Call
the Map
FORECAST51 DAYS OUT
← Senate3 November 2026 · 51 days out

Texas · U.S. Senate

Open this race on The Map ↗

James Talarico and Ken Paxton are in a dead heat — the modeled margin rounds to even.

James Talarico (D)50 in 10050.3%49.1high 53.0 · low 45.2
Ken Paxton (R)50 in 10049.7%49.0high 52.9 · low 45.1

high / low: vote share (%) in the middle 80 in 100 simulations

About this field

AG Ken Paxton beat Sen. Cornyn in the primary. His baggage makes deep-red Texas unexpectedly watchable in a blue year.

Forecast share averages the simulated vote. Win chance counts how often a candidate wins. A wider range of outcomes can give a candidate a higher win chance despite a lower average share.

Tilt D80% range · margin points R+7.9 to D+8.0Open seat

Forecast history

Steady0.0 pts · Sep 11 → Sep 13
EVENAug 1Nov 3 · Election Day

Latest reading · Sep 13 · first published Sep 9 · 80% range · margin points R+7.9 to D+8.0. Methodology

Hover the line, tap it, or use the arrow keys to inspect its history.

About this series

This comparable series begins on September 9, 2026, when the model version changed to CTMM 2.2. Earlier readings remain in the archive and are not joined as voter movement; faded points before September 9, 2026 are reconstructions, not forecasts issued on those days.

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.

The polls

Ledger weighted average D+1.9Used by the forecast: 30 polls (60-day half-life) · measured D+2.0 · after the fitted poll-error shift D+0.531 recorded polls · 30 eligible for the aggregate · 30 with positive weight

FieldworkAddedPollsterResultSample
from 2026-09-083d agoInsiderAdvantage ↗D+1.5D 47.1% · R 45.6%1,200 LV
from 2026-08-273d agoYouGov ↗UnivisionD+5.0D 48% · R 43%1,000 RV
from 2026-08-303d agoFabrizio Ward/Impact Research ↗AARPD+4.0D 48% · R 44%895 LV
from 2026-08-24Overton Insights ↗Texas Public Policy FoundationEVEND 50% · R 50%1,167 LV
from 2026-08-21Slingshot Strategies ↗Texas Public Opinion ResearchD+6.0D 48% · R 42%1,000 LV
from 2026-08-05YouGov ↗University of TexasD+3.0D 42% · R 39%1,200 RV
from 2026-08-09Emerson College ↗NexstarR+1.0D 46.25% · R 47.25%1,000 LV
from 2026-07-30Wedgewood Polls ↗D+2.0D 48% · R 46%800 LV
Explore poll adjustments

8 of 31 matching · 31 total

Ledger weighted average D+1.9

InsiderAdvantage9 Sep · 1,200 LV · added 10 Sep
YouGov4 Sep · 1,000 RV · added 10 Sep
Fabrizio Ward/Impact Research1 Sep · 895 LV · added 10 Sep
Overton Insights26 Aug · 1,167 LV · added 2 Sep
Slingshot Strategies24 Aug · 1,000 LV · added 30 Aug
YouGov13 Aug · 1,200 RV · added 25 Aug
Emerson College10 Aug · 1,000 LV · added 19 Aug
Wedgewood Polls31 Jul · 800 LV · added 19 Aug
Explore all 31 polls for this race

How the margin was built

Follow each contribution to the margin. Wider ribbons mean more percentage points. Tap an input for its calculation and source.

Toward D+13.7
Toward R−13.7
Forecast marginEVEN

The signed totals combine at the forecast. Displayed values are rounded.

All calculations & sources

How this state voted, 2024 −13.690 points

The state's two-party presidential margin in 2024, 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, two-party, 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 +9.672 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 -4.018 minus starting point -13.690 = 9.672 points.
  • For orientation, the presidential results here: 2024 R+13.7, 2020 R+5.6.
  • The work: the −4.0 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.

This race’s polls +2.072 points

What this race’s own recent polling adds beyond its prior, after each poll is weighted for recency, sample size and pollster quality.

  • 30 matchup-validated, sample/recency/grade-weighted poll(s), latest 2026-09-09
  • InsiderAdvantage (2026-09-09, n=1,200): D+1.5 · weight 1.32
  • YouGov (2026-09-04, n=1,000): D+5.0 · weight 1.02
  • Fabrizio Ward/Impact Research (2026-09-01, n=895): D+4.0 · weight 0.88
  • Overton Insights (2026-08-26, n=1,167): ±0.0 · weight 0.82
  • Slingshot Strategies (2026-08-24, n=1,000): D+6.0 · weight 0.71
  • YouGov (2026-08-13, n=1,200): D+3.0 · weight 0.54
  • … and 25 more below.
  • Adjusted poll-bank aggregate D+1.9 · 31 recorded polls · 30 eligible for the aggregate · 30 with positive weight. The sealed model records a net polling contribution of +2.1 D. Observation weights are not the final model blend weight. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-09-09 (4 days old).
  • Adjusted poll-bank aggregate D+1.9 · 31 recorded polls · 30 eligible for the aggregate · 30 with positive weight; recorded polling contribution +2.1 D. These observation weights must not be read as the model’s final prior-versus-polling weight. Eligible polls: latest poll: 2026-09-09 (4 days old).

