SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " odd " 2,040 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Shaky political science: using "simulated" elections over real-world elections
[Dear DSOS readers – this article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in early December, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting. We found that many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data, and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first three articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report, the second one analyzing a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report, and a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research]. In this fourth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we shine a spotlight on seven studies that were web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group (the ERRG is an ad hoc committee headed by New America’s Political Reform Program and joined by the American Enterprise Institute, the Unite America Institute and Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law). This research consortium has been led by Lee Drutman, senior fellow with New America’s Political Reform Program. These seven studies are simply not credible from any objective standard about how political “science” is supposed to illuminate our understanding of either ranked choice voting or politics in general. The feature that six of these seven studies have in common is that they all used surveys – artificial, simulated elections -- to attempt to say something cogent or interesting about ranked choice voting (RCV) elections. None of them used real world data from actual RCV elections – either the 1000+ elections in the US or the many thousands of elections from places like Australia, Ireland and elsewhere where RCV has been used for 100 years. While a few of these studies conclude with some mixed positives about RCV, our analysis here is content neutral. The idea that, with a political reform like RCV, you can ask respondents in a mock, artificial election to vote with that method, with only the barest of explanation about how RCV works or its likely impacts (i.e. no spoiler candidates, majority winners, voters liberated to pick their favorite candidates, coalition-building), and then ask them their thoughts/reactions about voting in that system, with fake candidates and no real campaigning, no real exposure to an actual election or actual candidates, rests on some very puzzling assumptions. The findings of these seven studies actually are contradicted by the findings from many other studies based on real-world RCV elections. These New America studies also failed to list the real-world RCV studies in their own citations, instead including those studies that reinforced their conclusions. The seven studies featured in this article were chosen because they form a cohesive cohort which precisely illustrates one of the main points of our research paper, namely that using surveys, i.e. artificial elections, or mathematical/theoretical models, instead of real-world data, is in fact “shaky political science.” Below are summaries of our analysis of five of the seven New America studies. You can read our complete analysis of all seven studies at our paper, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting.” Choosing to “Vote As Usual” by Andre Blais, Carolina Plescia, and Semra Sevi. New America. (Blais et al., 2021). This study, web-hosted and funded by New America’s Political Reform Program and its Electoral Reform Research Group, used two surveys in which respondents completed ballots for simulated elections using plurality, approval, RCV and point (Score) voting. In both cases the authors provided the respondents with only minimal explanation of each method. For example, the entire explanation for RCV was “For this vote, rank the candidates from your first to your last choice (you do not need to rank them all). This is called the ranked vote.” That’s it. The study did not provide any context or explanation to survey respondents about why she/he might want to rank multiple candidates. Participants were not even told that ballots would be tabulated using an “instant” runoff, not to mention any description of RCVs ability to eliminate the spoiler effect or liberate voters to rank their favorite candidates without fear of helping the “greater evil” candidate to win. That’s like taking an iPhone back in time to 1970 and asking someone if they like it better than their rotary phone without explaining how it works. Their first survey targeted states that held 2020 Super Tuesday Democratic primaries and used the real candidates’ names in the survey; the second survey used fictitious candidates. In other words, they surveyed respondents who had only ever participated in plurality elections, had no history or background with using RCV or any of the other methods, had no clue about its likely impacts, and did not communicate how the alternative methods would be counted, and then asked them: “How satisfied are you with using each system?” Predictably, the winner was plurality elections, the system used for president, Congress, gubernatorial and state legislative elections – in other words, the method they have been using, year after year, all their voting lives. With so little explanation of RCV and its impacts, this study is simply not credible in discovering anything useful about real-world RCV elections. It merely shows that a basic voter education campaign is needed when adopting a new election system. Additionally, the result contradicts many other post-election surveys following real RCV elections, asking opinions from voters who had just participated in a RCV election, that showed a great deal of satisfaction with RCV (see details on that in Studies 22-25 in our paper, as well as the four studies cited in the review for Study 28). Share Other studies on “satisfaction” and “understanding” make similar mistakes, in terms of basing their surveys on inadequate explanation to respondents and lack of education about context. How could any survey ever hope to measure accurately, in essence simulate a real-world election, without actual campaigning candidates, the media writing about those candidates, organizations endorsing candidates and voters being inundated with crucial information? More than anything, what these “studies” based on surveys show is that if you ask voters about something they don’t know very much about, and fail to adequately educate them, their responses will unsurprisingly reflect their confusion. Equally puzzling is that New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group, headed by political scientist Lee Drutman, found this to be a credible enough study that they not only published it but highlighted it in Drutman’s own discussion of research related to ranked choice voting. This pattern was repeated in study after study featured by New America’s Electoral Reform Research Group. For example in Ranked-Choice Voting and Political Expression: Voter Guides Narrow the Gap between Informed and Uninformed Citizens by Cheryl Boudreau, Jonathan Colner, and Scott MacKenzie, the researchers based their analysis on a survey which found that respondents who were asked to vote in a simulated RCV election, with minimal explanation of RCV or how it works, displayed less evidence of being informed about how to use RCV effectively, with the least informed voters ranking fewer candidates. As pointed out under the study above, in a real election voters are informed by a wide variety of methods, including public education by the election administration, by interested political groups, the media, and the candidates themselves who benefit from voters being aware of how to vote in the new system. In Support for Ranked-Choice Voting across Race and Partisanship by Joseph