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

Updated October 22, 2026, 09:28 UTC

State legislatures › Maryland Senate

Maryland Senate District 16

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

Decided: only a Democrat is running · Sara N. Love (D)

Maryland Senate District 16: Decided: only a Democrat is runningMaryland Senate 15: chance of a Democratic win >99%Maryland Senate 17: chance of a Democratic win 97%Maryland Senate 18: chance of a Democratic win >99%Virginia upper 38: no election in 2026Maryland Senate District 16: Decided: only a Democrat is running1817VA 381516
Safe DLean DToss-upLean RSafe RHatched: not up in 2026 (shaded by holder) · dashed: other state

District 16 is safe Democratic. Of its 4 neighbouring districts, 3 favour Democrats, 1 has no 2026 forecast. 1 of them is across the state line.

StatusDecided: only a Democrat is running
CandidatesSara N. Love (D)
Candidate list fromofficial
Current memberSara Love

How it has voted

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

Legislature 2022uncontested (D)
Governor 2022D+68
← RepublicanDemocratic →

Who lives here

Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019-2023.

This districtMaryland
Median household income$185,195$101,652
Bachelor's degree or more (25+)85%43%
Median age4539
White (not Hispanic)66%47%
Black6%29%
Hispanic9%12%
Asian14%6%
Born abroad26%16%
Jobs in manufacturing3%5%
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.