SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " troubling " 99 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Sign in to save shuffle history.
Blue Jays Facing Troubling Vladimir Guerrero Jr. Development
The Toronto Blue Jays are facing a troubling Vladimir Guerrero Jr. development.
‘One of the most troubling things I’ve seen’: lawmakers briefed on double-tap strike
Two top House lawmakers emerged divided along party lines after a private briefing with the military official who oversaw September’s attack on an alleged drug vessel that included a so-called double-tap strike that killed surviving crew members, with a top Democrat calling video of the incident that was shared as part of the briefing “one of the most troubling things” he has seen as a lawmaker.
Humans Are Now Changing How Sharks Survive—Scientists Sound the Alarm - Futura-Sciences
A worrying new trend in shark behavior This phenomenon is highlighted in the documentary Shark Beach with Anthony Mackie, available on National Geographic and Disney+. Several years ago, researchers and grassroots organizations began recording a troubling behavioral shift among sharks in the Gulf of Mexico: depredation. What does that mean?...
Swope Health serves KC’s neediest. Its CEO faces troubling allegations
Lawsuits accuse CEO Jeron Ravin of reckless spending and retaliation against employees who raised concerns. From David Hudnall:
Mariners Facing Troubling Development After Colt Emerson News
Seattle Mariners rookie shortstop Colt Emerson was removed from the lineup.
Longer lives, worse health? Scientists uncover troubling trend across generations
The morbidity gap between life expectancy and healthy life expectancy is widest in America, where people spend about 14 years in poor health.
When legal sports betting surges, so do Americans' financial problems
As online betting has grown in popularity, a new report from the New York Federal Reserve builds on the troubling link between legal sports wagering and financial health.
Proposed Data Breach Mandate Sparks New Business Risks » CBIA
Troubling new legislation proposes a significant change to how businesses must respond to “massive” data breach incidents.
When Ebola Strikes, HIV Care Cannot Stop
As the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) confronts its 17th and fastest-growing Ebola outbreak, a troubling warning is emerging from community networks
Docs sound alarm on imaging delays amid health system's 'troubling' teleradiology transition
A hospital system in Tennessee is under fire for delays getting patients’ radiology reports submitted in a timely manner following its move to outsource reads.
Seahawks Get Troubling Sam Darnold Timeline After New Injury Diagnosis
The Seahawks were dealt some concerning news on Sam Darnold's potential return. The post Seahawks Get Troubling Sam Darnold Timeline After New Injury Diagnosis appeared first on HEAVY.
The US has surpassed 1,100 measles cases in two months. Expect more deaths next
The US has recorded more than 1,100 measles cases so far this year, according to data published Friday by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It’s a troubling milestone that has many in public health bracing for the worst.
Orlando Economic Partnership scrubs Goliath Ventures from website after CEO's Ponzi scheme arrest
'OEP’s ties to Goliath Ventures are deeply troubling,' an Orange County Commissioner said.
Ravens Offensive Line is Producing Troubling Stats Early On
Baltimore Ravens quarterback Lamar Jackson is one of the quarterbacks who have faced the highest pressure from defenses.
NFL has a troubling championship diversity problem
Seahawks-Patriots will be the 10th rematch in the 60-year history of the Super Bowl
Olympic curling scandal threatens to forever alter a sport built on a culture of trust
The most troubling aspect of the Olympic curling cheating accusations is that it could mark the official end of the hobbyist foundations of the sport.
AI's Big Red Button Doesn't Work, And The Reason Is Even More Troubling
"It's going to be really bad for humans."
Lawmaker briefed on double-tap strike: ‘One of the most troubling things I’ve seen’
Bears Get Troubling Kyle Monangai Update Contradicting Ben Johnson Report
The Chicago Bears got an unfortunate bit of information on the health of Kyle Monangai that was at odds with what Ben Johnson said recently. The post Bears Get Troubling Kyle Monangai Update Contradicting Ben Johnson Report appeared first on HEAVY.
Pat McAfee stopped his show after seeing a troubling message
Pat McAfee addressed a troubling online message during his ESPN show, sparking fresh debate about threats, social media and sports media.
When spit hoods are used on children, troubling patterns emerge
Adults are using spit hoods to restrain, coerce and punish kids — a troubling pattern of use inside ERs, ambulances and detention centers spanning several states.