Anthony, David C. Kimball, Jack Santucci and Jamil Scott, the researchers used respondents from different parties and races voting in simulated plurality and RCV elections, who indicated their satisfaction with each voting method. Instead of using real world election results, the authors fell back on the easy, armchair and less reliable academic research methodology of making up mock elections. As with the other studies, little explanation was given of how RCV works or what its implications might be (electing majority winners or eliminating spoilers, for example). Unsurprisingly, this study found that respondents were not very satisfied with RCV. However, when the authors added an explanation that RCV has a tendency to elect more women and people of color, they found that this greater explanation increased the preference for RCV. The more voters were familiar with it, and the more they understood potential positive impacts – surprise! -- the more they were open to switching away from the status quo. Of note, the results from this study are thoroughly contradicted by a number of other studies whose data was obtained from real RCV elections with real voters. Those studies show a great deal of satisfaction with RCV. More “fake election” research An interesting wrinkle on this “research by fake elections” approach, which only served to illustrate how unreliable such “research” can become, was taken in Ranked-Choice Voting, Runoff, and Democracy: Insights from Maine and Other U.S. States by Joseph Cerrone and Cynthia McClintock_,_ also web-hosted and funded by New America’s ERRG. It gets high marks for creativity, but an eye-roll for thinking this could possibly add anything meaningful to our understanding of real world RCV elections. This study tried to determine whether RCV, plurality or two-round runoff elections provided greater voter satisfaction and acceptance of election results. To determine that, the authors conducted a survey asking if voters were satisfied with a fictional newspaper report of an election, with three different versions given to respondents – plurality, runoff and RCV, with variations of Republican/Democrat winners and variations of “come-from-behind” winners,” i.e. candidates not initially in first place but who win the “runoff.” Again, a minimal explanation of RCV or how it works was given, and the survey showed that respondents had the greatest unfamiliarity with RCV than the other methods. The unsurprising result? Respondents were much more satisfied with “come-from-behind” victories in a traditional two-round runoff election than in RCV, even though RCV is also a runoff system but with a single round of counting. Interestingly, the dissatisfaction with RCV disappeared for those who were more familiar with RCV. In fact, among those respondents who were “very familiar” with RCV, they were equally satisfied with RCV, runoff and plurality. Surprise, surprise. Again, what this study revealed, more than anything, is not only the inadequacy of the explanation for RCV given by the authors of this study, but the failure of the research format itself, thinking that such an artificial mock election could somehow simulate what actually happens in the real world in a real RCV election. Those four studies reviewed above are fitting examples of inadequate and shaky political “science.” Other studies reviewed in our paper from the New America/Electoral Reform Research Group cohort which also used mock elections included: Ranked-Choice Voting is an Acquired Taste by Joseph Anthony and David C. Kimball. New America. (Anthony et al., 2021). Ranked-Choice Voting is No Refuge for Extreme Candidates by Melissa Baker. New America. (Baker, 2021). Also included in this New America cohort is Does Ranked-Choice Voting Reduce Racial Polarization? by Yuki Atsusaka and Theodore Landsman, which actually did use real-world election results data but applied an odd and unconventional methodology to the data which relied on shaky assumptions and non-real-world scenarios that were too divorced from reality. To determine levels of “racially polarized voting,” the researchers imagined “ethnic parties,” by which they mean political parties for each ethnic group, which was especially odd since the election data they were using came from nonpartisan RCV races. But then they made an even odder assumption, namely that since race and ethnic characteristics of studied voters were not available, the authors tried to infer that information based on who voters selected and the racial make-up of voters in each district. This amounted to little more than vague and ambiguous guesswork dressed up with a bunch of mathematical equations used to give it a veneer of scientific appearance. Indeed, it seemed to assume racial polarization in order to prove racial polarization. Based on this questionable methodology, the authors concluded that RCV doesn’t reduce racial polarization. But the premise of this study missed an obvious reality: since RCV incentivizes more candidates to run and can result in more diverse fields of candidates, one would expect more racially-polarized voting in voters’ top rankings, not less, because more voters would have someone on that ballot who represents their racial or ethnic identity and more freedom to vote for their real first choice. By encouraging more diverse candidates and eliminating the spoiler effect, RCV facilitates voting for a favorite candidate of your own race and then selecting a second choice with the best likelihood of winning. The real measure is what voters do with their additional rankings – do they consider other candidates and vote “for the best of the rest”? This study didn’t tell us anything useful about that. But readily available data shows this is common in real RCV elections, and candidates act on this knowledge by engaging with voters outside their racial group. So the authors of this study failed to consider or account for what actually happens in real-world elections, and their conclusions are tainted by this failure. New America has contributed a great deal over the past 2.5 decades to our understanding of many policy areas, including politics and political reform (full disclosure: Steven Hill, one of the authors of this article and of the “Shaky Political Science” research paper and series, is a former senior fellow and former director of New America’s political reform program, 2005-2010). So it was especially disappointing that New America funded and published such a large batch of dubious studies about ranked choice voting. The stated praiseworthy goal of its Electoral Reform Research Group was to inspire new academic research about ranked choice voting that would shed light and help the public better understand the impacts of RCV. Instead, the ERRG research did just the opposite. It produced dubious research that created more confusion and misinformation. In so doing, New America’s political reform program contributed to “shaky political science.” Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS, a reader-supported digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe
Entertainment district approved for downtown Atlanta
The Atlanta City Council passed an ordinance creating a public World Cup Entertainment District downtown, but officials excluded a provision that would have allowed fans to have open containers.
Inside Todd Blanche’s audition for attorney general
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche traveled to Florida on Monday where he met with a new prosecutor tapped to handle one of the most important cases to President Donald Trump — the investigation into former CIA director and Trump critic John Brennan.
Could AG Todd Rokita's 'powerful' endorsement sway these primary races?
The conservative attorney general is lending his endorsement to several candidates this cycle, including those going up against incumbents.
