Photo via Silver Bulletin

FLIPR 2026 midterm election forecast

Read the original at Silver Bulletin ↗
Cite

Silver, N. (2026, August 24). FLIPR 2026 midterm election forecast. Silver Bulletin. https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2026-midterm-election-polls-model

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Silver Bulletin · collected 2026-08-24 · by Nate Silver commentary

Quick Summary

FLIPR, an election forecast model by Silver Bulletin, updated its 2026 midterm predictions on September 15, 2026. Based on recent polls, Democrats now have a 59% chance of regaining control of the Senate, marking their highest probability in the cycle. The forecast uses adjusted polling data and simulations based on 40,000 iterations to predict outcomes for House, Senate, and gubernatorial races.
Written by AI on 2026-09-16, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, September 4, 2026, that the state's new congressional map could not be used in November's midterm elections. As a result, the state has reverted back to the old map from 2024. This decision may impact Democrats' chances of retaking control of the House of Representatives in November, according to Silver Bulletin's election forecast model, FLIPR. The model takes into account various adjustments, including polling averages and "timeline adjustments" to reflect trends in the generic ballot.

Written for “FLIPR Midterm Election Forecast” on 2026-11-01, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 FLIPR Midterm Election Forecast
Politics · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 0% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Fox News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 0 of 16 claims Outlet record 69/100
“Article A describes the ranked-choice primary election results on an unspecified date, while Article B mentions updates after the nonpartisan gubernatorial primary and a candidate swap in Alaska's statewide races on specific dates”
Silver Bulletin
Hedges 0 of 20 claims
“They cover related events (election forecast and generic congressional ballot) but are not describing the same specific happening”
The Bulwark
⚖️ Leans strongly left Hedges 0 of 5 claims
“Article A is a general forecast of midterm elections, while Article B is a discussion about Donald Trump's role in the midterms, indicating they cover different aspects of related events”
NBC News
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 2 of 23 claims Outlet record 60/100
“Article A describes a forecast of the Senate election results, while Article B mentions candidate swaps and updates to the ballot in Alaska's statewide races”
Silver Bulletin
Hedges 3 of 18 claims
“Article A is a landing page for FLIPR's midterm election forecast with updates, while Article B is a separate article about a 'tour of the 48 key House races', indicating two distinct articles”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
15
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
0%
0 of 15 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
not measured
these signals count newsroom corrections; Commentary has none to count
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-16 · source text last changed 2026-09-15 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Silver Bulletin · 54 article(s) · 0 correction(s) detected
No corrections detected for this publisher. That may mean careful reporting, or simply that nothing has been checked.

Who wrote this

Nate Silver
36 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 I think you’d agree that it would be pretty weird for a fox to be friends with a dolphin?
2026-10-31 · assertive framing · SBSQ #32: SuperMegaJumboDeluxe Edition
🔮 We’ll try to space things out, but it’s possible that dishes will pile up and there will be some dry spells, or that you’ll get more than one newsletter or more than one FLIPR update in a day.
2026-10-30 · assertive framing · The cognitive dissonance election
🔮 For example, if Democrats have a good night next Tuesday and Peggy Flanagan easily wins in Minnesota, our newsletter from earlier this month that seriously contemplated Michele Tafoya’s chances might be one of those.
🔮 But I’m feeling a little meta-d out this weekend — maybe it was seeing You Can See Everything on Friday.1
2026-10-25 · assertive framing · Let’s talk shop about every Senate race
🔮 Strategic Vision “polls” exhibited statistical patterns — namely, being far more likely to contain some trailing digits (such as 5, 7, 8 and 9) than others, including on obscure questions they probably thought would never be scrutinized — that were canonical signs of forged election results in authoritarian regimes.
2026-10-22 · assertive framing · Fake polls are a real problem
🔮 But leave that philosophical question aside for now — because after a long week of travel,1 I could use a simpler Model Talk.
2026-10-17 · assertive framing · The good, bad and ugly outcomes in the Senate
🔮 Below, you’ll find our forecast for each 2026 Senate race, along with how our numbers have changed over time and which states are likeliest to decide control of the chamber.
2026-10-15 · assertive framing · FLIPR 2026 Senate forecast
🔮 Although our critics might disagree, we seek to avoid false equivocation at Silver Bulletin.
2026-10-09 · assertive framing · Could Minnesota spoil the blue wave?
🔮 It’s not unreasonable to approach election polls from a position of mild — maybe even more-than-mild — skepticism.
2026-10-03 · assertive framing · What if the polls are wrong again?
🔮 That definitely will not happen before the midterms.
2026-10-01 · assertive framing · SBSQ reboot thread
Also by Nate Silver
SBSQ #32: SuperMegaJumboDeluxe Edition
2026-10-31 · Silver Bulletin
The cognitive dissonance election
2026-10-30 · Silver Bulletin
Let’s talk shop about every Senate race
2026-10-25 · Silver Bulletin
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 36 articles by Nate Silver →

Topics

Democrats House New York Times Senate YouGov/Economist

Subjects

Senate ORG · 4× House ORG · 3× Democrats NORP · 2× FLIPR PERSON · 1× New York Times ORG · 1× Republicans NORP · 1× Silver Bulletin ORG · 1× Silver Bulletin’s ORG · 1× The New York Times ORG · 1× YouGov/Economist ORG · 1×

Narrative

FLIPR models House, Senate and gubernatorial elections jointly, meaning that we can calculate the probability of things like Republicans holding the Senate but losing the House.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-08-24
🔮 As a result, Democrats’ chances of retaking the Senate are up to 59 percent in our Deluxe forecast.
2026-09-16 · Silver Bulletin
FLIPR 2026 midterm election forecast · assertive framing

Claims (15 extracted, 0 hedged)

The streak of excellent polls for Democrats continues. asserted
streak → continue → Democrats
The latest New York Times/Siena poll shows the generic ballot at D +8, and this week’s YouGov/Economist wave has it at D +12 among likely voters. asserted
wave → show → voters
As a result, Democrats’ chances of retaking the Senate are up to 59 percent in our Deluxe forecast. asserted
chances → retake → forecast
That’s the highest they’ve been this cycle. asserted
they → ’ → ?
We’ll regularly update the charts below as new election polls and other data come in.2 asserted
polls → update → charts
This page is designed to be viewed on the web rather than in our email client or in the Substack app. asserted
page → design → app
If you’re curious about how the model works, and what’s new for 2026 (quite a lot, actually), we also have a very detailed methodology article. asserted
we → ’re → article
The Silver Bulletin polling averages are the first step in FLIPR, and they include various adjustments. asserted
they → include → adjustments
They account for whether polls are conducted among registered or likely voters, and for house effects. asserted
polls → account → effects
They weight more reliable polls more heavily. asserted
They → weight → polls
They also include a “timeline adjustment”, where outdated polls are revised to reflect trends in the generic ballot. asserted
polls → include → ballot
Speaking of the generic ballot, you can find a version of it with our likely-voter adjustment below; this is the version that FLIPR uses. asserted
FLIPR → speak → that
We draw most of the election polls used in our model from The New York Times poll database3, but collect generic ballot and congressional approval polls ourselves. asserted
We → draw → polls
They are typically based on 40,000 simulations and include a small amount of sampling error. asserted
They → base → error
FLIPR models House, Senate and gubernatorial elections jointly, meaning that we can calculate the probability of things like Republicans holding the Senate but losing the House. asserted
Republicans → model → House
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support