‘The United States is showing troubling parallels’
Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
Scientists found a dangerous feedback loop accelerating Arctic warming
The Arctic is changing rapidly, and scientists have uncovered a powerful mix of natural and human-driven processes fueling that change. Cracks in sea ice release heat and pollutants that form clouds and speed up melting, while emissions from nearby oil fields alter the chemistry of the air. These interactions trigger feedback loops that let in more sunlight, generate smog, and push warming even further. Together, they paint a troubling picture of how fragile the Arctic system has become.
ChatGPT Took a Science Exam Designed by College Professors and Scored a Low D, and That Should Worry You
Confident. Clear. But a new study suggests ChatGPT's polished tone might be masking something far more troubling about how it actually reasons.
Attacks Against Judges Are an Attack Against America’s Constitution
“Threats against judges and their families remain at deeply troubling levels,” warn Paul R. Michel and Robert J. Cindrich.
Oakland: Audit Finds Troubling Gaps In City's Business Tax Collection System
Bay City News
Man, Blood Dungeon Rips
Blood Dungeon is an escalating panic attack full of troubling creatures and atypical Drum and Bass that's a blast to play.
Concerns with the Sebastian County Sheriff’s office
The recently-surfaced video showing the potential maltreatment of a Sebastian County Jail inmate, and a subsequent statement about the troubling incident from interim Sheriff Mike Conger point to the need...
Midterm elections shaping up as big business for gamblers in the rough and rowdy world of prediction markets
“This is a troubling trend that election administrators across the nation must deal with,” said Jared DeMarinis of the Maryland State Board of Elections.
Why Calling Anti-Trans Hate a “Distraction” Is So Troubling
It’s a familiar line in the midterms: Anti-trans attacks are a “distraction” from “kitchen-table” issues. That sends a chilling message about whose rights are worth fighting for.
On the Future of Species by Adrian Woolfson review – are we on the verge of creating synthetic life?
A genomic entrepreneur’s guide to the coming revolution in biology raises troubling questions about ethics and safety
Legionnaires’ cluster grows in New York City: Health Department
New York City health officials have confirmed a troubling trend has grown on the Upper East Side.
Opinion | The Troubling and Paradoxical Nature of Christian Nationalism
Readers respond to an Opinion guest essay by Molly Worthen and reflect on church, state and American politics. Also: After a therapist dies.
GPU prices are now 28% above MSRP on average, RTX 5090 explodes to 136% above MSRP
GPU prices have been tracked across 10 countries, revealing a troubling snapshot of the market that gamers have endured and will continue to endure.
Giants' Hayden Birdsong to seek second opinion after troubling injury diagnosis
Giants righty Hayden Birdsong suffered a Grade 2 forearm strain and UCL sprain, a potential big blow for the young pitcher and San Francisco's staff.
West Virginia’s youngest children are losing health care coverage
A troubling new report suggests that health insurance coverage is slipping away from too many of our youngest children.
Simple dinner table habit linked to poor diet and higher health risks in adults over 60
New research links the common habit of reaching for the saltshaker at dinner to troubling health patterns in older adults, including blood pressure and poor diet.
Deutsche Bank CEO warns Germany’s political shift is troubling foreign investors
Deutsche Bank CEO Christian Sewing warned that recent election results could hurt Germany’s appeal to international investors.
3 Takeaways From the Latest PISA Test of Reading, Math, and Science
The results show reading performance dropping across the world—and one uniquely troubling U.S. trend.
The Supreme Court Just Axed a 91-Year-Old Precedent That Protects Us from a Troubling Executive Power
Chief Justice John Roberts is nothing more than presidential power enthusiast in judicial garb.
GUEST OPINION: Court saw through attack on stoves, science
When the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) filed a federal lawsuit last year challenging Colorado’s new gas stove labeling law, it exposed a troubling pattern of how climate advocacy can morph into scientific misinformation to achieve policy goals through fear rather than facts. At the heart of the court dispute is House Bill 25-1161, […]
Hotel executive checks in on the blows to Hawaiʻi's tourist business
Jerry Gibson, President of the Hawaiʻi Hotel Alliance, discusses rising travel costs and troubling tourism numbers.
Red Wings Executive Makes Troubling Admission About Dylan Larkin’s Future
Red Wings executive Jimmy Devellano admits Dylan Larkin still wants to leave Detroit despite the organization's attempts to repair their relationship.