Mason Miller has top-five Cy Young odds -- here's what it would take for MLB's best closer to make a real run
Mason Miller hasn't allowed a run all season, and he's struck out more than 70% of the batters he's faced
He wasn't expected to survive past birth. Years later, this teen suffered a stroke, but is still defying the odds
Advancing epidemic and pandemic preparedness through research readiness: SEAR Unity Studies Network Sites chart the way forward in 2026
On 25 March 2026, WHO Regional Office for the South‑East Asia Region (SEARO) convened the first meeting of the SEAR Chapter of the Unity Studies Network Meeting in 2026 to take stock of progress and plan next steps for strengthening epidemic and pandemic preparedness across the Region. The meeting focused on reviewing the ongoing adaptation of selected, standard Unity Study methodologies, sharing field implementation experiences from 2025, and identifying key priorities to guide collaborative work in 2026.Held virtually, the meeting brought together representatives from six Unity Studies network sites across five countries (Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand) as well as participants from all three levels of WHO.The meeting took place against the backdrop of ongoing regional efforts in South‑East Asia to strengthen early investigations and studies for epidemic and pandemic preparedness, with a focus on pandemic influenza and other emerging respiratory pathogens with epidemic and pandemic potential. In this context, and as part of preparedness for the rapid generation of evidence, the WHO Health Emergencies Programme in SEAR (WHE/SEAR) encourages Unity Studies sites to adapt prioritized, standardized Unity Study protocols to their national contexts. This approach supports the generation of timely and reliable evidence to inform public health decision‑making during epidemics and pandemics.These efforts are supported through a combination of experience sharing, participation in the global Unity Studies network webinars, capacity‑building of the national public health workforce, and regional collaboration that promotes inter‑country, inter‑agency, and inter‑ministerial action. In parallel, sites are encouraged to explore diversified funding sources to help sustain research preparedness over the long term.Discussions highlighted the importance of WHO’s catalytic financial support through the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Partnership Contributions (PIP‑PC). When combined with national and institutional resources, this support enables countries and sites to maintain continuity of activities at a core level and remain prepared to respond rapidly and effectively to future epidemics and pandemics.Regional and Global Updates: Opening the session, Dr Pushpa Ranjan Wijesinghe, Programme Area Manager, Pandemic and Epidemic Management (PEM) Unit, WHO Health Emergencies Programme, highlighted the progress made in operationalizing the Unity Studies Network across the Region and acknowledged the collaborative efforts of WHO at all three levels, together with country unity studies sites. He emphasized the availability of limited but catalytic funding through the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Partnership Contribution (PIP‑PC) workplan at SEARO to sustain network activities in 2026, while encouraging sites to leverage additional funding sources to expand implementation.Representing SEARO, Dr Ashok Basnet, consultant, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness reported that, at the regional level, the Unity Studies Network currently includes six sites across five countries: Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. He noted that in 2025, catalytic funding supported protocol adaptation, training, and pilot implementation. In addition, a regional Unity Studies symposium held during the Global Public Health Summit in Sri Lanka strengthened and advocated collaboration between the Unity Studies site, national decision‑making forum, relevant technical units of the ministry of health, WHO and other partners.The symposium also highlighted the role of early investigations and studies as a key component of a multi‑source surveillance system needed at country level to generate a broad range of evidence. It underscored the critical role of country Unity Studies sites and similar research entities in generating evidence to support public health decision‑making during epidemics and pandemics.Participants of the WHO GISRS Unity Studies Sites Network- SEAR Chapter Meeting 2026 (Photo credit- PEM/WHE/SEARO). SEARO also updated participants on ongoing efforts to develop a regional Unity Studies webpage and to promote participation in global knowledge‑sharing platforms, including webinars and the WHO Community of Practice. Priorities for 2026 include supporting the implementation of Unity protocols, strengthening collaboration and experience sharing across sites, documenting and publishing findings, integrating Unity Studies activities as a component of multi-source national surveillance systems, and building workforce capacity.Dr Nickle Boddington of the Global Influenza Programme (GIP) at WHO Headquarters, which coordinates the Unity Studies Network globally, provided updates on global Unity Studies activities, noting that the network has expanded to 16 sites worldwide. New and updated protocols, including rapid clinical severity assessment tools and standardized data platforms, are being developed to support implementation. The global Community of Practice has also been launched to facilitate technical exchange, and continued support will be provided to sites for protocol adaptation, ethical approvals, and readiness for early investigation during outbreaks. Updates from Unity Studies sites in SEAR in 2025Unity Studies sites shared progress and experiences in implementing protocols across diverse country contexts. Sites initiated activities in 2025 using catalytic funding from SEARO, complemented by the mobilization of internal national resources. The Institute of Epidemiology, Disease Control and Research (IEDCR), Bangladesh, reported the adoption and piloting of investigation protocols on non‑seasonal influenza and emerging respiratory diseases during recent avian influenza outbreaks, demonstrating a multi‑source funding approach involving government, WHO and One Health partners.The Hamdard Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (HIMSR), New Delhi, India, highlighted the piloting of household transmission investigation studies, the expansion of the national Unity Studies network, and the contribution of study findings to global evidence through published outputs. The All-India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi, India, shared experiences from large‑scale seroprevalence studies conducted during the COVID‑19 pandemic, recent efforts to strengthen national Unity network sites through training activities, and plans to initiate multi‑centre studies on respiratory viruses.Similarly, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand, highlighted its experience in developing integrated surveillance and diagnostic protocols for multiple respiratory pathogens, enhancing readiness for targeted investigations of emerging threats. The University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka, reported ongoing engagement with the Ministry of Health and exploration of additional funding sources to initiate studies. Meanwhile, the National Public Health Laboratory, Nepal, provided updates on continued coordination with national stakeholders to initiate implementation, despite delays related to the country context.Across sites, shared experiences underscored the importance of protocol adaptation, multisectoral collaboration, and sustainable funding to operationalize Unity Studies and generate evidence for public health action.Discussions and Way ForwardThe meeting reinforced key priorities for 2026, including strengthening unity studies protocol implementation, enhancing collaboration, knowledge sharing, integrating research as a component of national multi-source surveillance systems, and ensuring that generated evidence informs public health decision‑making. Participants also emphasized the importance of documentation, visibility, and leveraging multiple funding sources, and agreed on the following action points.Unity Studies Sites and WHO Country Offices:Advance adoption and implementation of at least one Unity protocol, continuing activities initiated in 2025 with catalytic funding, supplemented with other sources of funding where feasible.Document site-specific experiences, outcomes, and lessons learned; participate in regional and global knowledge-sharing platforms including WHO webinars and the Community of Practice.Work closely with ministries of health to establish unified national platforms for translating generated evidence into national public health decision-making. WHO Country Offices may facilitate technical support and complementary, synergistic funding opportunities where feasible. WHO Regional OfficeCoordinate with WHO Country Offices to support implementation of core unity studies activities by network sites through catalytic funding and provide technical guidance and virtual engagement opportunities throughout 2026.Facilitate the participation of all Unity Studies sites in the regional meeting on Unity Studies implementation in October 2026, to be held back‑to‑back with the Annual SEAR Regional PIP‑PC Meeting; develop and host a SEAR Unity Studies website; and mobilize support from academic institutions within the SEAR Unity Studies Network to support the development of regional manuscripts that showcase Unity Studies activities to scientific audiences and promote knowledge‑sharing.Explore complementary funding opportunities and partnerships to sustain and expand network activities across the Region.WHO HeadquartersProvide global technical guidance, updated protocols, and toolkits to support the implementation of Unity Studies in SEAR.Facilitate engagement of SEAR sites in global webinars, the Community of Practice, and opportunities to showcase their work.Support joint publications, inclusion of SEAR experiences in global outputs, and identification of additional funding and collaborative opportunities to strengthen Unity Studies activities.
