IA · Senate 2026 · Updated Oct 28, 2026, 2:01 a.m. ET

Iowa

Rated Toss-up

Ashley Hinson wins this seat in 52 in 100 simulations. Call it a true toss-up.

Ashley HinsonR52 in 100
Josh TurekD48 in 100

The race

What this race is about

The numbers on this page come from the model. This section doesn't. It's a short briefing on the contest itself: who is running, what they are arguing about, and where each side's strength lies.

The matchup

An open seat: Joni Ernst announced in September 2025 that she would not seek a third term. Rep. Ashley Hinson, a former TV anchor long seen as the heir apparent, entered within hours and won the June primary with 74 percent and Trump's endorsement. Democrats chose Josh Turek, a Council Bluffs state legislator and two-time Paralympic gold medalist in wheelchair basketball who won his first race by six votes. A Libertarian, Thomas Laehn, is also on the ballot.

The issues

Medicaid is the sharpest edge. Hinson voted for the 2025 budget law, and Turek says it threatens coverage for about 110,000 Iowans; she points to new rural health money. Iowa's fast-rising cancer rates have become an unusually big state issue, with both candidates releasing plans in late August. The Summit carbon pipeline and eminent domain cut against Hinson with rural voters, since a pipeline-linked megadonor backs her.

Who has the edge, and where

The public polling is essentially tied, with Hinson up 3 in one August survey and Turek slightly ahead in another. The structure still favors her: Iowa has not elected a Democratic senator since Tom Harkin, and Trump carried it comfortably three times. Cook moved the race to Toss-up on August 20. Turek's western-Iowa, blue-collar profile is the Democrats' bet against that history.

The environment

This is the classic sleeper race of a Democratic-leaning cycle. Open seats are easier to flip than incumbents are to beat, and rural discontent over tariffs and farm prices is part of the backdrop. If the national wind holds, Iowa is the kind of state where it shows late.

Written by hand, not by the model. As of August 27, 2026.

Over time

How the forecast has moved

Chance in 100 the seat goes to each side: blue for the Democratic caucus, red for the Republicans · one point per day · hover or tap to read the lines

The margin

How close it lands

Each simulation produces a final margin. The curve shows where those margins fall; the tinted areas on either side of even are the futures each party wins.

← Ashley Hinson aheadJosh Turek ahead →

Where the simulated margins land · marker at the average margin

Under the hood

What's driving the number

The forecast blends a weighted poll average with a fundamentals model: the state's partisan lean, incumbency, the national environment, and fundraising. Positive points favor the Democratic side of the margin; negative favor the Republican side.

Partisan leanR +12.0
IncumbencyEven
National environmentD +4.7
FundraisingD +0.4

Fundamentals sayR +7.0
The polls sayD +0.3
Blended forecast marginR +0.5

The blend puts 89 percent of its weight on the polls and 11 percent on the fundamentals; polls take over as more arrive and election day nears.

The field

How other forecasters see this race

Ours isn't the only model on this race. Where another forecaster publishes a number — or we've copied one in by hand from a paywalled model — it appears here beside ours, dated, because models update on their own schedules. Forecasts disagree for knowable reasons: different poll filters, different weights on the fundamentals, different priors.

Ashley Hinson winsThis forecast52 in 100
Ashley Hinson winsRametta & Hare · as of Oct 2754 in 100

No model is "right" before the votes are counted. How our number is made — and how it scored against 2012–2024 races — is on the methodology page.

The markets

What the betting markets say

Prediction markets put a price on this seat too: what people are paying for a contract that pays out if Ashley Hinson wins, read as an implied probability. Shown for comparison only. This is not betting advice, and market prices never feed the model.

Ashley Hinson winsThis forecast52 in 100
Ashley Hinson winsKalshi56 in 100
Ashley Hinson winsPolymarket56 in 100

Market prices as of Oct 28, 2026, 2:00 a.m. ET

The evidence

The polls, as the model sees them

Every public poll of this race, with the weight the model gave it in the latest run. Weights reward recency, sample size, and pollster track record; the house adjustment corrects each pollster's habitual lean before averaging.