ESPN Analyst Gives Troubling Arch Manning Message Before Texas-Tennessee
Texas remains unbeaten entering SEC play, but Arch Manning’s latest performance raised specific concerns before a difficult trip to Tennessee. The post ESPN Analyst Gives Troubling Arch Manning Message Before Texas-Tennessee appeared first on HEAVY.
Hispanic Heritage Month: Representation matters for heart health
DALLAS, Sept. 15, 2026 — As Hispanic Heritage Month begins, a new report from the American Heart Association reveals a troubling milestone: cardiovascular disease has surpassed cancer as the leading cause of death among Hispanic adults in the United...
Oakland audit finds troubling gaps it business tax collection system
While auditors point out that it's difficult to say exactly how much tax revenue the city lost out on, they estimate that about $9 million to $12 million would generally be referred to collections or liens annually.
Scientists Put Sensors on Narwhals. They Revealed Something Troubling Beneath Greenland's Glaciers
Unwitting research assistants.
Texas report finds rising mental health struggles among teen girls, few getting help
A new report is raising concerns about the mental health of teen girls across Texas, with experts warning that many are struggling in silence—and not getting the support they need. Research from the Girl Scouts of the USA and the Girl Scouts of Northeast Texas highlights a troubling trend: nearly 3 in 5 teen girls say they feel persistently sad or hopeless. Despite that, only a small percentage are receiving professional help.
Docs sound alarm on imaging delays amid health system's 'troubling' teleradiology transition
A hospital system in Tennessee is under fire for delays getting patients’ radiology reports submitted in a timely manner following its move to outsource reads.
Jefferson County health officials report troubling rise in drug overdose deaths in 2026
A sharp rise in drug-related overdose deaths in Jefferson County has health officials urging residents to take precautions and seek help, as the county’s 2026 t
Merchants of Doubt and the attacks on Extreme Event Attribution science
Last week, I attended a meeting at Columbia University on attribution science and climate law, hosted by the Sabin Center. It was a fantastic event, bringing together scientists and legal experts working at the intersection of extreme event attribution and climate law. Subscribe For those unfamiliar with it, extreme event attribution attempts to quantify the contribution of climate change to an extreme event. For example, several groups analyzed the impact of climate change on Hurricane Harvey’s enormous rainfall totals over Houston, Texas and they found that climate change increased rainfall by 15 to 38%. One thing that came up again and again was how terrified fossil-fuel interests are of extreme event attribution science. They are acutely aware that this research could land them in court. And losing those cases would leave them legally liable for billions of dollars in climate damages. Because the legal stakes are so high, the blowback has turned ugly. I spoke with several scientists at the meeting who are facing ongoing harassment over their work. This blowback is a coordinated campaign to make the entire field look suspect. The goal is to create the impression that attribution science is too uncertain, too political, or too conflicted to be useful in court or in public policy. The strategy is not based on actual science or evidence of misconduct, but on the generation of doubt. The new Merchants of Doubt We’ve seen this before. In fact, not that long ago: We only have to go back a year to the Department of Energy (DOE) Climate Working Group (CWG) report to see an example of using doubt as the tool to push back against well-established science. This strategy is laid out in an email from a member of the CWG, Dr. Roy Spencer, that was released during litigation over the Climate Working Group process. The key quote is: About all I can hope is that what we write will provide sufficient “reasonable scientific doubt” regarding the science claims in the 2009 TSD [technical support document], based upon almost 2 decades of new science, to call into question the original reasoning for the EPA Administrator’s decision that CO2 presents a threat to human health and welfare. This statement is strong evidence that at least some members of the committee were working to support a particular policy outcome: revoking the Endangerment Finding. The email also explains how they planned to do it: by attempting to generate “reasonable doubt”. This is going to be hard, Spencer implies. Despite falsely claiming that “2 decades of new science” weakens the case, Spencer explicitly acknowledges that the actual peer-reviewed science of climate change overwhelmingly rejects his position: But if the science argument is decided upon by a vote, or by the number of published citations, we lose the science argument. We can go back even further: This CWG email shares unmistakable DNA with the infamous 1969 tobacco memo that declared: “Doubt is our product, since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” The tobacco memo also acknowledges the limit of this strategy: Like the CWG, they knew the science was not on their side. Share The new new Merchants of Doubt The people attacking the IPCC chapter on extreme event attribution are the newest iteration of the Merchants of Doubt. Their goal, like all Merchants before them, is to introduce doubt into the process. Because the report is