Modder Discovers Abandoned Dark Souls II Sewer Level
The infamous Gutter appears to have been far more ambitious in an earlier development phase
Where to watch Kansas City Royals vs. New York Yankees: Live stream, TV channel, odds for Sunday, April 19
The Yankees are aiming for a three-game sweep of the Royals.
2026 AdventHealth 400 predictions, odds, start time: NASCAR at Kansas picks, best bets by advanced model
Best bets for NASCAR at Kansas as the AdventHealth 400 unfolds on Sunday with Tyler Reddick atop the Cup Series standings
It's Your Business | Just Hamburgers aims for August opening
Co-owner Todd Thorstenson said that workers broke ground on April 9, and the project could take three to four months depending on weather conditions.
Boston Bruins at Buffalo Sabres odds, picks and predictions
The Boston Bruins and the Buffalo Sabres play Game 1 of their best-of-7, first-round series Sunday in Buffalo, New York. Puck drop is at 7:30 p.m. ET.
2026 NBA bracket odds, predictions, best bets: NBA playoff picks by expert on 101-60 run
SportsLine's Mike Barner reveals his NBA bracket picks and series predictions for the 2026 NBA playoffs
NBA player prop picks, odds, free best bets: Model includes LeBron James for NBA Playoffs on April 18
The SportsLine model and team of experts reveal top NBA props picks and NBA predictions for the NBA Playoffs on Saturday
Where to watch Houston Rockets vs. Los Angeles Lakers NBA playoffs: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Saturday, April 18
Kevin Durant and LeBron James will square off in the first round of the playoffs.
Antrim need a perfect day to shock Derry
For Antrim to upset the odds at Celtic Park on Saturday [17:00 BST], manager Mark Doran feels "it will take a lot of things to go right for us and a lot to go wrong for Derry".
Seaspan Marine sells a piece of its barge business to Hodder Tugboat
Seaspan Marine, North Vancouver, British Columbia, announced on Wednesday that it has reached an agreement to sell its chip and hog fuel barge division, along with remaining forestry industry transpor
Neanderthal Babies Were Apparently Built Different and Reached Toddler Size in Only Six Months
A 50,000-year-old infant skeleton reveals our extinct cousins grew up surprisingly fast to survive
Testing Begins for Katalyst-NASA Swift Boost Mission
On April 14, engineers from Katalyst Space Technologies arrived at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, to begin environmental tests of the company’s LINK robotic servicing spacecraft.
Where to watch Kansas City Royals vs. New York Yankees: Live stream, TV channel, odds for Friday, April 17
The Yankees continue their homestand with a three-game series against the Royals.
ICE acting director will resign at the end of May, DHS officials say
Todd Lyons, who was named acting director in March 2025, led the agency at the center of President Donald Trump’s plans to reshape immigration to the U.S.
"Abyss Eye" Set Featuring Mega Darkrai ex Officially Revealed for...
Abyss Eye starring Mega Darkrai ex has been officially revealed! It will release in Japan on May 22nd as their M5 set. Oddly, the set was revealed four
NI health: Family 'skimped to get by' during toddler's cancer treatment
There is a bespoke fund to cover travel costs for families of children undergoing cancer treatment - but it only applies in England.
ICE acting director Todd Lyons will resign at end of May, DHS says
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting director Todd Lyons, a key executor of President Donald Trump’s mass deportations agenda, will resign at the end of May, federal officials announced Thursday | KMBZ
ICE acting director Todd Lyons will resign at end of May, DHS says
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting director Todd Lyons, a key executor of President Donald Trump’s mass deportations agenda, will resign at the end of May, federal officials announced Thursday | Newsradio 1140 WRVA
Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons to step down from agency
Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Todd Lyons is stepping down from his role later this spring, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin announced Thursday.
2026 NBA Playoff Odds: Best Bet for Wolves-Nuggets; Who Will Win East?
Find out which squad Sammy P is backing to come out of the East and whether he's taking the T'Wolves or Nuggets to advance past the first round.
Where to watch Toronto Blue Jays vs. Milwaukee Brewers: Live stream, TV channel, odds for Thursday, April 16
Vladimir Guerrero Jr. and the Blue Jays close out their three-game series with the Brewers.
