In a press release dated October 20, 2026, the group known as Wedgewood Polls confessed to creating and distributing false election polling data to several national news organizations. The fabricated statistics covered a wide range of races, including contests in Michigan, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Mississippi, Kansas, Ohio, Maine, Iowa and Nevada.
National outlets cited the bogus numbers
Prominent media outlets such as The New York Times, VoteHub, FiftyPlusOne and MS NOW reported the fabricated figures as if they were legitimate. After the deception was uncovered, the data were removed from each outlet’s reporting streams.
Wedgewood’s stated purpose
Wedgewood Polls framed the scheme as a “social experiment” intended to demonstrate the “vulnerabilities, lack of oversight, and overall low barrier to entry in the modern political polling industry.” The group also attempted to raise money through a GoFundMe campaign for a supposed Nebraska Senate and Governor’s poll, collecting $500 from 14 donors. ElectionIndex, which promoted the GoFundMe, later pledged to refund every donor, noting that the Nebraska poll was never conducted.
Media response and accountability
The New York Times issued an Editor’s Note on October 21, 2026, acknowledging that its Poll Tracker had included 15 Wedgewood releases between June and October. The note clarified that none of the group’s releases were ever part of the tracker or average for President Trump’s approval rating or the national congressional‑control poll.
VoteHub’s head of data science, Zachary Donnini, described the Wedgewood team as “nice kids with at least some understanding of polling, but obviously no professional experience.” Despite this assessment, VoteHub assigned the group a D grade and still displayed the data on its site.
Broader pattern of poll fraud
FiftyPlusOne’s investigation linked Wedgewood’s actions to a growing series of poll‑fabrication cases. Earlier in the year, a small Florida firm admitted to manipulating respondent‑level data to match its own assessment of a race. Another individual told The Guardian that he had fabricated multiple poll results as part of a “social experiment” to test how quickly social media would amplify unverified polling data.
These incidents echo a historical tactic described by Dr. Bernard Nathanson in 2013, when he revealed that the pro‑abortion industry had fabricated poll results to advance its agenda. While the contexts differ, the underlying strategy—creating false data to shape public perception—remains a threat to honest discourse.
Why this matters for American liberty
Accurate polling is a cornerstone of an informed electorate, a principle that aligns with the Constitution’s guarantee of free and fair information. Exposing fraudulent polling practices helps protect the public’s ability to make decisions based on truth rather than manufactured narratives. As responsible citizens, we must demand greater transparency and accountability from any organization that seeks to influence the political process.
For now, the fake data have been removed, and the pollsters have faced public criticism. The episode serves as a reminder that vigilance and integrity remain essential in safeguarding our democratic institutions.
Original reporting: Must Read Alaska (Anchorage) — read the source article.