National environment +1.988 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 2026-09-08: 52% generic-ballot aggregates (D+6.5) · 28% special-election overperformance (D+9.0 across 46 specials) · 20% approval-implied (D+8.6 from net approval -21.7).
  • Latest polls — generic ballot 2026-09-08 (5 days old), approval 2026-09-10 (3 days old).
  • Generic-ballot average D+6.5 · support factor 0.84 (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 — 16% of the weight is carried that way.
  • Blended national environment: D+7.6.
  • Applied at full strength to this chamber's races.
  • The work: national environment × 1 chamber strength = +2.0 D of this margin.
  • Blended national environment: D+7.6 (updated 2026-09-08).
  • Effective poll weight 84%; fundamentals share 16%, carried by the interval (×1.08) 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: +2.0 of this margin.

Structural safeguards +0.001 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 +0.0 D.

The components this edition publishes for this race, in points. “Other factors” closes the sum to the two-party structural lean exactly. Here the structural lean IS the published margin, so the walk sums to the projection exactly; nothing is left over.

Named factorContribution
FundamentalsThe admitted fitted baseline. Its surviving variables differ by office; the source detail above identifies those used for this race.−4.02
This race's pollsAdmitted head-to-head polls of this race, recency- and quality-weighted.+2.07
National environmentThe national environment’s contribution to the prior. Polling can attenuate its influence; this value is not the national polling margin.+1.99
Other factors+0.00

Recent elections

ElectionResultVotes cast
2020 · U.S. Senate ↗R+9.911,144,040
2014 · U.S. Senate ↗R+28.44,648,358
2008 · U.S. Senate ↗R+12.37,912,075
2002 · U.S. Senate ↗R+12.14,514,012

Margins compare Democratic and Republican vote totals. Nonstandard ballots are labeled separately.

The money

Bar length compares reported receipts in this race; the tick marks cash on hand. A missing filing stays blank rather than becoming $0.

One more fundraising reportCall the Map · $0

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

Received so far
$0
Measured compute
$26,188.58

Ko-fi and Buy Me a Coffee receipts are counted through Sep 1, 2026. 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.

Ko-fi ↗Buy Me a Coffee ↗

See the public support ledger →

Outside spending

Support + opposition · separate from receipts

For and against James Talarico$30.8M

20 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
LONE STAR LIBERTY PAC$0$14.1M
Lone Star Rising PAC$5.2M$0
MAGA INC.$0$5.0M
America PAC$0$2.1M
Truth and Courage PAC$0$1.8M
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$0$936K
FORWARD TEXAS$0$500K
EVANGELICALS FOR A BETTER FUTURE$400K$0
PROTECTING AMERICA'S FUTURE$0$302K
JEFFERSON RISING$0$110K
Latino Victory Fund$83K$0
Forward Blue PAC$50K$0
WinSenate$50K$0
Win it Back PAC$0$43K
SEIU COPE (Service Employees International Union Committee On Political Education)$31K$0
Field Team 6 Inc.$27K$0
THE EDGE ACTION FUND$25K$0
EVERY STATE$10K$0
Disrupt$9K$0
RED SENATE$0$6K

For and against Ken Paxton$41.2M

17 spending groups
GroupForAgainst
TEXANS FOR A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY$0$24.8M
MAGA INC.$5.0M$0
LONE STAR LIBERTY PAC$4.4M$0
Lone Star Rising PAC$0$2.4M
FELLOWSHIP PAC$2.3M$0
NO GOING BACK PAC INC.$936K$0
Texans Demanding Accountability$0$618K
America PAC$512K$0
American Principles Project PAC$10K$100K
RED SENATE$81K$0
SENATE CONSERVATIVES FUND$56K$0
SENATE CONSERVATIVES ACTION$48K$0
Club for Growth PAC$12K$0
THE LOWDOWN$0$9K
COURAGEOUS CONSERVATIVES PAC$2K$0
Montgomery County First PAC$721$0
Early Vote Action PAC$0$0

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

$30.0M in outside spending on earlier candidates.

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

Race context

Forecast votes cast
8,271,752
Forecast turnout
40.0% of the voting-eligible population
2024 presidential margin
R+13.9

Statewide, 40.2% of the voting-eligible population is projected to cast a ballot; the lower figure above is the share projected to vote in this race.

Population profile Select a measure for its source and denominator

White alone · 59.1%17,293,460 of 29,243,342 · Residents2022 Census · matched race geography
Demographic source and limits

U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 American Community Survey 5-year estimates ↗

Coverage

24 stories · 13 quotes

All coverage and full posts on the Wire →