not even out yet, they cannot attack its conclusions. So they are attacking the authors instead. Here is a press release from the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee: In the letter, the Chairmen express concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving members of the Attribution Committee, stating that “publicly available information suggests a troubling pattern” in which committee members are affiliated with nonprofits that support climate accountability lawsuits, “raising the appearance of impropriety and member bias.” To be clear, this is just innuendo. There is no actual evidence of bias. And given the robust process that these reports go through, including multiple lines of peer review, it seems very unlikely that significant bias can survive into the report. When the report comes out, critics will have the opportunity to make legitimate criticisms of the report — if any exist. If none do, however, they’ll still make criticisms, but they’ll be bogus, simply designed to generate doubt. We’ll see. A note to the press: Fix your frame To any journalists reading this: The public debate over extreme event attribution science is not going away. The science is simply too dangerous to fossil-fuel interests for them to stop fighting it. You very well might be assigned to write an article about this area of research in the future. When you do, do not automatically adopt the framing that climate misinformers want you to use. They want you to frame the story around questions like: Are climate scientists trying to put their thumb on the scale to achieve a predetermined, politically motivated result? Are climate scientists improperly letting their politics invade the science of the IPCC? That frame is a trap. Instead, you need to view this through the historical lens of the Merchants of Doubt. How does the ecosystem of doubt operate? Who funds it? What methods do they use to misrepresent science and slime researchers? What scientific results are they trying to keep people from understanding are legitimate? Ultimately, you instead need to focus your article on the generation of doubt as a way to maintain the fossil fuel industry’s social and legal license to keep burning oil, gas, and coal. If you treat the misinformers’ frame as a legitimate, good-faith scientific critique, you are helping them produce doubt. Don’t do it. Don’t be a Merchant of Doubt. Thanks for reading The Climate Brink! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. Subscribe other stuff The Staying Curious Substack has an interesting post about the different flavors of climate sensitivity. This is crucial information if you want to understand how scientists think about how much warming the Earth will experience. I’d be grateful if you could hit the like button ❤️ below! It helps more people discover these ideas and lets me know what’s connecting with readers.
High On Life 2 Review - Contact High
High on Life 2 is the kind of game that you can put on, laugh at for a while, and forget what's troubling you, even though reminders might slip in through the pointed social commentary.
Music legend’s husband denies she has dementia after performance cutbacks, troubling reports
Recent concerts have left fans and tour staff worried about her health.
Political Candidates and the Troubling Chill Factor
Whether it’s political polarization, ruthless social media or federal interference, this is a particularly tough time to be in elected office in a city or a state.
Scientists Sent a Robot 3 Miles Below the Ocean—What It Found Is a Warning
The growing level of pollution in our oceans is troubling, but researchers have revealed just how deep the plastic waste reaches.
Revealed: 10 new insights in climate science
Each year, the world’s leading climate scientists evaluate the most critical evidence on how our planet is changing. Their assessments draw heavily on data from Earth-observing satellites – and the latest report delivers a stark warning: the planet’s energy balance is drifting further out of alignment, ocean warming is now accelerating, and the land’s capacity to absorb carbon is declining, along with other troubling trends.
Michigan’s 50-Minute Offensive Drought Sends Troubling Warning Before Oklahoma
Michigan survived Western Michigan on Saturday night.That might be the least important takeaway from the Wolverines’ 13-12 victory.Buried underneath the controversial ending and Bryce Underwood’s game-winning Hail Mary to JJ Buchanan is a statistic that should be considerably more concerning with Oklahoma coming to Ann Arbor next. Michigan scored on its opening possession with 9:40 […] The post Michigan’s 50-Minute Offensive Drought Sends Troubling Warning Before Oklahoma appeared first on HEAVY
Mastantuono taken out of Fiorentina’s game at half-time
Franco Mastantuono’s loan spell at Fiorentina is off to a troubling start. The Argentinian was subbed off at halftime in a 2-1 loss at home to Torino, as Fiorentina remain winless and pointless in Serie A. Mastantuono has been starting for his new team, but head coach Fabio Grosso will be forced to make some […]
Your Mental Health: A look at the rise of suicide-related teen ER visits
A troubling new study is putting a spotlight on a growing mental health crisis among children and teens.
Jay Z's past political statements won't help perception of NFL politicizing Super Bowl halftime
Jay Z reportedly chose himself to perform the 2027 Super Bowl halftime show, but his extensive political history could deepen a troubling viewership trend.
