VoteEasy Determinations: Evaluating Evidence and Making Determinations
The goal of Issue Positions research is to make a determination: to predict how a candidate would respond to a question on the Political Courage Test (PCT).
The only determinations that should be put into cells on excel/Google Sheets are as follows (please note everything is case sensitive):
- Pro-life/Pro-choice
- Yes/No
- Unknown Position
In order to make a Yes or No determination, we must be fully confident that the evidence we have collected is thoroughly researched and defensible If you are unable to gather enough evidence to make an accurate determination of a candidate's position, or if the evidence suggests that the candidate is undecided, the answer should be marked as Unknown Position. In most cases, the evidence should speak largely for itself and not require in-depth analysis.
Keep in mind that each piece of evidence suggests the candidates' issue position; the amalgamation of various sources will serve to infer the candidates' issue position. When making determinations, be sure to take standardized evidence into consideration when appropriate.
Conflicting Evidence
Contradictory evidence must undergo additional scrutiny in order to make a determination. Issue Position research is based on the likely assumption that candidates' issue positions are stable and unchanging. But it is possible a candidate will demonstrate a contradictory position on an issue. Perhaps the candidate lacks a clear position (such as, if the candidate were "undecided"). Perhaps the candidate's position has changed over time. The candidate could be reacting to specific and nuanced policies with which he/she strongly disagrees. Any contradictory evidence must undergo additional scrutiny in order to make a determination.
1. Challenges often arise when actions conflict with statements. If actions and statements conflict within an issue position, that issue position must be left as "Unknown Position"; the evidence for this determination should still be included as it has value for the voter.
2. If the candidate has released a statement regarding his/her changed position or his/her vote on a bill that conflicts with their typical position, a determination can be made based on the most recent statement.
3. If there is an abundance of sufficient evidence and limited insufficient evidence for a contradictory position (for example, 3 statements demonstrating a position on a particular issue and one contradictory vote), a determination will be made in favor of the strong evidence.
Timing
The more recent the data, the better. Determinations must contain evidence within six years of the election year being researched. For example, data from 2018 can be used for candidates running in 2024; it is expected that the researcher would search for newer information, before using any old information.
Insufficient or Unclear Evidence
In some cases you will come across an issue of little-to-no evidence. This is particularly an issue for challengers and those without campaign websites. If you have exhausted all resources and consulted your supervisor and the PCT Director and are still unable to determine a candidate's position on an issue, mark the candidate's position as "Unknown Position.”
Unclear evidence will often happen for a candidate with a large, sometimes-overwhelming public record. If you can't determine a clear position within a reasonable time frame, then mark it as "Unknown Position". When a determination is unclear, It is safer to mark “Unknown Position” and provide our users the evidence found to let them infer a judgment on their own rather than us.
Remember, it is ultimately the candidate's responsibility to answer these questions when we ask, or at the very least inform voters of their positions on key issues in a clear manner. Failure to determine a candidates' position in a reasonable time frame is the fault of the candidate and not the researcher. Vote Smart dedicates significant resources to making a reasonable effort to determine candidates' issue positions, and ultimately we must cap the time spent per question and candidate so we may allocate those resources towards other important work.
