A day before the 2026 US midterm elections, the final New York Times/Siena surveys show Democratic candidates ahead in all seven closely watched Senate races. Votendi’s weighted polling averages paint a similar but more restrained picture, with one state separating the two sets of numbers.
- NYT/Siena versus Votendi: seven Senate races compared
- Two Senate scenarios: 53–47 or 54–46
- Iowa is the dividing line between the two pictures
- Michigan shows the largest difference in polling margins
- Texas, Ohio, Maine and Alaska: the importance of Republican-held seats
- Why the Cook baseline matters
- The House picture is also strongly Democratic in polling and external ratings
- Seven Democratic leads — but two different polling pictures
- Data and methodology
The battle for the US Senate has entered its final hours with a striking set of polling numbers.
Seven surveys released by the New York Times and Siena Research Institute on November 1 show Democratic candidates leading in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Texas. The margins range from just one percentage point in Iowa to 11 points in Michigan.
But comparing the new surveys with Votendi’s existing weighted polling averages reveals important differences in the size of those leads.
Most significantly, Iowa is the only one of the seven races in which the two polling approaches currently show different candidates ahead.
That distinction changes the arithmetic of two hypothetical Senate compositions: 53–47 or 54–46 in favour of the Democratic caucus, assuming the other 93 seats follow the Cook Political Report’s existing partisan ratings.
Neither calculation is a forecast or a declaration of election winners. Both are illustrations of what the two sets of polling leads would mean under identical assumptions.
NYT/Siena versus Votendi: seven Senate races compared
The New York Times/Siena figures represent individual statewide polls of likely voters. Votendi’s figures are weighted averages incorporating multiple surveys, with adjustments for recency, sample size, pollster grade, methodology and editorial weight.
| State | NYT/Siena Democratic lead | Votendi polling lead |
|---|---|---|
| Michigan | D +11.0 | D +3.6 |
| Texas | D +7.0 | D +2.6 |
| Maine | D +6.0 | D +2.1 |
| Kansas | D +5.0 | D +2.3 |
| Ohio | D +5.0 | D +3.5 |
| Alaska | D +2.0 | D +1.9 |
| Iowa | D +1.0 | R +0.2 |
Sources: New York Times/Siena Research Institute, November 1, 2026; Votendi’s published weighted polling averages, checked November 2, before the new Siena surveys were incorporated.
The broad direction is similar in six of the seven contests. But Siena’s margins are substantially larger in Michigan, Texas, Maine and Kansas.
In Michigan, for example, Siena reports Abdul El-Sayed leading Mike Rogers 53% to 42%, an 11-point difference. Votendi’s existing average puts El-Sayed at 48.4% and Rogers at 44.8%, a 3.6-point margin.
That is a difference of 7.4 points between the two reported leads.
Texas shows another notable gap. Siena places James Talarico at 50% and Ken Paxton at 43%, compared with Votendi’s 48.8% to 46.2%.
In Maine, Siena measures a six-point lead for Troy Jackson over Susan Collins, while Votendi’s average shows a 2.1-point difference.
These discrepancies should not be interpreted as changes in public opinion of the same magnitude. They reflect differences between one survey and an aggregation of multiple polls conducted over different periods.
Two Senate scenarios: 53–47 or 54–46
To understand how the two polling pictures translate into Senate arithmetic, begin with the Cook Political Report’s partisan ratings, as displayed on Votendi’s US Midterms hub.
Cook’s breakdown leaves seven races classified as Toss-ups. The remaining 93 seats are assigned to Democratic or Republican categories:
- 47 Democratic or Democratic-caucus-aligned seats
- 46 Republican seats
- 7 Toss-up seats
These are pre-election ratings, not certified results.
The next step is a simple, conditional calculation: hold those 93 party classifications fixed and assign each of the seven Toss-ups according to the candidate currently leading in either Siena’s individual poll or Votendi’s weighted average.
Scenario A — using Votendi’s current polling leaders
Six of the seven races show Democratic leads: Alaska, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Texas.
Iowa is the exception. Votendi’s average shows Republican Ashley Hinson at 46.2% and Democrat Josh Turek at 46.0%.
Allocating the seven races according to those leads produces the following illustrative Senate composition:
Democratic caucus: 53 seats
Republicans: 47 seats
Scenario B — using the final NYT/Siena polling leaders
Siena shows Democratic candidates leading in all seven states, including Iowa, where Turek has 48% against Hinson’s 47%.
Allocating the same seven races according to the Siena leads produces:
Democratic caucus: 54 seats
Republicans: 46 seats
The difference between the two calculations is exactly one seat — Iowa.
Neither scenario accounts for the possibility that a candidate trailing in the polls wins, that a race outside the Toss-up category produces an unexpected result, or that polling errors are correlated across multiple states.
They are arithmetic illustrations, not independently calculated probabilities or Votendi election forecasts.
Iowa is the dividing line between the two pictures
The Iowa Senate contest between Josh Turek and Ashley Hinson demonstrates why the choice of polling measure matters.
The Siena survey gives Turek a narrow 48% to 47% lead. Votendi’s 18-poll average instead places Hinson fractionally ahead, 46.2% to 46.0%.
Both margins are extremely small.
