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

Updated October 22, 2026, 09:28 UTC

State legislatures › Oklahoma House

Oklahoma House District 43

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

Decided: only a Republican is running · Jay Steagall (R)

Oklahoma House District 43: Decided: only a Republican is runningOklahoma House 47: chance of a Democratic win 7%Oklahoma House 60: chance of a Democratic win 4%Oklahoma House District 43: Decided: only a Republican is running476043
Safe DLean DToss-upLean RSafe RHatched: not up in 2026 (shaded by holder) · dashed: other state

District 43 is safe Republican. Of its 2 neighbouring districts, 2 favour Republicans.

StatusDecided: only a Republican is running
CandidatesJay Steagall (R)
Candidate list fromnews guide + filing book
Current memberJay Steagall

How it has voted

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

Legislature 2022no two-party contest; won by Jay W Steagall (Republican)
Governor 2022R+20
Legislature 2024no two-party contest; won by Jay W Steagall (Republican)
President 2024R+40
← RepublicanDemocratic →

Who lives here

Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2019-2023.

This districtOklahoma
Median household income$77,134$63,603
Bachelor's degree or more (25+)31%28%
Median age3537
White (not Hispanic)73%63%
Black4%7%
Hispanic10%12%
Asian3%2%
Born abroad6%6%
Jobs in manufacturing7%9%
Jobs in farming or mining4%4%

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.