Where to watch Kansas City Royals vs. Detroit Tigers: Live stream, TV channel, odds for Thursday, April 16
Bobby Witt and the Royals will try to get on track against the Tigers.
Iowa GOP at odds over Kim Reynolds' immigration bill. What happens now?
With Iowa House and Senate lawmakers failing to agree on an immigration bill, the measure will go to a rare conference committee.
Bring on the Allbirds AI memes
The Allbirds AI pivot is prime meme fodder — and social media did not disappoint.
Boston Celtics vs. Philadelphia 76ers - Live Score
View the Boston Celtics vs. Philadelphia 76ers game played on April 30, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
Todd McShay’s Mock Draft Throws a Grenade at Vikings
For the last five weeks, nine out of ten NFL mock drafts have featured Oregon Safety Dillon Thieneman to the […]
Warriors vs. Clippers odds, prediction, time: 2026 NBA Play-In Tournament picks, April 15 bets by proven model
SportsLine's proven model has revealed its Golden State Warriors vs. Los Angeles Clippers play-in best bets
2025-26 NBA Playoff Odds: Back OKC to Make Second Straight Finals Trip
"The Bear" expects the Thunder to roar to a second straight NBA Finals berth.
2026 NFL Draft Odds: Back Ty Simpson as 1st-Rounder, Over 4.5 Corners on Day 1
Find out how many QBs and cornerbacks Geoff Schwartz is wagering on to get called off board on Day 1 of the NFL Draft.
Springing into science
When people understand science, the whole community benefits. A scientifically literate community is a stronger community – one where people can navigate new technologies, evaluate information and participate in conversations that shape our future. Scientific literacy isn’t about memorizing facts. It’s about understanding how the world works well enough to make thoughtful choices within it. […]
Where to watch Chicago Cubs vs. Philadelphia Phillies: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Wednesday, April 15
Shota Imanaga is scheduled to start for the Cubs against the Phillies.
Denver Nuggets vs. Minnesota Timberwolves - Live Score
View the Denver Nuggets vs. Minnesota Timberwolves game played on April 25, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
Toronto Raptors vs. Cleveland Cavaliers - Live Score
View the Toronto Raptors vs. Cleveland Cavaliers game played on May 03, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
2026 RBC Heritage odds, picks, field, date: Surprising PGA predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the RBC Heritage 2026 10,000 times and revealed PGA picks for Hilton Head
Tennessee ranks #2 in the country for first-year business closures, study finds
Opening a business takes a leap of faith, but in Tennessee, the odds of falling are higher than most.
Pitt to offer online Infant Mental Health certificate
A new University of Pittsburgh academic program aims to address the mental health, growth and development needs of infants and toddlers amid a shortage of qualified, working professionals. Pitt has launched a new, online graduate certificate in Infant Mental Health. The 12-credit program kicks off this fall, said Robert Gallen,
Charlotte's Black developers describe challenges
Three prominent Black Charlotte real estate developers spoke at the weekly Sarah Stevenson Tuesday Forum, sharing insights on why they remain outliers in an industry that they said remains dominated by white males.
Steelers LB Patrick Queen Reveals Odds on Aaron Rodgers’ Return
Like everyone, Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker Patrick Queen is just waiting to hear if four-time NFL MVP quarterback Aaron Rodgers will […] This article originally appeared on Steelers Now: Steelers LB Patrick Queen Reveals Odds on Aaron Rodgers’ Return
NBA Play-In Tournament predictions: Expert picks, odds for Hornets vs. Heat, Suns vs. Blazers and more
The 2026 NBA postseason gets started on Tuesday night with the Play-In Tournament
Todd Blanche says Americans should be 'happy' Trump is deeply involved in DOJ
The acting attorney general said in an interview with NBC News that he's not concerned when Trump "encourages or directs or expects the Department of Justice to do its job."
UW STEM-ology Provides Energy and Natural Resources Activities for All
STEM-ology, a monthly series of themed science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) events for all ages, concludes this month at the University of Wyoming, with events including Toddler Tue
Where to watch Los Angeles Angels vs. New York Yankees: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Tuesday, April 14
Aaron Judge and the Yankees take on the Angels.
2026 RBC Heritage odds, picks, field, date: Surprising PGA predictions from golf model that's nailed 17 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the RBC Heritage 2026 10,000 times and revealed golf picks for Hilton Head
What are the odds? CMU sports betting class explores statistical, cognitive sides of gambling
In 2018, Ron Yurko was researching sports analytics as a Ph.D. student at Carnegie Mellon University when the Supreme Court legalized sports betting. Suddenly,...
Cubs vs. Phillies prediction, odds, line, time: 2026 MLB picks for Monday, April 13 from advanced model
SportsLine's model reveals its Chicago Cubs vs. Philadelphia Phillies best bets and MLB picks today
Orlando Magic vs. Philadelphia 76ers - Live Score
View the Orlando Magic vs. Philadelphia 76ers game played on April 15, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
OpenAI is pivoting to…socialism?
The AI company just released a set of oddly left-wing — and wildly hypocritical — policy ideas.
Toronto Raptors vs. Cleveland Cavaliers - Live Score
View the Toronto Raptors vs. Cleveland Cavaliers game played on April 18, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
Masters 2026: Odds for every winner since 1985
The longest odds of any Masters winner since 1985 are 150-1, with Trevor Immelman in 2008 and Larry Mize in 1987 pulling off the feat.
Ravens oddly take Mark Andrews replacement in latest mock draft
This would be an interesting move.
A president and a pope: Two of the world’s most influential Americans at odds over Iran
Never before has the relationship between Washington and the Vatican revolved around two Americans — specifically, a 79-year-old politician from Queens and a 70-year-old pontiff from Chicago.