Siena reports a sampling margin of error of approximately 4.7 percentage points in Iowa, making the one-point difference particularly sensitive to polling uncertainty.
The result is not a contradiction that can be settled by selecting whichever number appears more recent. A single survey provides a fresh measurement; an average incorporates a wider body of evidence.
Neither establishes the election outcome.
Iowa is also important in the seat calculation because it is a Republican-held seat. Under the simplified assumptions used above, changing its allocation from Republican to Democratic moves the Senate tally from 53–47 to 54–46.
Michigan shows the largest difference in polling margins
Michigan presents the biggest gap between the final Siena poll and the existing Votendi average.
Siena’s El-Sayed lead is 11 points, while Votendi measures 3.6 points.
That difference is particularly notable after Democratic Representative Haley Stevens endorsed Republican Mike Rogers on November 1, following a dispute with El-Sayed.
The final Siena fieldwork extends through November 1, but the survey should not be presented as a reliable measurement of the endorsement’s impact. The timing of individual interviews and the absence of a comparable post-endorsement survey prevent that conclusion.
The polling numbers are also politically significant for a different reason: Michigan is currently a Democratic-held Senate seat.
A Democratic victory there would retain the seat, not create a Republican-to-Democratic gain.
That distinction is essential when calculating the national balance of power.
Texas, Ohio, Maine and Alaska: the importance of Republican-held seats
Unlike Michigan, several of the other closely watched races involve seats currently held by Republicans.
Texas, Ohio, Maine and Alaska are particularly important in any arithmetic exercise examining possible changes in the partisan composition of the Senate.
Both Siena and Votendi show Democratic polling leads in those four states, although the margins differ considerably.
In Texas, Siena records a seven-point lead for Talarico, compared with Votendi’s 2.6 points.
In Ohio, Sherrod Brown leads Jon Husted by five points in Siena’s poll and 3.5 points in Votendi’s average.
In Maine, Jackson leads Collins by six points in Siena’s survey and 2.1 points in Votendi’s tracker.
Alaska is the closest agreement between the two approaches: Siena reports Mary Peltola ahead of Dan Sullivan by two points, while Votendi records a 1.9-point margin.
Alaska and Maine also use ranked-choice voting, so first-choice polling figures cannot be treated as guaranteed final-round election outcomes.
Why the Cook baseline matters
The Cook Political Report currently identifies seven Senate Toss-ups, with 47 seats assigned to Democratic categories or aligned independents and 46 to Republican categories.
The Democratic baseline includes independent senators who caucus with Democrats; their caucus alignment should not be confused with formal party membership.
With Republicans currently holding 53 seats and Democrats plus their aligned independents holding 47, changing control requires a net shift of four seats toward the Democratic caucus. A 50–50 Senate would leave the Republican vice president able to break ties.
The hypothetical 53–47 and 54–46 calculations exceed the 51-seat threshold for a Democratic caucus majority, but this follows solely from the assumptions of those examples.
The actual composition will be determined by the election results, not by the leading candidates in a collection of polls.
The House picture is also strongly Democratic in polling and external ratings
The broader congressional picture provides additional context.
Votendi’s national Generic Congressional Ballot average currently shows Democrats at 50.0% and Republicans at 41.9%, across 92 published polls — an 8.1-point Democratic lead.
Separately, the Cook Political Report’s House ratings, displayed on Votendi, place 222 districts in Democratic categories, 195 in Republican categories and 18 as unallocated or Toss-ups.
The threshold for a House majority is 218 seats.
This is a different type of evidence from the Senate state polls. A national generic ballot is not a district-level result, and Cook’s House categories are external assessments rather than mandates already won.
Nevertheless, the two indicators explain why the Democratic position in House polling and ratings deserves separate attention from the state-by-state Senate contest.
Seven Democratic leads — but two different polling pictures
The final New York Times/Siena release provides a notably consistent set of individual measurements across the seven Senate battlegrounds.
Votendi’s existing weighted averages show much the same directional pattern, but generally smaller Democratic leads and one exceptionally close Republican advantage in Iowa.
The comparison therefore produces two useful observations.
First, the difference between an individual poll and a weighted polling average is consequential, particularly when an election depends on several narrow state-level margins.
Second, the distinction between polling leads and actual Senate control must remain explicit, even when several surveys point in the same direction.
The hypothetical 53–47 and 54–46 calculations help illustrate the arithmetic. They do not substitute for election results.
On November 3, the central question will be which of these closely contested races translate their polling measurements into actual votes and eventually into confirmed Senate seats.
Data and methodology
NYT/Siena: Final polls released November 1, 2026, among likely voters in Alaska, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio and Texas. Individual state sample sizes range from 610 to 1,215 respondents.
Votendi: Weighted polling averages displayed on November 2, 2026, before the latest NYT/Siena surveys were incorporated. Averages use a 30-day recency half-life and additional weighting factors.
Senate arithmetic: Conditional examples using the Cook Political Report’s 47 Democratic-aligned, 46 Republican and seven Toss-up seat allocation. The 53–47 and 54–46 examples are not Votendi forecasts.
Sources: Siena Research Institute — November 1 polls · Votendi US Midterms hub · Cook Political Report Senate ratings · Votendi methodology.
