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

Updated October 22, 2026, 09:28 UTC

State legislatures › North Carolina Senate

North Carolina Senate District 32

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

>99% chance of a Democratic win · Peter Antinozzi (R), Keenen Altic (Green), Paul Lowe, Jr. (D)

North Carolina Senate District 32: ForecastNorth Carolina Senate 30: chance of a Democratic win <1%; 2024 president R+47North Carolina Senate 31: chance of a Democratic win 1%; 2024 president R+23North Carolina Senate District 32: Forecast313032
Safe DLean DToss-upLean RSafe RHatched: not up in 2026 (shaded by holder) · dashed: other state

District 32 is safe Democratic. Of its 2 neighbouring districts, 2 favour Republicans.

StatusForecast
Chance of a Democratic win>99%
Likely margin (80% range)D+34 to D+57, middle D+46
CandidatesPeter Antinozzi (R), Keenen Altic (Green), Paul Lowe, Jr. (D)
Candidate list fromofficial
Current memberPaul Lowe

How it has voted

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

Legislature 2024D+42
President 2024D+40
← RepublicanDemocratic →

Who lives here

Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019-2023.

This districtNorth Carolina
Median household income$68,359$69,904
Bachelor's degree or more (25+)45%35%
Median age3839
White (not Hispanic)58%61%
Black23%20%
Hispanic12%11%
Asian3%3%
Born abroad9%9%
Jobs in manufacturing11%12%
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.