v0.2.0Evidence preliminaryWisconsin Governor · Research Preview · Nov 3, 2026
David Crowley is favored, but a Tom Tiffany win remains plausible.
This research preview is centered on reviewed polling and calibrated gubernatorial polling error. Certified past results are shown for context and add zero forecast points.
Conditional modeled chance to win · two modeled major candidates only · not projected vote share
David Crowley +4.480% range: Tom Tiffany +1.7 to David Crowley +10.6
Conditional modeled chance to win · two modeled major candidates only · not projected vote share
David Crowley +4.480% range: Tom Tiffany +2.8 to David Crowley +11.8
Evidence desk · Snapshot note
David Crowley is favored by a polling-only research preview; certified historical results are shown for comparison, add zero forecast points, and published uncertainty leaves both candidates a credible path.
Published fallback
The published polling-only research preview favors David Crowley, with current polling pointing to David Crowley. Certified historical results produce a Democratic comparison margin, but that reference belongs to earlier candidates and adds zero forecast points. The uncertainty range leaves room for either candidate, so this is not treated as a certain outcome.
David Crowley's evidence-based path is for the polling signal to hold up as more independent surveys arrive. The other candidate needs new verified polling to move that signal; these are conditional paths, not campaign recommendations or separate probabilities.
Watch whether future independent polling confirms or changes the present estimate. That evidence would update the polling center, while the historical comparison would remain descriptive rather than becoming a hidden model input.
Prepared from this forecast snapshot and the sources below.
David Crowley's clearest path is for the current polling signal to be confirmed by additional independent surveys.
Tom Tiffany's clearest path requires new verified polling to move away from the present signal; the published uncertainty still leaves room for that reversal.
Official forecast unchanged · Commentary only · Forecast effect 0
Deterministic race brief
Built directly from the published forecast and reviewed evidence. Model-assisted answers may explain this record, but they cannot revise it.
David Crowley is the model favorite. Tom Tiffany remains inside the model's central range of outcomes.
4 reviewed polls from 3 pollsters. Latest fieldwork ended Aug 18, 2026; sponsor: League of American Workers.
Latest release · TIPP InsightsWe call it close because the central range crosses an even race.
Open the published forecast artifactThese evidence-cited readings explain plausible pressure on the race. Dependency groups separate mechanisms; shared-sample labels identify reused respondents across mechanisms. Neither is independent or additive.
No candidate-directed context has passed review yet.
No candidate-directed context has passed review yet.
The path is strongest if independent polls confirm the current lead and the supportive conditions below continue to hold.
No reviewed candidate-directed context yet.
No opposing directional context has passed review.
If these conditions change, the path changes. This is a scenario, not a second forecast.
The path requires reviewed polling to move toward Tom Tiffany while the supportive conditions below hold.
No reviewed candidate-directed context yet.
No opposing directional context has passed review.
If these conditions change, the path changes. This is a scenario, not a second forecast.
The race matters for Wisconsin's governing trajectory even though the legislature is decided separately.
Observed: Wisconsin currently has a Democratic governor and Republican majorities in both legislative chambers; the Assembly and part of the Senate are also on the 2026 ballot.
What would change this: Certified legislative candidate fields, district ratings, and chamber results would clarify the full control consequence.
Dependency group · Wi State Control 2026
Wisconsin Public RadioCandidate identity is treated as projected pending canvass.
Observed: News organizations project David Crowley and Tom Tiffany as the primary winners, while Wisconsin's statewide canvass is due after this release cutoff.
What would change this: The statewide canvass and certified general-election candidate list would replace the provisional status.
Dependency group · Wi Candidate Field 2026
Associated Press / NPR · Wisconsin Elections CommissionEvidence desk · Published record
Ask what drives the forecast, what would need to change, or how a conditional scenario could play out in Wisconsin Governor.
Questions worth asking
Evidence map
The certified-result stations are descriptive references, not sequential model updates. The final two stations show the modeled polling center and forecast uncertainty.
Tony Evers versus Tim Michels, shown only as a statewide historical comparison.
Wisconsin's certified presidential vote, shown only as a recent statewide comparison.
The midpoint of the certified governor and presidential two-party margins. It is a descriptive comparison with exactly zero separate forecast effect.
Quality-, recency-, sponsor-, and correlation-adjusted estimate from reviewed polls.
The current polling center with uncertainty set by the nearest out-of-time gubernatorial polling-error calibration; historical reference results add no points.
Since the last run
Future changes will be tied to a poll, data release, or documented model update.
Calibration before confidence
Verified context stays outside the probability until it demonstrates predictive value in an out-of-sample election test.
AP projects David Crowley and Tom Tiffany as the major-party nominees; Wisconsin's statewide primary canvass is due August 26.
The prior governor and presidential results are displayed for context and add zero forecast points.
Reviewed polls use the same recency, quality, sponsor, and pollster-correlation controls as the archived backtest.
2 reviewed assessments explain direction and caveats with exactly zero forecast effect.
The error layer is historically calibrated; the full race-specific publication remains a research preview.
Historical check
Out-of-time production-aggregator polling error by days before Election Day. This calibrates the polls-only baseline and does not validate the full fundamentals model.
Read the complete backtest limits →Race replay
Move through the record one dated input at a time. The tape reveals a probability only when an archived model run exists; news never receives an automatic sentiment score.
The election-day median margin was +4.4 points with an 80% range from -2.8 to 11.8.
Reviewed releases
Swipe the table for other share and model use →
| Pollster / dates | Sample | David Crowley | Tom Tiffany | Other / undecided | Review / use |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TIPP InsightsSponsor: League of American Workers | 1,199 LV | 47% | 43% | 4% / 6% | Accepted With PenaltyIn current average |
| Platform CommunicationsSponsor: Badger Battleground | 500 LV | 48% | 44% | — / 8% | Accepted With PenaltyIn current average |
| RMG ResearchSponsor: Institute for Reforming Government | 800 RV | 46% | 43% | — / 11% | Accepted With PenaltyIn current average |
| TIPP InsightsSponsor: League of American Workers | 1,175 LV | 42% | 41% | 5% / 12% | Accepted With PenaltyIn current average |
News with a paper trail
The major-party matchup is projected by news organizations; the statewide canvass remains pending at the release cutoff.
Model treatment: Use the projected major-party matchup with a visible pending-canvass warning and no margin adjustment.Two August surveys show Crowley ahead, with sponsor and disclosure limitations reflected in poll weights.
Model treatment: Include through the documented poll-quality, sponsor, recency, and correlation controls.Built to be challenged
Every published run points back to its inputs, rules, simulation seed, and model version. Corrections create a new record instead of rewriting history.
Bind the candidate field and certified historical references to dated sources.
Adjust current polling for recency, sponsor, quality, and repeated pollsters.
Apply the nearest out-of-time gubernatorial polling-error calibration across the simulated outcome.
Publish the forecast artifact, source manifest, warnings, and validation state together.