Compiled from the candidate-position research and abortion-record follow-up in this conversation, checked October 21, 2026. All 46 printed candidates, the two joint governor tickets, 11 judicial retention questions and the amendment are included in ballot order. Write-in blanks are not additional named candidates. Candidate summaries describe published priorities without adopting campaign claims about opponents. Officeholders’ official pages document their stated positions and records; party profiles, interviews, reporting and public rosters are identified by their links.
Abortion classifications describe only the cited statements or actions. Historical opposition to one restriction does not establish support for unrestricted access. “Reproductive-rights pledge” is broader and less specific than a detailed abortion platform. For all other candidates, no explicit abortion position or relevant vote was verified in the research reviewed. Platform availability and abortion-position availability are separate questions.
Office-duty descriptions link to official sources. Race context was checked October 21, 2026. Cook’s Toss Up and Lean categories identify competitive races; Lean favors a party. “Close polling” refers to the cited poll, not a separate forecast. Selected polls can disagree and are not a complete average. Reported margins of error or credibility intervals apply to candidate shares, not directly to the difference between candidates. No-data labels do not establish that a race is safe or uncompetitive.
Debate and joint-appearance links were checked October 21, 2026. Full debates, joint interviews and forum coverage are labeled separately, with participants and dates where verified. A missing link means no suitable instance was verified in this review, not that no debate occurred. The postponed October 21 PBS governor event is a schedule notice, not a completed debate.
Record and accountability review: All 46 named candidates were checked in public-source searches on October 21, 2026. These are selected, source-linked examples, not an exhaustive lifetime background check or a numerical score. A promise is marked delivered only when the earlier commitment and resulting action can be identified; related actions and incomplete legislative steps are labeled separately. For many candidates no comparable earlier pledge/outcome pair was found. An unsuccessful proposal is not automatically a broken promise, especially when another body controls the outcome. Complaints, investigations, settlements, court rulings and acknowledged incidents are distinguished, with responses and known dispositions. Unresolved entries give the date of the last verified development; a current search date does not make an older case status current. “Not located” means no substantiated major issue was found within this review, not proof of a clean record. Campaign and office sources establish statements or reported administrative actions, not independent certification of every claimed result. Background links identify reviewed material and do not prove the absence of misconduct.
This is a saved research snapshot and will not update automatically. Source links open externally. Filtering changes the candidate entries shown; printing uses the current candidate filters and expanded sections. Choose “Expand details” before printing to include all supporting research. The page itself works offline; external sources require internet access. Candidate record and nonpartisan background sections are included in search and filters. Judicial summary tables remain visible; individual profiles and supporting research start collapsed. Name links open the corresponding judge’s profile. Searches include collapsed candidate text and open matching detail. “Expand details” and “Collapse details” apply throughout the guide. Nonpartisan backgrounds and all 11 judicial profiles were expanded October 21, 2026; professional biographies establish experience, not an independent performance endorsement. The four common judicial charts all use the same 1–5 performance scale; the additional conduct items use a different agreement scale. No composite score, inferred ideology or endorsement of retention has been assigned.