Link.I want to know more. Was this a prank of a sort that some people will admire and think of as what the supposedly legitimate polling business deserves?
ADDED: What else did Median Strategies do? My first thought was Spencer Pratt. And then I saw that LoGiurato linked to the L.A. Times article, "Poll showing Bass leading Raman by double digits was bogus, company says."
"The phony poll also claimed that 16% of its respondents said they had voted for Pratt... 'Faced with a choice between the incumbent and a Democratic Socialists of America-aligned challenger, most Pratt voters appear to be treating Bass as the more familiar, more moderate option rather than sitting out the race,' Median wrote in its analysis. That angle led to a headline in the California Post, which declared that 'Spencer Pratt’s voters could be deciding factor in LA mayor showdown according to latest poll.'... Median, which declined an interview, began posting on social media on Aug. 9 and had about 20 followers. 'Polling has a credibility problem. Ours is the fix: no partisan clients, no campaign or party money, numbers that go wherever the data takes them even when it’s inconvenient. Trustworthy polling, rebuilt,' it wrote in its first post. Median then released a poll on the Wisconsin gubernatorial race showing Democratic socialist Francesca Hong up by more than 20 percentage points."
But the Marquette poll also had Hong up by more than 20 points.
IN THE COMMENTS: Rocco said: "At least Alan Sokal had to get published in an academic journal to prove his point. Today you can just post to the internet." For background, see Wikipedia: "Sokal affair."
Posts
103 comments:
So.....the propagandistic "fact checkers" have moved into simulated polling?
Astroturfers find it easy to fool the AI aggregators all the time?
OMG.
That's pretty reprehensible and cheap. But it is a good learning lesson, isn't it. Disinfecting sunlight, one hopes.
Oh, I think we'll see more "short term experiments" next election term. And every election term thereafter.
Of course, it's been pretty clear for most of this century that polling is often used more as campaigning tool, as opposed to just an analytical tool.
Real eyes realize real lies.
My OMG was not because I was surprised by the actuality, but rather due to shock that they came clean, so soon or at all.
**"Thank you for your understanding."**
There are few phrases I hate more than that passive-aggressive horseshit. I'm not understanding. I want a criminal investigation.
IEE writ large.
Virtual democracy. AI progressing with gigawatt diversity, electricity, and indoctrination. Foolish AI. We misinterpreted "to serve man, woman, and child".
Manipulations lies and fraud pour out of the Dem party crime syndicate.
Lies, damned lies and statistics.
Planned obsolescence, a pop-up HypeMachine™.
I'm surprised they came forward with it. Maybe they're being investigated for campaign fraud?
Median Strategies is completely anonymous. Nobody knows who they are. So anybody in the media who cited them ought to be mocked, right?
So, AI favors Dezis. Perhaps a Roman imperial, republican plot to abort Grecian demos-cracy as a viable prime progressive as assembled authority.
“rather due to shock that they came clean, so soon or at all”
I’m suspicious of the disclosure. Why admit it? None of the other propagandists ever admit it. Is this an attempt to legitimize the other propaganda pollsters?
The polling firm is claiming that they were trying to see how far untested polls would spread in the media. The answer was quite far. But the answer was also that mere presence in social media was not very effective in influencing elections since the polls for Raman and Hong did not have much influence on actual voters. Bass and Crowley, the establishment candidates, won. It seems that campaign workers and social media influencers live in Dorothy-land where tornadoes sweep through, carrying them up and away whereas voters think that the politicians are going to go on doing pretty much what they have been doing and they vote on whether they like that.
I'm looking forward to a similar admission from "IEE Strategies" too.
"She Only Danced One Summer"
Be suspicious of any major event in a major election year- pandemic, random assassination attempt, suspect data reported as fact, voting anomalies…if you haven’t figured this out by now…
Pride prejudice polling parade. Abort.
That update is very interesting, Althouse.
follow the money
". . . since the polls for Raman and Hong did not have much influence on actual voters."
You don't think their inflated poll numbers boosted their vote totals and discouraged some of their opponents' supporters from voting?
could there be a link between phony polls - and democrat party vote cheat?
These days it’s only possible to poll the gullible.
Whenever I get a request to participate in a poll, either by phone call or increasingly by text message, I always decline because I assume it could be a fraudulent attempt to get something from me, and I have no way to verify the veracity of the caller or messager.