Poll	Dates	Sample	D–R	Margin	House adj.	Weight
Echelon Insights (R)	Oct 16–23	403 LV	45–43	D +2.0	+0.9	11%
InsiderAdvantage (R)	Oct 21–22	1,200 LV	45–47	R +2.0	−0.4	17%
co/efficient (R)	Oct 15–19	863 LV	46–49	R +3.0	−1.0	6%
Trafalgar Group (R)	Oct 13–15	1,094 LV	44–46	R +2.0	−1.7	4%
GS Strategy Group (R)/ New River Strategies (D)	Oct 9–13	602 LV	46–44	D +2.0	+0.2	4%
NPA Polling	Oct 8–12	678 LV	47–48	R +1.0	−0.1	4%
YouGov	Oct 6–12	2,245 LV	47–46	D +1.0	+1.5	14%
Marist University	Oct 8–11	1,100 RV	51–44	D +7.0	+0.9	5%
Marist University	Oct 8–11	—	48–45	D +3.0	+0.9	1%
Emerson College	Oct 5–6	650 LV	45–47	R +2.0	+0.9	6%
SSRS	Sep 29–Oct 5	801 LV	43–45	R +2.0	+0.4	4%
Suffolk University	Oct 1–4	500 LV	48–44	D +4.0	+1.5	4%
New York Times / Siena University	Sep 22–Oct 1	606 LV	47–48	R +1.0	—	2%
Rasmussen Reports (R)	Sep 28–30	1,048 LV	47–43	D +4.0	−0.6	3%
Quantus Insights (R)	Sep 28–29	738 LV	49–51	R +2.0	−0.4	2%
Beacon Research (D)/ Shaw & Co. Research (R)	Sep 24–28	1,204 RV	50–46	D +4.0	+1.1	4%
Beacon Research (D)/ Shaw & Co. Research (R)	Sep 24–28	1,008 LV	49–47	D +2.0	+1.1	2%
InsiderAdvantage (R)	Sep 22–23	1,200 LV	47–46	D +1.0	−0.4	1%
Marist University	Sep 17–20	1,050 RV	50–42	D +8.0	+0.9	<1%
Marist College	Sep 17–20	1,050 RV	50–42	D +8.0	+1.2	2%
Trafalgar Group (R)	Sep 16–18	1,089 LV	42–44	R +2.0	−1.7	<1%
co/efficient (R)	Sep 14–16	831 LV	43–48	R +5.0	−1.0	<1%
Cygnal (R)	Sep 9–11	500 LV	43–43	Even	+1.5	<1%
Rasmussen Reports (R)	Sep 8–10	1,031 LV	45–40	D +5.0	−0.6	<1%
YouGov	Sep 3–8	2,041 LV	47–43	D +4.0	+1.5	<1%
YouGov	Sep 3–8	2,169 RV	44–43	D +1.0	+1.5	<1%
Emerson College	Aug 31–Sep 1	750 LV	45–50	R +5.0	+0.9	<1%
Global Strategy Group (D)	Aug 27–31	800 LV	46–42	D +4.0	+0.1	<1%
Abacus Data (R)	Aug 29	2,500 LV	54–45	D +9.0	—	<1%
Wedgewood Polls	Aug 27–29	600 LV	48–50	R +2.0	+0.1	<1%
Abacus Data	Aug 26–28	500 RV	52–46	D +6.0	—	<1%
Abacus Data	Aug 26–28	323 LV	54–45	D +9.0	—	<1%
Abacus Data	Aug 26–28	—	54–45	D +9.0	—	<1%
Suffolk University	Aug 20–23	500 LV	41–45	R +4.0	+1.5	<1%
Emerson College	Aug 2–4	712 LV	45–48	R +3.0	+0.9	<1%
New York Times / Siena University	Jun 15–27	600 LV	46–48	R +2.0	—	<1%
Beacon Research (D)/ Shaw & Co. Research (R)	Jun 23–27	1,003 RV	50–46	D +4.0	+1.1	<1%
Cygnal (R)	Jun 16–19	600 LV	44–46	R +2.0	+1.5	<1%
Global Strategy Group (D)	Jun 8–11	1,000 LV	47–45	D +2.0	+0.1	<1%
Public Policy Polling (D)	Jun 3–4	557 RV	46–46	Even	+0.2	<1%
Echelon Insights (R)	Apr 3–9	377 LV	46–45	D +1.0	+0.9	<1%
GQR (D)	Mar 10–16	1,200 LV	43–47	R +4.0	−0.3	<1%
Change Research (D)	Jan 8–11	1,108 LV	41–44	R +3.0	+0.4	0%

How the weights, the blend, and the simulation work is spelled out on the methodology page.