Election forecasts you can inspect.Tested models, shown with their sources and their uncertainty.

Updated October 22, 2026, 09:28 UTC

State legislatures › Indiana House

Indiana House District 77

2026 forecast · Updated October 22, 2026, 09:28 UTC

Decided: only a Democrat is running · Alex Burton (D)

Indiana House District 77: Decided: only a Democrat is runningIndiana House 76: chance of a Democratic win 4%; 2024 president R+33Indiana House 78: chance of a Democratic win 5%; 2024 president R+17Kentucky House 11: chance of a Democratic win 6%; 2024 president R+30Indiana House District 77: Decided: only a Democrat is running78KY 117677
Safe DLean DToss-upLean RSafe RHatched: not up in 2026 (shaded by holder) · dashed: other state

District 77 is safe Democratic. Of its 3 neighbouring districts, 3 favour Republicans. 1 of them is across the state line.

StatusDecided: only a Democrat is running
CandidatesAlex Burton (D)
Candidate list fromofficial
Current memberAlex Burton

How it has voted

On its current lines. Legislative contests and the top-of-ticket vote inside the district.

Legislature 2024uncontested (D)
President 2024D+12
← RepublicanDemocratic →

Who lives here

Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019-2023.

This districtIndiana
Median household income$50,637$70,051
Bachelor's degree or more (25+)21%29%
Median age3638
White (not Hispanic)70%76%
Black19%9%
Hispanic4%8%
Asian1%3%
Born abroad4%6%
Jobs in manufacturing15%18%
Jobs in farming or mining0%1%

Initial version. This model was tested on every state legislative election from 1994 to 2024 before publication, forecasting each as if it had not happened. It beat the simple rule “the party that holds the seat keeps it”, and its chamber seat counts were off by 2.9 seats on average (target: under 3). Districts with no two-party race last time are read from their own presidential vote, a change tested in advance that cut their average error from 17 to 13 points. It missed one of its five accuracy targets: in 2024, the calmest year on record, its ranges were wider than they needed to be (92% of results fell inside its 80% ranges; target: at most 88%). Treat the ranges as cautious. The full test record and code.