The Marquette poll does appear to have done an OK job of predicting the Hong vote, which was 39.3% in the election v. 38% in the poll.
The fact that David Crowley had dropped out of the race and then dropped back in after Mandela Barnes dropped out was likely also a factor in the polling. The primary winning strategy of dropping out and then back in also worked for Tom Smith, a Republican candidate for Congress in Michigan.
manipulative influencing? Perhaps on the margins. I think it helps the left cover their ballot tricks and USB stick tricks.
"Lies, damned lies and statistics."
"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled." - Mark Twain
I've never in my life been approached to participate in a poll. I've been a registered voter for 54 years.
I wonder if they're afraid of being sued, or maybe even prosecuted criminally, for fraud. Is there a class-action market for this? Could a million people be pissed off enough at being hoodwinked for a class-action suit?
rcommal said...
"..My OMG was not because I was surprised by the actuality, but rather due to shock that they came clean, so soon or at all.."
my guess IS;
they were ordered, by their masters, to close up shop.
not because their data was "bogus", but because it indicated massive voter fraud in Wisconin's vote "count"
Peter Boghossian is smiling right now.
The only poll that matters is the one where you don’t need to prove you’re you in order to participate.
At least Alan Sokol had to get published in an academic journal to prove his point. Today you can just post to the internet.
Autocorrect keeps wanting to spell Sokal as Sokol.
The polling organization will eventually trace back to a Hong supporting deep pocket.
Yancey Ward beat me to it.
My mother lost her mother decades ago. My grandmother's best friend (who I always called "aunt" even tho she is not family relation by blood) - she became my mom's surrogate mother.. She is very special to us. (as a child I spent time on the shores of lake Winnebago in her tiny tiny cabin)
Anyway - she is 106 years old! She lives in a care facility outside of Milwaukee. It's a large facility and a nice one.
I should visit during election season - just to see how ballots are handled in these types of facilities.
We need an army of Nick S.
Then there's this
Spencer probably won - by large amounts. The Democrat party crime syndicate stopped it.
"The polling organization will eventually trace back to a Hong supporting deep pocket."
Nithya Raman also could not be reached for comment.
This is nuts. Trying to understand where an equilibrium lies.
So a completely fake poll had the same results as the "legitimate" ones? Everybody is incompetent, and in the same direction. I have to assume the "real" polls ones use the same methodology as the fake ones.
There’s a hilarious irony here: the fake poll didn’t just test belief in polling, it became a real-world example of how easily people accept results that confirm what they already want to believe. The experiment, it seems, worked a little too well.
I guess they hong up on further polling. Get it? Hong up?
@IEE: "it became a real-world example of how easily people accept results that confirm what they already want to believe."
No, IEE, despite your wishes we still don't believe you.
Remarkable how someone could write this story and not say a single word about the company behind it. Is Median Strategies a real company? Did it exist before this "poll"? Is this the only opinion research it ever published? If only there were some kind of profession whose members sought to ask these questions and seek answers...
"Propaganda, all is phony"- Bob Dylan
We all know polls are meant to shape public opinion about elections, not measure them. The Marquette Poll, so admired in Wisconsin, does it every election cycle.
@Enigma: A poll being spectacularly wrong isn’t evidence that it was fake. The Selzer & Co./Des Moines Register poll is a particularly good example of why those concepts shouldn’t be conflated. It was an extraordinary methodological failure, but there is no evidence it was fabricated.
The more interesting question with something like Median Strategies is provenance: Who created the organization? When? Who funded it? What previous research had it conducted? Who commissioned the poll? Was there actually a sample of respondents?
That’s where “this poll was wildly wrong” becomes a very different and potentially much more serious question from “this poll was invented.”
The Marquette Law School Poll showed Francesca Hong at 38%, Mandela Barnes at 16%, and Crowley at 7%, July 22-27, 2026. State Navigate Poll had Hong at 44%, in early August.
So either the Marquette Poll and State Navigate were total bullshit, or Democrats are releasing this fake poll / social experiment story to cover for the absentee voter fraud and thumb drive scandal in Milwaukee.
You’ll never get me to believe, during the 2024 election cycle, that the Iowa poll wasn’t manipulated. The woman pollster knew she was retiring and made her numbers say what she wanted them to say.
AKA Meddling Strategies
Democrats have been cheating and stealing elections since I have been alive. It is accepted wisdom that Texas and Illinois vote counts in 1960 were manipulated to give JFK the victory. This is one of their core electoral strategies (cheating) and is why democrats "went to the mattresses" over the SAVE act.
“𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘚𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢 𝘏𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 38%, 𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘵 16%, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘊𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘵 7%, 𝘑𝘶𝘭𝘺 22-27, 2026. 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘕𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘏𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 44%, 𝘪𝘯 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘈𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘴𝘵.“
Some, but not all, of this was sampling. Crowley had just re-entered the race when many polls were conducted, and some preceded Mandela’s withdrawal, which allowed Crowley to consolidate the vote.
Then came more than $4 million in TV spending for Crowley in the final stretch, a significant buy in a short period.
Hong also struggled with frontrunner scrutiny, particularly during an ill-advised national media tour that exposed vulnerabilities on issues including policing and Thanksgiving.
Crowley’s late surge largely escaped the earlier public polls. Some private tracking reportedly caught the movement in the final days, and the momentum continued through Election Day.
I guess there is nothing — from a legal perspective — that will stop this kind of misrepresentation.
That means that we will see (much) more of it in future. 🤬
My husband, who ingests a lot more mainstream news than I do and who is an inveterate pessimist*, often tells me poll results that he believes confirm that the sky actually is falling. I always counter with, "Who paid for the poll? What were the questions, and how were they worded? What was the weighting strategy?" He never looks into those things.
With the Grievance Studies papers, the perps went to considerable effort to make their work appear real: notes, citations, data, impenetrable academic-speak. I wonder whether their project was much less work than the studies they were lampooning. Similarly, considering that the fake polls here must've been backed up by SOMETHING that looked like "the crosstabs" that we're all exhorted to check when a poll with a weird result comes out, how fake were they, actually, as compared with the obvious push-polls that we're so often fed as straight "opinion" polls?
IOW: I assume ALL polls are fake, in the sense that there is always an agenda behind them.
* Except about our dog, who is very well trained except with regard to recall, the uncrackable nut. Hope springs eternal for him there. He never stops believing that THIS time he can let her outside off-leash and she won't take off. Sigh.
I think bots should be deleted.
Oops
Some think the UW sociology department was behind it...
Lot of money spent on polls
or its utter BS
Gotta go with the latter
Mossad?
The merry band of tricky mischievous tricksters??
Editor needs to assign cub reporter meade. In madison to this story stat...
The only time and place I participate in polls is on Tuesdays at city hall.
Florida (where I live) is holding its primary today. There’s not really a battle of progressives here this year, not in the way we saw it in NY, WI, MI, ME etc. But it will still be interesting.
I’d talk about polling, but…um… .
Has anyone blamed the Jews yet?
Dick Tuck was a Democrat dirty trickster who was celebrated as a political prankster. His chief target, Richard Nixon, may have learned a thing or two from his nemesis.
Jamie (8:10am):
I don't know (or care) who Peter Boghossian is, but I just realized why the name sounds familiar and slightly funny: I've been subconsciously - and now consciously - misreading it as Boss-Hog-ian.
...'Lot of money spent on polls -AND- its utter BS...'
And there was another such 'phony' poll in the LA runoff as well, conducted as an 'experiment'. Sure.
It reads like a 'get-out-in-front-and-pre-bunk this problem' type of story. I wonder if someone is about to publish an exposé that really blows up the pre-election polling scam, revealing that its real purpose is to create voting patterns, not observe them.
And now they're trying to steer the outcome so they can salvage their preferred image, in time for the midterm polling frenzy. Can't have the proletariat seeing how the sausage gets made.
So the two races Median Strategies dabbled in both had accusations of fraud: Hong's and Rahman's. Maybe election fraud is itself a "social experiment."
I'm waiting for someone to do everything to build a bomb and then claim it was an art project.
Don't you dare ask questions about corrupt democrats and their thumb drives.
The other pollsters had the same kind of numbers. And the El-sayed race had a similar big miss.
So they pulled numbers out of thin air? How does this differ from, for instance YouGov or Marquette?
I don't know which is worse: polling companies, prediction markets, or NBC News.
“..𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘚𝘤𝘩𝘰𝘰𝘭 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘭 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘢 𝘏𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 38%, 𝘔𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘵 16%, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘊𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘵 7%, 𝘑𝘶𝘭𝘺 22-27, 2026. 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘕𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘭 𝘩𝘢𝘥 𝘏𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘵 44%, 𝘪𝘯 𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘈𝘶𝘨𝘶𝘴𝘵..“
and IF you look at it.. THIS was EXACTLY RIGHT.