Steelers HC Mike McCarthy Gives Troubling Remark on Will Howard
As Drew Allar dazzles in the preseason opener, Steelers head coach Mike McCarthy’s critique of Will Howard’s "peaks and valleys" signals a tightening race for the final roster spots.
Oilers Confirm Troubling Update On Injury-Prone Frederik Andersen
The Edmonton Oilers made a major move to try and shore up their goaltending, their biggest position of need, earlier this summer by signing veteran goaltender Frederik Andersen.Andersen, who has had a lengthy history of injury issues, is once again dealing with a setback that is going to make him unavailable for the first several […] The post Oilers Confirm Troubling Update On Injury-Prone Frederik Andersen appeared first on HEAVY.
Kennedy is funding dangerous science to validate his anti-vaccine agenda
The fact that the U.S. actually sanctioned the study is deeply troubling.
Yankees Handed Troubling Verdict After Latest Aaron Judge Injury
Right as the playoffs are right around the corner, the New York Yankees were hit with devastating news as the team will put Aaron Judge on the 10-day injured list on Sept. 19 due to a right calf strain. As a result, the Yankees will head into the crucial four-game series with the Tampa Bay […] The post Yankees Handed Troubling Verdict After Latest Aaron Judge Injury appeared first on HEAVY.
The crumbling employer-based health insurance system
Today's D.C. Diagnosis newsletter covers maintaining diversity in drug trials and troubling trends in employer-based health insurance.
Jim Thornton Wheel of Fortune Future Decided: Details
Jim Thornton‘s future on “Wheel of Fortune” took a dramatic turn this week. The longtime announcer became the subject of an investigation after a troubling incident. The situation involved messages re...
Cubs Facing Troubling Development After Unfortunate News
The Chicago Cubs are facing a troubling development after unfortunate news.
Missouri candidate allegedly wanted campaign manager to plant cocaine in opponent’s car
The state’s GOP chairman called the allegations “serious and deeply troubling” and said Republican Thomas Christopher Ross should immediately drop out of the race.
Michigan rep rips fellow Democrats for 'troubling' convention behavior
Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet said behavior at the Democratic convention in Detroit is a "step in the wrong direction" that could hurt Dems in November
54% of men believe a dangerous testosterone myth — the troubling places they’re getting their info
Testosterone is so hot right now. And many men believe boosting this hormone can make them hotter. That’s just one of the strange beliefs highlighted in a new Men’s Health survey of...
Browns Hit With Troubling Deshaun Watson Locker Room Report
The Cleveland Browns appear to be losing their patience with Deshaun Watson and the constant drama. The post Browns Hit With Troubling Deshaun Watson Locker Room Report appeared first on HEAVY.
Judge dismisses CVS-Aetna’s lawsuit against Radiology Partners
"This case reflects a troubling pattern in which payers, dissatisfied with IDR results, increasingly try to attack those outcomes outside the framework Congress created," Rad Partners says.
Israeli students plunge to historic lows in reading, math and science
International PISA results reveal the steepest decline in Israel's history across literacy fields, erasing 15 years of improvement. The troubling implication:
Moderate Democrats Prepare for ‘War’ Against an Ascendant Left
One moderate group says the progressive wins are “deeply troubling” and is planning a $15 million effort against democratic socialism.
Meghan Markle reacts to ‘sickening’ child pornography allegations against father: ‘I am deeply distressed’
She called the claims “troubling and disturbing.”
Finding hope in troubling times with poetry and science
The Poets for Science Gathering this fall at Kent State is something of a cross between an academic conference and a festival.
Pope Leo XIV Announces Surgery Following Troubling Health Discovery
Pope Leo XIV has shared an update about a recent health discovery that will require surgery. The 71-year-old pontiff said doctors found a nodule in his lung during a medical check-up. His medical team...
Seattle hospital cuts family medicine resident slots
Fewer residency slots in family medicine could add to a troubling shortage of doctors in Washington, especially among community clinics.
Cape Girardeau coffee shop closure highlights small business struggles
The owner of The Groundabout announced on social media Monday that all four of its shops are closing, including its cafe on Broadway in downtown Cape Girardeau. Other downtown business owners said the closure reflects a troubling trend and pointed to a lack of foot traffic in the area.
'Big Short' Michael Burry warns Nvidia risk could be 'catastrophic'
Michael Burry of "The Big Short" fame warned of a "troubling" surge in Nvidia's purchase obligations to $95 billion, labeling it a "risky position."
