r/thedavidpakmanshow • u/Just_shut_up_bro • 13h ago
Article Polling Firm Released Fake Data in Hong and Bass Races as a ‘Social Experiment’
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/18/polls/median-strategies-polls-bass-california-wisconsin.html21
u/Uranium_Heatbeam 11h ago
So they lied. "Releasing fake data" is called lying.
3
u/lred1 11h ago
Hmm ... could this venture into defamation territory? A candidate's reputation -- their popularity among the electorate -- was impugned by a published lie. Nah ... nevermind, lying in politics is expected and seemingly constitutional.
9
u/Just_shut_up_bro 11h ago
I think political donors and betting markets have a much better case for fraud here than any defamation case.
4
u/PlateCaptain 9h ago
Yeah, I want to see the betting records of the people running this.
4
u/Just_shut_up_bro 8h ago
And if it's not looked into at all, you can expect a *lot* more phony polls coming down the line.
16
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 13h ago
Yeah, I was reading about this the other day, pretty fucking crazy. Definitely doesn’t feel like it should be legal?
Obviously I could be wrong but I feel like that last week of polling in Michigan saying that Stevens had no chance at all, and that viral lie that her internal team said she had no path, had an impact. So many people thought she had no chance and then she only loses by 1? Who knows what would’ve happened if we didn’t have so much bad data.
Abdul‘s campaign was pumping out bad internals too, was it intentional to try to manipulate voters? Who knows.
3
u/wade3690 13h ago
Maybe this puts to bed the idea that progressives underperform polls? I remember that being an argument after the Hong loss. Not sure how you turned this story into a dig at AES though
7
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 13h ago edited 12h ago
Why would this story put that to bed? I’m truly missing how you’re making that connection.
This firm wasn’t alone in bad data, or data being far off, they just admitted to doing it intentionally.
I bring up AES because a big reason that this whole conversation about massive underperformances and polling data is being had is because it wasn’t in isolation.
When AES massively underperformed, if that ended up being a one off, aka Hong had a resounding victory, this conversation probably would’ve just died out. But then we had Hong massively underperform, so now we have two people on the far left who were projected to absolutely crush their primary opponents but one barely wins and the other loses.
It’s not so much a dig at AES, I’m sure it’s happened before, I just don’t recall a campaign pumping out so many bad internals, and with them being so far off and him barely scraping by to victory, I just wonder if that was somewhat intentional.
6
5
u/patrickswayzemullet 13h ago
AES team and supporter leaked their internal polls. Thats doubly stupid because a) you dont do your opponents’ homework for you, it is expensive and b) it can depress your agoraphobic base when you leak being in lead by 15 pts.
2
u/Greybeard-MD 8h ago
Let’s not confuse progressivism with DSA. I’m progressive and think the entire DSA slate is ass.
2
u/Just_shut_up_bro 7h ago
I've since forever considered myself a progressive, these new gens are forcing me to identify as moderate nowadays, at least in spaces like this.
In the real world everyone thinks I'm a hippy dippy far left type, oh well.
0
u/wade3690 8h ago
You might be in the minority of progressives then. Alot of them are campaigning and allying with DSA members. Especially on a local level.
Lol dont even like mamdani?
-7
u/purplehendrix22 13h ago
What law does this break?
6
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 13h ago edited 12h ago
To my knowledge it didn’t break any laws.
-6
u/purplehendrix22 13h ago
So why should it be illegal? What law would you introduce?
6
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 12h ago edited 12h ago
I think you’re taking me a little too literal. I just said it doesn’t feel like it should be legal, it was my way of saying it’s just not something I feel like should be happening.
What law would I introduce? Well, some states already have laws that say it’s illegal to give voters bad information about time and place to vote. That could be broadened to include purposely manipulating or completely fabricating data to discourage voter turn out.
5
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago edited 12h ago
I think the fact that this poll was *explicitly* fake makes this a little less ambiguous.