Hong ended up with a vote count of 311,512 or 39.33%
so EVERY ONE that said they wanted Hong (and a few more),
had their vote counted for Hong..
and then EVERY SINGLE OTHER VOTE was counted against her.
Actually, only enough to make her lose were counted against her;
actually, 315,308 votes, or 39.81%
Mandella (whoever) was dropped out, and only someone that NO ONE had Ever heard of was left on the ballot..
So 𝘊𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘺 received ALL (well Most of all) the other votes.
since Hong NEVER had a majority, she was doomed from the start
professor?
i did NOT use ANY slash i things,, i JUST copied and pasted some one ELSE's itallics into my reply.
i did NOT think that the itals would go in.. looks like blogspot changed formatting again?
or doesn't anyone else see the 𝘊𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘺 in my post?
maybe i SHOULDN'T have done SO MUCH acid back in the '80s?
Compare this with how the media reported allegations of Russian manipulation of social media posts in presidential elections.
rcommal writes: 𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢 (𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘐 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦) 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺.
Trump voted by mail in Florida's Republican primary, according to local voting records — even as he continues to rail against mail-in voting with lies of fraud.
Trump votes by mail again in his home state of Florida ~ Politico
speaking of hilarious jokes.
https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/2089306252576690250
Lead Anchor at CNN Jake Tapper comes out and admits THEY ALL KNEW Joe Biden wasn’t really President and calling the shots
He says there was an elite inner circle of advisors who would make the decisions and “steer the country.”
Jake Tapper “So the Politburo, not a term we came up with, it's a term from within the Biden administration — these were the individuals that help steer the government.”
Isn’t this the same thing Ann Selzer was doing when she said Harris had a 3 point lead over Trump in Iowa?
I remember having a “discussion” at a dinner party the night before the election, and some woman at the table brought this up as evidence that Harris would win the election. I almost spit out my food , and said “c’mon - you don’t really believe that”. I was trying to be nice, but she thought she knew better.
"Trump voted by mail in Florida's Republican primary, according to local voting records — even as he continues to rail against mail-in voting with lies of fraud."
He's got a good reason.
Conflating 'mail-in voting' with 'mail an unsolicited ballot to everyone in the state', as is done in multiple democrat states, is par for the course with you.
"I remember having a “discussion” at a dinner party the night before the election, and some woman at the table brought this up as evidence that Harris would win the election."
You had dinner with Inga!
"its real purpose is to create voting patterns, not observe them."
This is my default assumption now.
Peter Boghossian is one of the perpetrators of the "Grievance Studies incident," in which he and a couple of others undertook to get absolutely ridiculous (and fake) research papers published in academic journals. They got caught, but not before several of their ludicrous papers were published and several more accepted for publication.
GD Smoke and Mirrors leftwing MFers!
In 1948, a newspaper said Dewey defeated Truman because a telephone poll said he would. Bad methods and wishful thinking aren't new.
Push polling is not remotely new either (using a nominal opinion survey to push for a desired outcome).
https://ballotpedia.org/Push_polling
Peachy +2. My mother passed at 104 in an assisted living place in Jan, 2021. She had dementia for the previous 5+ years but received an absentee ballot every election. I did not see her for her last 10 months due to Covid restrictions. Mail room was very accessible in common area and one could just go into the back of the mail boxes. No idea if she or someone else voted with her ballot in 2020. 5 million with dementia in US.
Beaver7216.
Another a wand opportunity for fraud.. by the morally devoid.
These blunt attempts at fraud are quite common. Remember Surgisphere? Dr. Sapan Desai, founder of the small Chicago-area company Surgisphere, claimed to possess a huge international database containing detailed records from hundreds of hospitals. Researchers used it for two major COVID papers. One in the Lancet that said hydroxychloroquine killed people and one in the New England Journal of Medicine claiming grossly exagerated deaths due to Covid. This supported vax only treatment and supported severe lockdowns, aligned with Fauci policy.
And after these prestigious papers were published and had their effect, even changing WHO policy, they were declared completely fake, and these journals of super science said uh oh, too bad. We will retract now but no one will be sanctioned.
So it’s an organized program that costs millions of dollars, these programs get respected pollsters including the Iowa pollster, to lie their asses off in service to the cause, but dumbshit scoundrels say “nope! No evidence man, no evidence!”