Barack Obama Speaks Out About Racist Video Donald Trump Posted
After Trump shared a video depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as apes, the former president addressed the ‘deeply troubling’ behavior.
Kyle Whittingham identifies troubling Michigan trend he must fix
Michigan coach Kyle Whittingham says his young team must improve its energy to build a winning culture.
Scientists sent a robot 3 miles below the ocean—what it found is a warning
The growing level of pollution in our oceans is troubling, but researchers have revealed just how deep the plastic waste reaches.
Wildfires, heat waves and access to care among health-related problems facing Californians
The new annual California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) data released today provide a more precise look at how the 2025 wildfires affected Californians' health and well-being, while also revealing troubling ...
Ohio State gets troubling injury news before massive Indiana showdown as Ryan Day faces difficult decisions
The Buckeyes are preparing for one of their biggest games of the season, but several important injuries could complicate their plans against Indiana.
Reform and the UAE – a threat to British politics
By Alex Carlen The United Arab Emirates likes to present itself as part of the solution to the climate crisis. The oil-rich Gulf state has committed to Net Zero by 2050, hosted COP 28, and even declared “championing climate action” as one of three strategic objectives for this week’s session of the United Nations General Assembly. But behind the scenes the UAE has quietly built one of its closest political relationships in Europe with the party most hostile to climate action in Britain: Nigel Farage’s Reform UK. There is no evidence that the UAE is funding Reform. But a new FairSquare report, Petro-populism: the UAE–Reform threat, published today, documents a growing political relationship that should concern anyone interested in the integrity of British democracy. Reform’s leaders have embraced the UAE’s political model and promoted positions that align closely with the Emirati government’s priorities, while the UAE has given Farage and his party unusually warm access and public backing. What is emerging is not simply a relationship between British politicians and a wealthy Gulf state, but a channel through which an authoritarian government can cultivate political influence here, and abroad. Democracy for Sale relies on its readers. If you already support us, thanks so much. If you don’t, sign up to support fearless independent investigative journalism. Subscribe Back in January, Nigel Farage appeared at a GB News event in Dubai. On the 50th floor of a tower overlooking the luxury resorts and upscale residences of Palm Jumeirah, the Reform leader declared: “I want Clacton to look like this.” At the event – which Farage never declared on his official register of interests – senior Emirati officials mixed with British expats. Farage was keen to flatter. “We recognise you are our friends”, he said, assuring them that “a Brexit London, a Reform London, will remember you.” Controversy surrounding Reform’s finances and its susceptibility to foreign influence have centred around high-profile donations from billionaire crypto donors, and the jailing of Nathan Gill, Reform’s former leader in Wales, for accepting bribes to give pro-Russia speeches. Far less attention has been paid to Reform’s blossoming new alliance with the UAE, an oil-rich authoritarian state with a track record of ruinous anti-democratic interventions. Farage wasn’t always so fond of the UAE. Back in 2023 he called it an “absolute monarchy with an abysmal human rights record.” Now Reform’s hierarchy calls the UAE home. Deputy leader Richard Tice splits his time between his constituency and Dubai and has called on the UK to learn from the UAE. The party’s treasurer Nick Candy runs a firm which has been in partnership with a UAE-state linked firm since 2024. Nadhim Zahawi sits on the board of an Abu Dhabi think tank alongside an array of the most senior UAE officials and is reportedly close to three brothers of the country’s despotic ruler Mohammed Bin Zayed. Reform’s leading lights have effusively praised the UAE’s governance model, defended it from criticism, and advanced its political agenda in the UK. GB News, whose two major shareholders – the Legatum Foundation and Paul Marshall – have strong links to the UAE, has been more than happy to broadcast UAE propaganda and was forced to pay damages in 2025 after airing a false claim about a UK charity by the UAE “disinfluencer” Amjad Taha. The UAE has responded in kind. When the UAE Minister for Foreign Affairs conducted an official visit to the UK in May, Farage was the only non-government figure granted an audience. UAE state media publicised the meeting, and said that they discussed “the strategic relations between the two countries and ways to enhance them in a manner that serves mutual interests.” For the UAE these ‘mutual interests’ largely concern its paranoia over political