Braves vs. Guardians prediction, odds, time: 2026 MLB picks for Sunday Night Baseball from advanced model
SportsLine's model reveals Atlanta Braves vs. Cleveland Guardians picks, MLB best bets for Sunday Night Baseball
Where to watch Charlotte Hornets vs. New York Knicks: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Sunday, April 12
The Hornets can potentially improve their seeding with a win over the Knicks.
Sutton's predictions: Sunderland v Tottenham
What's Roberto de Zerbi going to do with Tottenham and how will he set them up? The whole situation is just odd, with De Zerbi securing a five-year contract despite only hanging around for more than two years at one of his previous eight clubs. Sunderland's form at the Stadium of Light has dipped a bit since they lost their unbeaten home record against Liverpool in February, but the Black Cats will be buoyant after beating Newcastle last time out.
Columbus Aviators coach, ex-NFL player Ted Ginn Jr. arrested, charged for DUI in Texas
The Aviators are set to play the Dallas Renegades on Sunday, with the team saying that offensive coordinator Todd Haley will step in for that game.
2026 Masters odds: Surprising PGA picks, predictions into Round 4 by golf model that nailed 16 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the final round of the Masters 10,000 times and revealed golf picks for Augusta National
“AI polls” are fake polls
A few weeks after Donald Trump’s second presidential win, I took the train up from London (where I was living at the time) to Oxford to attend a conference on polls and forecasts of the 2024 election. Most of the attendees were pollsters or academics, but I also watched presentations from Aaru and Electric Twin, two companies that do what is interchangeably called synthetic sampling, silicon sampling, or synthetic audiences. Stripped of startup jargon, that means they use large language models (LLMs) to simulate responses to public opinion polls by having AI agents take on the role of survey respondents. I had already heard of Aaru thanks to some articles with eye-catching headlines like “No people, no problem: AI chatbots predict elections better than humans” in the months leading up to Election Day. The founders were making some big, some might even say far-fetched claims, such as: “within two years, we will simulate the entire globe — from the way crops are grown in Ukraine to how that impacts production of oil in Iraq, trade through the strait of Malacca, and elections for the mayor of Baltimore.” When Semafor asked Aaru’s cofounders — Cameron Fink and Ned Koh — about my boss, they said “we respect all those who came before us.” Nate (as he so often does) shared his thoughts on Twitter: Fink and Koh were relatively good-natured about this back-and-forth when we spoke at Oxford. They even offered to mail me one of the t-shirts featuring Nate’s quote they apparently had made. I never took them up on the offer, which I now somewhat regret. These synthetic sampling companies fell off my radar for a while, but they do still exist. In fact, Aaru recently received a $1 billion valuation. Is what they’re doing anywhere close to the most important frontier in AI development? Not by a longshot, especially when Anthropic just developed a model so adept at exploiting software vulnerabilities that it’s only being released to 40 companies. Still, silicon sampling is increasingly finding its way into public polling. Axios reported in March that “a majority of people trust their own doctors and nurses” based on findings from Aaru — without mentioning that the “people” in that sentence were actually LLMs. Around the same time, the Public Sentiment Institute “boosted” their online sample of 373 real survey respondents with 114 AI agents.1 (Spoiler alert: even the co-founder of Electric Twin doesn’t think that’s a particularly defensible approach.) Polling companies like Qualtrics and Ipsos are also developing synthetic data panels. So, what should we make of these … “polls”? Let’s get one thing out of the way: whatever they are, they’re not polls in the way that term is usually defined. Subscribe You can’t replace polls with AI On one hand, using LLMs to essentially make up fake survey respondents sort of sounds like the dumbest idea ever, one that will at best imperfectly replicate real polls while introducing all sorts of biases. On the other hand, with LLMs improving at a remarkable, perhaps even alarming rate, maybe that means I’m a dinosaur at the ripe old age of 24 because I still want to rely on polls that talk to actual people. I’m not going to argue that synthetic samples are completely useless. In fact, as I’ll return to later, there is evidence that some techniques can replicate topline survey results quickly and cheaply. But the marketing from certain companies can be slightly optimistic. “No traditional poll will exist by the time the next general election occurs,” said Fink in 2024. We’re just 206 days away from the midterms, and based on the fact that I still have to collect a bunch of polls every day, I’d say he should have run that prediction by a sample of AI agents before the interview.2 To see why synthetic samples can’t replace polls, here’s a quick primer on how they work. The simplest version of these models involves taking a LLM (like ChatGPT or Claude), giving it a demographic profile (e.g., a white, college-educated woman who lives in Utah and makes $70k a year), and then asking it to respond to a survey question. You repeat that process a few thousand times using different demographic profiles and end up with a sample of synthetic survey responses. The actual models used by private companies are more sophisticated than this, usually because they incorporate more hypothesized demographic characteristics for each agent and provide them with extra information. Aaru, for example, feeds agents a diet of news and information they’d be likely to consume, while Electric Twin incorporates their customers’ proprietary data about the audience they’re trying to replicate. The way Ben Warner, the co-founder of Electric Twin, explained it to me was “we have a large amount of data on […] for instance, 5,000 people. Can we make an accurate prediction of how they would respond to another question?” Still, it should be obvious why synthetic samples can’t replace polls. Polling is fundamentally a data collection process. We might use surveys to make predictions by feeding them into election forecasts, but the main purpose of a poll isn’t prediction, it’s gathering new data about what people think and how they feel. Silicon sampling, on the other hand, produces no new data. It’s simply a model: you input LLM training data, demographic prompts, and a bunch of other information, and it spits out a prediction for what a poll would say. We love models here, but models aren’t polls. That difference is an important philosophical sticking point for most pollsters I talk to. “I think politics should stay away from [synthetic sampling], because we’re trying to […] represent the voice of the people,” said Natalie Jackson, a vice president at GQR Insights. Democratic pollster John Hagner told me: “I think I’m just incredibly skeptical of this idea. I don’t think it’s research. At that point, you’re asking the machine to tell you what you already believe.” Hagner has seen some presentations of early synthetic sampling experiments, but so far, “if it’s being used in a campaign, people are keeping it incredibly quiet.”3 But Eli, I hear you saying, aren’t polls themselves increasingly governed by modeling decisions? Indeed they are: pollsters’ choices on which sampling method to use, how to define their likely voter models, and how to weight their samples can and do lead to dramatic differences in the results they publish. Aaru even referenced these limitations in the methodology statement included with that maternal mortality “poll” — although I’m using the term “methodology statement” loosely here, because it doesn’t really explain how the model works at all. We can ignore the (frankly preposterous) implication that synthetic sampling isn’t subject to a separate set of biases. The important point is that there’s still a meaningful difference between using weighting and other statistical techniques on actual polling data and using a model to predict what a poll would say. The latter is far closer to election forecasts or techniques like MRP — potentially useful models, but not a replacement for polls.4 To be fair, other