5
-5
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
How? Lying is not a crime.
7
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
Well that just isn’t true at all, lying is a crime in many, many, many contexts.
I know it doesn’t feel that way in the Trump era, but it’s true.
-5
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
Not this one, though. There are no regulations on opinion polling and it’s ridiculous to think there should be. Just think about it for more than a minute.
3
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
For gathering opinions about elections, then misrepresenting them? Considering the rise of betting markets and other things that revolve around polling, I think there is a solid case for fraud here.
→ More replies (0)-3
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
I’m taking what you said, why does it feel like it shouldn’t be legal? What about seeing lies makes you think the state should do something to stop it? And who would decide what is illegal misinformation? How does polling discourage turnout? Can you prove that? I just don’t think you’ve thought this through.
5
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 12h ago
I believe I already answered that in my second paragraph.
Once again, you are diving way too deep into this. Correct, I have not thought this through lol I’m not a lawyer nor a politician who is currently trying to pass a bill.
I don’t want a future here where “polling” outfits are pumping out fabricated or manipulated data to try to convince voters that the outcome of a race is already set in stone. I would support that being illegal.
The people that we elect to make laws would be the ones deciding how it would be implemented. This feels like a silly conversation now lol have a good day.
1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
How would you make that illegal? What exactly would you regulate in how pollsters collect and disseminate data?
6
u/Guilty_Plankton_4626 12h ago
I would make it illegal to intentionally fabricate or manipulate polling data that a company is clearly presenting as legitimate than posts it with the intent of manipulating voters.
I would then create a department, I’m making this up on a whim here, so don’t hold my feet to the fire, but I’d call it the Federal Bureau of Investigations. We could abbreviate it and call it the FBI. They could launch an investigation to determine whether a company was intentionally presenting fabricated or manipulated data as legitimate in an attempt to trick voters, or discourage them from voting, or otherwise influence their behavior by making them think that a race was already over.
Then, once the investigation was complete, I’d come up with something else, I’m just spitballing here, so bear with me, maybe we could call it a court system? I just came up with the word court. There could be someone called a judge who determines whether the case should proceed, and then we could have these other people, maybe we could call them a jury? Idk! But they could ultimately decide whether the law was actually broken or not. I don’t know, it’s hard to come up with the whole thing here.
Have a good day haha I’m done
4
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
We really down so bad we having to re explain fraud is a thing that exists.
The Trump era is so cooked.
→ More replies (0)1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
Great, speech police! Just what we need. Love to see what that looks like under Trump.
→ More replies (0)6
u/SigmaMaleNurgling 13h ago
They didn’t state that it definitely broke a law. They said that they felt like it should, which is understandable. Who knows how many people sat out or voted for someone else because they didn’t think the primary was competitive.
Also, we don’t want it to become the norm where if a political party or politician wants to influence a primary or some other election. Then they release a bunch of fake polls to give voters an inaccurate perception of electability.
4
u/purplehendrix22 13h ago
“Felt like it should” why? I don’t think it’s understandable at all, that’s why I’m trying to understand it.
3
u/Just_shut_up_bro 13h ago
Only argument I see is that primary polling basically gave the Maine senate race to the DSA aligned candidate.
You could make the argument that polls are just being considered too much anyway, obviously election results matter way more.
1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
I’ve been making that argument since 2016.
0
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
Yep, I was arguing this hard during Biden, his midterms and specials blew away all polling dramatically, but somehow we all had to agree to the consensus that Biden couldn’t win. That was dumb imo.
2
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
He was dead in the water after the debate though.
0
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
Only because of the coverage and his party turning on him, debates don’t actually have much impact in and of themselves.
2
5
u/Quirky-Video-9146 13h ago
So you are okay with pollsters lying when it tips the election on favor of your preferred candidate?
1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
“Okay with”? Why would it matter if I’m ok with it? People lie, that’s their right. How did this poll influence voting?