Islam, and in this regard the UAE-Reform alliance is part of a broad and troubling pattern. Following a crackdown on dissent at home in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, the UAE has offered material and political support to a range of violent and authoritarian actors willing to oppose the Muslim Brotherhood with no regard for the consequences. Its meddling in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, and most notably Sudan, have been devastating. The UAE’s strategy of seeking out partners on the political fringes who it believes will advance its interests is not unique to Britain – it extends beyond the Middle East to Europe and the US. In France, it has offered clandestine support to Marine Le Pen through secret meetings, as well allegedly funding trips to the region after which Le Pen returned with a renewed focus on the UAE’s perceived enemies – Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. Left-wing opposition leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon has accused the UAE of smearing him and of “encouraging discrimination, hatred or violence”. In the US, the UAE actively supported the rise of Donald Trump, establishing itself as a key ally during both his first and second terms. Around these relationships sits a wider ecosystem of figures willing to amplify UAE narratives, that even extends to Andrew Tate and Tommy Robinson. Subscribe In Britain, the UAE has used a combination of aggressive diplomacy and illicit, disruptive tactics to achieve its policy goal of eliminating any perceived threat from political Islam. In 2012, for instance, it threatened to block billion-pound arms deals with the UK and stop inward investment if David Cameron did not act against the Muslim Brotherhood and rein in the BBC’s coverage of the group – going so far as to suggest, with no supporting evidence, that the group had infiltrated the BBC. It has financed smear campaigns against a high-profile UK charity and funded a mercenary to secretly surveil, and possibly assassinate, a British national on British soil. In Reform UK, the UAE has finally found an ally willing to not only ban the Muslim Brotherhood, but to publicly vilify the group and repeat the UAE’s claims that dangerous Muslims are a fifth column in British society, a narrative that aligns with the Islamophobia and anti-immigration sentiments that underpin Reform’s populist politics. The Rycroft review into foreign interference concluded that “hostile states and non-state actors have a clear incentive to attempt to undermine UK democracy.” The UAE’s network and alliance with Reform must be understood within that framework. It is a powerful, disruptive and deeply authoritarian actor with the resources and networks to intervene in our politics, and a track-record of doing so in a multitude of other countries. The evidence of the threat the UAE poses is overwhelming. The question is whether parliamentarians are willing to call the UAE out and demand action using the tools that the government has to respond. Placing the UAE on the “Enhanced Tier” of the Foreign Registration scheme alongside Russia and Iran would send a powerful signal to the UAE that its meddling will no longer be tolerated, and would place Farage’s next trips to the UAE under the scrutiny they deserve. Alex Carlen is research and advocacy manager at London based human rights organisation FairSquare and author of its new report Petro-populism: the UAE–Reform threat. Subscribe
Apple Watch user gave ChatGPT Health his data, with troubling results
ChatGPT Health launched recently with Apple Health integration, but a journalist’s experiment with the new technology didn’t go very well.
Finding hope in troubling times with poetry and science
The Poets for Science Gathering this fall at Kent State is something of a cross between an academic conference and a festival.
Ray J shocks fans with troubling performance amid health struggle
Ray J shocked fans this week when he took the stage to perform with a chest patch and blood dripping from behind his sunglasses.
The best movies, TV shows, music, books, arts and comedy of 2025
In troubling times we may seek entertainment to escape and, perhaps, make sense of the chaos. This year was no different. The best in movies, TV, books, comedy, music and arts became part of our survival kit.
Steelers get troubling update in ESPN's latest power rankings
The Pittsburgh Steelers didn't receive great news in ESPN's latest power rankings update.
Scientists Put Sensors on Narwhals. They Revealed Something Troubling Beneath Greenland's Glaciers
Unwitting research assistants.
Cape Girardeau coffee shop closure highlights small business struggles
Downtown business owners said The Ground-a-Bout closure reflects a troubling trend and pointed to a lack of foot traffic in the area.
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
Trump shows off his new helipad, brags about construction projects
For a brief period Wednesday, the president set aside more troubling issues to revel in his role as White House redeveloper.