synthetic sampling companies are perfectly happy with the distinction between polls and models. Warner compared polling and synthetic sampling to different tools in a toolbox. “The mistake I think we make is we think that these new tools should either work in exactly the same way or somehow replace these old tools,” he said. “Rather than thinking of it as, okay, so we’ve always had the hammer, we’ve always had the screwdriver, now we’ve got a saw. But don’t use a saw to try [to] do the job of a hammer.” A quick comment from Nate Eli didn’t ask me for a comment — rather rude of him, don’t you think? But since I’m editing this story, I figured I’d add a few quick thoughts rather than putting words in his mouth. Beyond the frequently misleading marketing, what bothers me about the AI “poll” hype is that as AI tools make statistical inference cheaper and/or better (note that these are not synonyms) that actually increases the comparative value of collecting original data. You might be able to train a model to make a reasonable estimate of what some hard-to-reach poll respondent would say — say, a young Black man who voted for Trump. (Such a person checks a number of boxes for a voter who is usually hard to reach in surveys.) Indeed, this is closely related to what models like the Silver Bulletin forecast already do. They essentially smooth out the kinks in noisy survey data by making inferences based on past voting patterns or national polls or surveys of other states. But you don’t actually know what these voters think unless you’re reaching them directly. If there’s a shift in opinion among this subgroup, you’re not going to detect it. So if I were running a campaign, I’d invest more in going the extra mile to find a representative sample of those voters. And then I’d hire some smart quants — or Claude? — to figure out the implications for campaign strategy based on proprietary data that my competitors didn’t have access to. -Nate Silver Are these models any good? If synthetic surveys are just a new type of model, the next obvious question is whether the models are at least accurate. The answer very much depends on who you ask. On one end of the spectrum, you have the maximalist argument that synthetic sampling is more accurate than actual polls. “It’s an incredibly challenging problem to go to someone and say ‘hey, we’re going to be more accurate at predicting human behavior than you, even when you talk to your customers directly’,” Koh recently told CNBC. In his view, synthetic sampling isn’t a saw to polling’s hammer, it’s “magic.” There’s certainly evidence that synthetic samples can replicate certain survey toplines. But if Aaru does have any examples of their approach outperforming the polls, they’re keeping those to themselves.5 Aaru’s 2024 election model, for example, had Kamala Harris leading in Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin on November 4th. And although they’ve since taken down their forecast page, they gave Harris a 50.5 percent chance of winning the race on November 2nd.6 After the election, Fink told Semafor he was happy enough with those results because they were “within margin of error,” a term that is completely meaningless when applied to a “sample” of AI agents. And of course, Aaru says their models have improved since 2024, so supposedly now they’d be more accurate than the polls? Still, their stronger argument is on cost: “We are significantly faster and cheaper than traditional polling, and still more accurate,” said Fink. The first two claims are undeniably true, but the third brings us to the opposite end of the spectrum. Both Jackson and Hagner are skeptical that these models are reliable for anything beyond replicating common survey toplines. “I just […] don’t think the machines are what we want when we’re looking for nuanced views. My example on this is people in Arizona and Nevada in 2024 who voted for Trump and voted for expanding abortion in their states on ballot initiatives,” said Jackson. Hagner identified another issue. Maybe the synthetic respondents, like sycophantic LLMs, are inhuman in one important way: they’re too nice. “The reports that have come through at the meetings that I’ve been at are that the early experiments on this, they cannot get respondents to be as racist or sexist or, frankly, as negative as human respondents,” he said. Academic research mostly agrees on this point. While there are some papers that show promising results when using LLMs to replicate polling data, most show that LLMs suffer from various quirks like producing too few “don’t know” responses and can seriously overpredict the favorability of politicians like Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. They also seem to struggle with too little variation between demographic subgroups, so the difference in predicted opinion between Democrats and Republicans, for example, is too small. When I asked Warner about these studies, his response to these papers was that just because academics can’t get synthetic sampling to work doesn’t mean that the technique doesn’t work in general. “Actually, the argument is, okay, yours does not [work]. That does not mean […] for this complex set of machinery, which uses a lot of investment, a lot of time, a lot of money, you can’t get it to work.” Cards on the table, I’m somewhat sympathetic to this argument because academics aren’t exactly great at making election forecasts. Usually, the people with skin in the game are the most accurate. Warner’s argument is that the approach Electric Twin takes — which includes, for example, making multiple predictions for each synthetic respondent using different models and prompts and subsequently averaging those to get a final prediction in a sort of ensemble forecast — produces better results than the simpler academic models. Warner shared a comparison between his method and the method from a recent academic paper with me, and Electric Twin was indeed able to get more accurate replication. But even still, he acknowledged that synthetic sampling “is not a crystal ball.” “If you asked me, do I think using other data sources will be more accurate than asking somebody who they will vote for, I would probably say no. But if you asked me ‘would your system be useful for our turnout modeling today?’ I would say yes.” For better or worse, it looks like the method is already getting more popular in the market research world. Most of the clients Aaru touts these days are businesses like EY and McDonald’s. And AI will probably begin to pop up in other parts of the political polling process. Pollsters are already using it to code open-ended survey responses, and some firms, like YouGov, are testing using LLMs to ask survey respondents questions. More worryingly, one danger to actual polls is that AI agents can be used to infiltrate online surveys. Most online polls use various checks to prevent that from happening, but there’s conflicting evidence on how effective those filters are and how prevalent AI agents currently are in online panels. If those agents ever become impossible to detect, it might spell the end of online polling, but the solution isn’t to replace all of your respondents with ChatGPT. Silver Bulletin is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a subscriber. Subscribe 1 That particular poll obviously doesn’t meet Silver Bulletin standards for aggregation. But we exclude all Public Sentiment Institute polls from our averages because we classify them as an amateur polling firm. 2 You could argue that Fink meant the next presidential election, but (a) I’m also confident we’ll still have real polls in 2028 and (b) in that case he should have asked an LLM to define “general election.” 3 Quick caveat: that’s reporting from a Democratic pollster. It’s possible that Republicans are more willing to use AI in political campaigns. 4 Indeed, Silver Bulletin does not include “polls” produced by MRP in our forecasts or averages, and we think it’s extremely misleading when their practitioners describe them in a way that suggests original data had been collected among a large number of states or Congressional districts. 5 A recent report from Aaru and EY did show two examples of a synthetic estimate being closer than a survey to a real-world benchmark — but I’d take those findings with a grain of salt because the report reads more like an ad and didn’t involve any sort of prediction being made ahead of time. 6 For comparison, our odds for Harris on the same day were 48.2 percent.