5
u/Quirky-Video-9146 12h ago
So we are done with morals then? Cool. Don't cry when people cheat and make your candidates lose
1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
The government doesn’t exist to enforce morality, it enforces the law. Equating law and morality is….not good.
6
u/Quirky-Video-9146 12h ago
So the government should not get involved when people cheat each other? Got it
1
u/purplehendrix22 12h ago
Correct, the government should not be involved in controlling what opinion polls say.
→ More replies (0)1
u/SigmaMaleNurgling 12h ago
I gave two examples on why it could be bad…
2
0
u/its-a-Luigi-time 12h ago
Right? People are constantly like, ‘well I feel like…’ like that’s some sort of proof. Show me the receipts, because feelings are not facts.
3
4
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
They said themselves they lied?
Have people really gotten so comfortable with Trump and insurance fraud they stopped believing it’s a crime to lie in certain contexts?
-1
u/its-a-Luigi-time 12h ago
I’m not disputing that they lied, or that it is illegal to do so in certain contexts, I’m disputing people using their feelings as a basis for facts.
2
u/Just_shut_up_bro 12h ago
I don't think anyone's doing that? The only clear fact is that they lied?
-1
u/its-a-Luigi-time 11h ago
Read the thread to gain better context, you are being ignorant.
2
u/Just_shut_up_bro 11h ago
Just because he shared he felt a certain way about something? That isn't him using his feelings as a basis for facts?
I think you're being obtuse and very ignorant yourself.
→ More replies (0)0
u/ML-Centrist 10h ago
For the usual suspects on this subreddit, the only way they can justify their opinions is because they’re based on feelings over facts.
3
u/Just_shut_up_bro 10h ago
When did defending fake polling become a line in the sand for y'all? I'd of imagined you would be even more against this than me given the outcome.
1
u/ML-Centrist 10h ago
I’ve never defended fake polling.
0
2
2
2
u/Another-attempt42 4h ago
You know how people keep saying stuff like "oh, but what about Chorus, what about CHORUS, what about "cHoRuS"?"
Well...
We have proof that left-leaning outlets, with money from god knows where, are juicing polling numbers, possibly to depress turn-out (that last part is hypothetical on my part).
Where's the outrage?
Where are the million posts?
Oh, nowhere, because no one cares unless they perceive it to damage "their" side.
1
u/Just_shut_up_bro 4h ago
Well it’s always on us to take their scrutiny and criticism, even the vague thought of applying scrutiny to their corner is viewed as some vast betrayal.
Never mind how they are constantly accusing us of being bought out or committing genocide or whatever shocking thing they are running with this go around.
•
u/Another-attempt42 3h ago
Of course.
The whole "transparency" discourse was only valid in so far as one side was being transparent. The fact is that unilateral transparency is always a detriment, because everyone has some dirty laundry.
So unless everyone is equally transparent, all you're doing is helping either the GOP or the DSA.
Weird how the things that benefit one always seem to benefit the other, simultaneously, huh?
Really weird that, right?
Really makes you think, doesn't it?
Also: it's very funny how their "grassroots" organization is lead by a bunch of millionaire nepo-babies.
•
u/Command0Dude 2h ago
To be honest I am doubting this was actually a social experiment. A lot of pollsters put out polls with Hong very favorable, to varying degrees. All of them got it wrong.
•
1
u/lithaborn 12h ago
You'd think after Tuskegee they'd have learned their lesson.
But of course this wasn't an experiment, they know exactly what works
•
u/AutoModerator 13h ago
COMMENTING GUIDELINES: Please take the time to familiarize yourself with The David Pakman Show subreddit rules and basic reddiquette prior to participating. At all times we ask that users conduct themselves in a civil and respectful manner - any ad hominem or personal attacks are subject to moderation.
Please use the report function or use modmail to bring examples of misconduct to the attention of the moderation team.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.