In Washington state , one year ago in august, an illegal non English speaking big rig driver decided to do a u turn in the middle of a highway. As he did so, a van carrying 3 people hit the big rig and died instantly.
This illegal non English speaking man failed the written drivers test 10 times.
He ended up in California where he was given a drivers license to drive a big rig.
China and Russia are spreading disinformation… divisions and lies help corruption rings
“Democrats surging in the polls!” always the pre-election story, followed by “How did the polls get it so wrong!” post election. These stories run like clockwork in the MSM every election cycle now.
"'Why aren't I 50 points ahead of Trump!?!" - Hillary "It was her turn" Clinton
"rcommal writes: 𝘍𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘢 (𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘐 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦) 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺.
Trump voted by mail in Florida's Republican primary, according to local voting records — even as he continues to rail against mail-in voting with lies of fraud.
Trump votes by mail again in his home state of Florida ~ Politico"
WALLS ARE CLOSING IN NOW.
It's possible to be critical of a system and still use the system.
The above is not from Rcommal but IEEEEEEEEEEE
Anthropogenic Intelligence (AI) are easy.
I prefer to enjoy comedy polled from mainstream news sources.
There are a million fake polls out there. Any of us could set one up on X or other social media sites this afternoon. I saw one a few weeks ago that had Newsom leading Vance by 20 or 30 points in a potential Presidential race. Lefties were reposting it all over the web like it was the word of God. Grok identified the “pollster” as some guy who worked at Starbucks.
If it was James O'Keefe, he probably would have copped to it
Known unknown: Thanks for clarifying that! I wouldn’t want to be thought as having wrote that, because I haven’t and I wouldn’t.
OG Mike writes: 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 '𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘭-𝘪𝘯 𝘷𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨' 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 '𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘭 𝘢𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦', 𝘢𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘤𝘳𝘢𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴…
“Unsolicited ballot to everyone in the state” can make it sound like election officials are mailing ballots to random households. In all-mail voting states, that’s not what happens.
Ballots are sent only to active, registered voters—people who are already on the official voter registration list. These lists are maintained and regularly updated by election officials, so ballots go to verified voters, not just any address.
When a ballot is returned, it doesn’t automatically get counted. Election officials first check that the voter is eligible and that the ballot is valid. This can include verifying the voter’s registration status, checking the signature on the return envelope against the one on file, and confirming that the ballot was received on time and hasn’t been duplicated.
So while the ballot is mailed without the voter requesting it each election cycle, it is still only sent to verified registered voters, and it goes through multiple checks before being counted.
"Trump voted by mail in Florida's Republican primary, according to local voting records — even as he continues to rail against mail-in voting with lies of fraud."
If you don't think he should be voting by mail, make it illegal and he'll stop doing it. If you're not willing to do that, feel free to keep your piehole shut when he's following the voting law that YOU insist on.
"and it goes through multiple checks before being counted."
We know from multiple reports that all those safeguards you listed are not being followed. If they were, the states would have no problem with the USPS monitoring them. But instead, the states are suing to have the USPS blindfolded.
That’s not the argument. I support vote-by-mail/absentee voting and have no problem with Trump using it when he follows the law. The issue is his political hypocrisy: he can’t reasonably use a legal voting method himself while portraying that same method as inherently fraudulent when other voters use it. Florida’s system requires voters to request mail ballots, provides identity information for the request, and verifies signatures on returned ballots.
So no, I don’t want to make mail voting illegal. I’d simply like the same standard applied to the rhetoric: if it’s secure enough for Trump to use, it’s presumably secure enough for everyone else.
OG Mike digs in: 𝘞𝘦 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘮𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥.
This argument confuses mail delivery with election administration. States are not suing because they oppose oversight, but because they object to an attempt to make USPS a gatekeeper for determining who may cast a mail ballot. Courts have blocked the Trump administration’s effort, affirming that election administration is primarily a state responsibility.
If there are specific cases where legally required safeguards were not followed, they should be identified and addressed. But claiming that “states are suing USPS, therefore safeguards must be failing” substitutes inference for evidence. A dispute over authority to regulate mail is not proof of fraud in the mail voting system.
"I’d simply like the same standard applied to the rhetoric"
You want everybody who's complaining that the use of fossil fuels is damaging the planet to stop using them and anything produced using them, then?
I bet you don't.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.