The original plan was to tell the story of the 2026 campaign through the ubiquitous ads that you’re undoubtedly seeing if you’re in a swing state.
asserted
you → tell → state
But then a bunch of polling-related news broke shortly before taping, such as a New York Times/Siena University poll showing strong numbers for Democrats on the generic ballot, and a scandal involving a fake “polling” firm called Wedgewood Polls.
asserted
bunch → relate → firm
I’ll have some extensive commentary about Wedgewood later in this post.
asserted
I → have → post
But first, here’s the Still Counting video…
asserted
video → ’ → ?
And here’s the audio.
asserted
audio → ’ → ?
Once again, we’re very grateful for your reviews, comments, likes and subscribes.
asserted
we → ’re → reviews
In 2009, I published a story at FiveThirtyEight suggesting that the prolific polling firm Strategic Vision was probably faking its data.
asserted
firm → publish → data
I never vetted the story with a lawyer, though I had asked Strategic Vision for comment, and their cagey responses reinforced my view that something weird was going on.
asserted
something → vet → view
I thought the case was highly convincing, however.
asserted
case → think → ?
(I guess back then, I applied more of a “big forgiveness rather than ask permission” mindset.)
asserted
I → guess → mindset
Strategic Vision “polls” exhibited statistical patterns — namely, being far more likely to contain some trailing digits (such as 5, 7, 8 and 9) than others, including on obscure questions they probably thought would never be scrutinized — that were canonical signs of forged election results in authoritarian regimes.
asserted
that → exhibit → regimes
(Human beings are pretty bad at picking truly random numbers.)
asserted
beings → pick → numbers
It was extremely unlikely these results had emerged by chance alone.
asserted
results → emerge → chance
My “spidey sense” also told me something was a little off about Strategic Vision’s results — though I forget exactly which details led me to that hypothesis.
asserted
details → tell → hypothesis
But I was right — or at least I think that’s a reasonably safe assumption based on their subsequent behavior.
asserted
that → think → behavior
The American Association for Public Opinion Research censured Strategic Vision for failing to disclose methodological information, and Strategic Vision never really attempted to provide any convincing refutation.
asserted
Vision → censure → refutation
They packed up their tent and left the industry.
asserted
They → pack → industry
The next year, in 2010, “polls” from another prolific firm, Research 2000, were discovered to contain similar anomalies.
asserted
polls → discover → anomalies
Research 2000 fought back a little harder, sending me a cease-and-desist letter, but Daily Kos, whom they were “polling” for at the time, sued them before they, too, disappeared.
asserted
they → fight → them
Research 2000 had frequently conducted “polls” for local newspapers and news outlets, presumably for a healthy amount of compensation.
asserted
Research → conduct → compensation
Earlier this week, Wedgewood Polls admitted it had fabricated data.
asserted
it → admit → data
It claimed its “polls” were an “experimental project to demonstrate the vulnerabilities, lack of oversight, and overall low barrier to entry in the modern political polling industry.
asserted
polls → claim → industry
My opinion is that Wedgewood’s explanation is bullshit, a pathetic attempt to get ahead of the story after FiftyPlusOne was set to publish a story exposing the fraud.
asserted
FiftyPlusOne → get → fraud
Whether some sort of crime was committed was unclear — Wedgewood allegedly collected crowdfunded money for a poll that may or may not have ever been conducted.1
uncertain
that → commit → poll
reports that Wedgewood identified Jack Sims and Andrew Prater as the people behind the firm.
asserted
Wedgewood → report → firm
Whoever was responsible for fabricating the data probably shouldn't be trusted with anything election- or poll-related again.
asserted
was → fabricate → anything
These “polls” had made their way into FLIPR, although they weren’t having much influence on the model.
asserted
they → make → model
When we removed them from our database yesterday, FLIPR’s various averages and forecasts were basically unchanged.
asserted
averages → remove → database
That’s a bit confounded because a lot of polls are coming out these days, including a strong series of generic ballot polls for Democrats published before yesterday’s update.
asserted
lot → ’ → update
Still, FLIPR includes precautions against being overly influenced by any one poll, and new/unknown pollsters start with fairly low ratings by default.
asserted
pollsters → include → default
For what it’s worth, here were the Wedgewood “polls” that had entered our database, as compared to the Silver Bulletin averages at the time.
asserted
that → ’ → time
There’s a slight D-leaning “house effect” here, though it’s pretty mild and not particularly consistent.
asserted
it → ’ → ?
In races where Silver Bulletin was publishing polling averages (there are a couple of caveats here: see the footnote2), their “polls” were about 0.6 points more favorable to the Democratic candidate on average.
asserted
polls → publish → candidate
Wedgewood showed progressive candidates “polling” especially strongly
One thing that’s a bit unusual is that Wedgewood “polled” several races where there was little or no publicly-available polling at the time.
asserted
Wedgewood → show → time
At Silver Bulletin, we turn on the average for a race once there are three distinct polls from at least two distinct polling firms.
asserted
we → turn → firms
Four races where Wedgewood issued a “poll” did not meet that distinction.
asserted
Wedgewood → issue → distinction
As far as I can tell, in fact, Wedgewood was the first firm of any kind to “poll” Troy Jackson’s race against Susan Collins in Maine as Graham Platner was preparing to drop out; they had Jackson ahead by 5 points.
asserted
Jackson → tell → points
In Michigan, meanwhile, Wedgewood was relatively early to “poll” Abdul El-Sayed’s race against Mike Rogers, showing him ahead by 5 points, better than the average3 which had AES ahead by 0.4 points instead.
asserted
AES → poll → points
A Democratic candidate who dropped out, Mallory McMorrow, has alleged that Wedgewood’s “polls” hurt donor and voter confidence in her campaign.
asserted
polls → drop → campaign
In the table, I’ve only listed polls that included the eventual general election nominees because I’m not sure how comprehensive our data is on candidates who lost their primaries.
asserted
who → list → primaries
…and 81 more, not listed.
The Aporia