Where to watch Athletics vs. New York Mets: Live stream, start time, TV channel, odds for Saturday, April 11
The Athletics and Mets continue their series in New York on Saturday.
Tyson Fury vs. Arslanbek Makhmudov odds, prediction: Picks for April 11 fight from proven boxing expert
Expert Josh Nagel reveals his boxing best bets for the April 11 Tyson Fury vs Arslanbek Makhmudov bout
A key criminal case could soon get tossed because of acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s comments
As Todd Blanche takes the reins at the Justice Department, a federal judge is set to decide whether controversial remarks made last year by the now-acting attorney general should lead to the unravelling of one of the Trump administration’s marquee criminal cases.
FSU softball falls to Stanford on walk-off grand slam
The Stanford Cardinal beat the FSU with a walk-off grand slam to snap their 25-game winning streak.
2026-27 NFL Odds: 'It's a Good Time to Buy Low on Detroit'
Sammy P did some digging to figure out where some of the sharpest minds are putting their money in NFL futures.
NBA player prop picks, odds, predictions, free best bets: Model includes Deni Avdija on Friday, April 10
The SportsLine model has simulated every NBA game 10,000 times and revealed its best player prop bets
Misericordia University Appoints New Dean to Lead College of Business
Misericordia University has appointed Todd A. Shawver, DBA, CMA as dean of its College of Business, effective July 1, 2026. A proven academic leader with a strong track record in enrollment growth, program innovation, and student success, Shawver brings extensive experience in advancing business education aligned with workforce needs and institutional mission.
Cavs at Hawks: How to watch, odds, and injury report
The Cavaliers will look to defeat the Hawks for the second-straight game.
Acting AG Todd Blanche sends series of memos to staff marking his first official day
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche sent a series of memos to Justice Department staffers Thursday marking his first official day running the agency.
Masters 2026 odds, picks, predictions, props: Expert fading Tyrrell Hatton in best bets at Augusta National
SportsLine golf expert Brady Kannon just locked in his best bets for the 2026 Masters at Augusta National Golf Club with Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson both not playing
2026 Masters odds, picks, field, date: Surprising PGA predictions from golf model that's nailed 16 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the Masters 2026 10,000 times and revealed golf picks for Augusta National
2026 Masters odds, picks, field, date: Surprising PGA predictions from golf model that's nailed 16 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the Masters 2026 10,000 times and revealed golf picks for Augusta National
Seattle Mariners vs. Athletics - Live Score
View the Seattle Mariners vs. Athletics game played on September 12, 2026. Box score, stats, play-by-play timeline, highlights, odds & more
Nancy Guthrie’s kidnappers may have made fatal health mistake: Detective
“It just scares me to think that somebody maybe took Miss Guthrie, and she had some sort of medical event.”
The World’s First Computer Sank 2,000 Years Ago. Science Finally Solved One of Its Biggest Mysteries.
Using, oddly enough, techniques developed to analyze gravitational wave signals.
The World’s First Computer Sank 2,000 Years Ago. Science Finally Solved One of Its Biggest Mysteries.
Using, oddly enough, techniques developed to analyze gravitational wave signals.
Masters 2026 odds, picks, predictions, favorites: Expert fading Rory McIlroy at Augusta National
SportsLine golf expert David Bearman just locked in his predictions for the 2026 Masters at Augusta National Golf Club with Tiger Woods (personal) not in the field
2026 Masters odds, picks, field, date: Surprising PGA predictions from golf model that's nailed 16 majors
Mike McClure's model has simulated the Masters 2026 10,000 times and revealed golf picks for Augusta National
Volunteers turn a fan's recordings of 10,000 concerts into an online treasure trove
f l a e n music internet entertainment technology oddities lifestyle u-s-news general-news | KYW Newsradio
Volunteers turn a fan's recordings of 10,000 concerts into an online treasure trove
f l a e n music internet entertainment technology oddities lifestyle u-s-news general-news | WBEN
Volunteers turn a fan's recordings of 10,000 concerts into an online treasure trove
f l a e n music internet entertainment technology oddities lifestyle u-s-news general-news | WBBM Newsradio 780 AM & 105.9 FM