20.2 to D+5.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 4R+7.2R win 76.8%R+20.2 to D+5.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 3R+7.2R win 76.8%R+20.2 to D+5.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 2R+7.2R win 76.9%R+20.3 to D+5.8Reconstructed with the stated inputs
Aug 1R+7.2R win 76.9%R+20.3 to D+5.9Reconstructed with the stated inputs

The polls

Poll average R+2.4A 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 R+2.5. 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.17 recorded polls · 15 in the poll average

FieldworkAddedPollsterResultSample
from 2026-10-1913h agoThe New York Times/Siena University ↗R+0.7D 47.76% · R 48.47%707 LV
from 2026-10-1413h agoThe Citadel ↗R+4.0D 39% · R 43%890 LV
from 2026-10-141d agoThe Citadel School of Humanities and Social Sciences ↗R+3.0D 39% · R 42%890 LV
from 2026-10-162d agoTargoz Market Research ↗R+1.0D 46% · R 47%895 LV
from 2026-10-155d agoImpact Research ↗D+1.0D 45% · R 44%800 LV
from 2026-10-16Trafalgar Group ↗R+3.0D 45.6% · R 48.6%1,095 LV
from 2026-10-05Rasmussen Reports (R) ↗R+4.0D 45% · R 49%837 LV
Rasmussen Reports (R) ↗R+5.0D 43% · R 48%1,006 LV
Explore each poll’s weight in the average

8 of 17 matching · 17 total

Poll average R+2.4

The New York Times/Siena University26 Oct · 707 LV · added 28 Oct
Targoz Market Research25 Oct · 895 LV · added 27 Oct
The Citadel25 Oct · 890 LV · added 28 Oct
The Citadel School of Humanities and Social Sciences25 Oct · 890 LV · added 28 Oct
Impact Research21 Oct · 800 LV · added 23 Oct
Trafalgar Group18 Oct · 1,095 LV · added 19 Oct
Rasmussen Reports (R)8 Oct · 837 LV · added 11 Oct
InsiderAdvantage29 Sep · 1,200 LV · added 2 Oct
Explore all 17 polls for this race

How the margin was built

Tap an input for its calculation and source.

Toward D+13.8
Toward R−18.1
Forecast marginR+4.3

Displayed values are rounded.

All calculations & sources

How this state voted, 2024 −17.870 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 +9.887 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 -7.983 minus starting point -17.870 = 9.887 points.
  • For orientation, the presidential results here: 2024 R+17.9, 2020 R+11.7.
  • The work: the −8.0 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 +3.187 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.

This race’s polls +0.686 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.

  • The New York Times/Siena University (2026-10-26, n=707): R+0.7 · weight 0.71 in the poll average
  • Targoz Market Research (2026-10-25, n=895): R+1.0 · weight 0.79 in the poll average
  • The Citadel (2026-10-25, n=890): R+4.0 · weight 0.78 in the poll average
  • The Citadel School of Humanities and Social Sciences (2026-10-25, n=890): R+3.0 · weight 0.78 in the poll average
  • Impact Research (2026-10-21, n=800): D+1.0 · weight 0.71 in the poll average
  • Trafalgar Group (2026-10-18, n=1,095): R+3.0 · weight 0.80 in the poll average
  • … and 11 more below.
  • Poll average R+2.4, from 15 polls · 17 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 R+2.5. 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 0.7 points away from Republicans from where it stood before the polls. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-10-26 (2 days old).

Structural safeguards −0.205 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 −0.2 D.

Votes for other candidates +0.058 points

Every step above is measured between the two major-party candidates alone, as if nobody else were on the ballot. The forecast sets 1.3% 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
FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race.−7.98
National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin.+3.19
This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted.+0.69
Structural terrain safeguardA bounded pull toward presidential terrain in heavily partisan states.−0.21
Other factors0.00

Where the votes are

The map of this race loads here.

Recent elections

ElectionResultVotes cast
2020 · U.S. Senate ↗R+10.32,515,104
2014 · U.S. Senate ↗R+17.41,240,075
2008 · U.S. Senate ↗R+15.31,871,431
2002 · U.S. Senate ↗R+10.21,102,912

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 Annie Andrews$5.5M

10 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
Security Is Strength PAC$0$1.9M
SLF PAC$0$1.6M
FRESH START SC PAC$871K$0
AB PAC$631K$0
HIGH PLAINS PAC$0$213K
UNITED FUTURES PAC$198K$0
Voice of the Electorate (VOTE)$50K$0
Field Team 6 Inc.$20K$0
Progressive Turnout Project$11K$0
RED SENATE$0$6K

For and against Darline Graham$9.1M

14 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
Security Is Strength PAC$2.8M$0
AMERICAN MISSION$2.3M$0
FRESH START SC PAC$0$1.6M
MAGA INC.$828K$0
PALMETTO ACTION$711K$0
PALMETTO FIRST PAC$0$298K
HIGH PLAINS PAC$288K$0
WFW ACTION FUND INC$100K$0
FREEDOM CAUCUS FUND$0$46K
HOLD THE LINE PAC$0$38K
Gun Rights America$0$7K
NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE VICTORY FUND$5K$0
COURAGEOUS CONSERVATIVES PAC$0$5K
RED SENATE$742$0

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

$13.4M in outside spending on earlier candidates.

No filing matched: Mark Hackett, Kasie Whitener.

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

Race context

Turnout, 2018 midterm
44.5% 1,726,527 ballots
Turnout, 2022 midterm
42.8% 1,718,626 ballots
2024 presidential margin
R+18.1between the two parties

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

Population profile

White alone · 65.0%3,342,861 of 5,142,750 · Residents2022 Census · matched race geography

Coverage

6 quotes

All coverage and full posts on the Wire →

Forecast as of October 28, 2026: Call the Map currently has Darline Graham ahead of Annie Andrews by R+4.3, with a 77 in 100 chance to win. This is an open seat. That result would keep the seat with Republicans. The current poll average is R+2.4; 17 public polls are recorded.