Shaky political "science": breakdown of the peer review process
[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 December 2025, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting (RCV). 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 four articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report; the second one analyzed 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; a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research; and a fourth article that analyzed seven studies sponsored by New America’s political reform program that deployed flawed methodology based on “simulated” elections instead of real-world elections, which when combined with some basic misunderstandings of RCV, produced odd and misleading results]. In this fifth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we examine two flawed studies on the impact of RCV on voter turnout authored by San Francisco State University professor Jason McDaniel. McDaniel’s research in these two papers stands out for its puzzling methodology, inadequate and cherry-picked data, and faulty analyses that not only misunderstands ranked choice voting but reflects a basic misunderstanding of politics in general. The first of the McDaniel studies actually passed through a peer review process and then was subsequently published by the Journal of Urban Affairs, despite its obvious errors. It is perplexing that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the errors and send it back to McDaniel for a rewrite or outright rejection. This calls into question the credibility of the peer review process itself. The peer review process is supposed to represent the intellectual pinnacle of the profession – a way for academics to certify the quality of each other’s work, and to act as a check against sloppy research. In the case of the McDaniel study, the peer review process failed. Yet his flawed study has been cited dozens of times by other political scientists in their own flawed works — an unvirtuous circle of academic research. Here is the first Jason McDaniel study that we analyzed: “Writing the Rules to Rank the Candidates: Examining the Impact of Instant-Runoff Voting on Racial Group Turnout in San Francisco Mayoral Elections,” by Jason McDaniel, 2016, Journal of Urban Affairs. This study covered San Francisco’s use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in mayoral elections, purporting to show that RCV reduces voter turnout overall, increases voter errors, and has a negative impact on “marginal populations,” i.e. racial minorities, mainly as the result of the alleged complexity of RCV asking voters to rank candidates and having to be familiar with multiple candidates and related dynamics. McDaniel reached these conclusions by examining five San Francisco mayoral elections taking place in odd years (i.e. where there are no federal or state races on the ballot) from 1995 to 2011, comparing three earlier non-RCV races (in 1995, 1999 and 2003) with the later two RCV races (in 2007 and 2011). Only two RCV races were studied, and as McDaniel acknowledged, only the contest in 2011 was “competitive” (that contest in 2007 was the first mayoral election using RCV, and incumbent mayor Gavin Newsom won easily in the first round of counting, earning 74% of first choices and far ahead of the second place candidate who had just 6.3% of first choices). Yet even the allegedly competitive contest in 2011was won by an incumbent with a landslide margin of nearly 20 points. No other elections were studied by McDaniel, even though San Francisco elects 17 other offices besides mayor with RCV, including the 11 seats on the Board of Supervisors (the name for the city council) in even years, and six other citywide offices in odd years. Previous academic research has found that competitive elections can stimulate greater voter involvement and higher turnout. For unexplained reasons, this study ignored at least 34 other RCV races between the years 2004 to 2011, many of which were very competitive and had high voter turnout. Instead, McDaniel’s analysis based its conclusions on data from only a single, marginally-competitive mayor’s race using RCV. These 2007 and 2011 mayoral elections were the only two RCV elections that McDaniel used as the sole basis for his small data set to determine the impact of RCV on voter turnout. Despite having no meaningful data to inform his study, McDaniel nonetheless concluded that RCV lowered turnout when compared to the previous three mayoral non-RCV elections using two-round runoffs. Then, using the same inadequate database of San Francisco elections, McDaniel also found that “Instant-runoff voting is associated with a significant decline in Black voter turnout and White voter turnout…On average, Black voter turnout decreases by 18 points and White voter turnout decreases by 16 points …” But how could he credibly arrive at that conclusion when his study was based on voter turnout in two RCV contests that were not even remotely competitive? Beyond that, McDaniel tacitly admits that the key determining factor driving Black voter turnout was not RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable Black candidate. McDaniel wrote, “Black voter turnout was about 17 percentage points higher for the two elections that featured an African American candidate compared to the three elections that did not” — but one of those three elections did not use RCV. The same dynamic was present for White voter turnout, in which higher turnout was not correlated with RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable White candidate. Beyond that, McDaniel’s voter turnout results, whether correlated with the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections, showed no clear patterns. In his Figure 1, he shows low Asian voter turnout in the non-RCV elections in 1999 and 2003 when there was no viable Asian candidate running, but in the 2007 mayoral election using RCV, there is still no viable Asian candidate, yet Asian turnout increases dramatically. For Latinos, voter turnout is virtually the same in 1999 (no viable Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2003 (leading Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2007 (no viable Latino candidate, RCV elections) and 2011 (leading Latino candidate, RCV elections). Meanwhile White voter turnout increased dramatically from a low in the 2007 mayoral election, in which the leading candidate was a white incumbent, to the 2011 election in which there were no leading white candidates that finished any higher than sixth place with 5.6% of the vote. Clearly other factors were determining voter turnout than either the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections. Despite these inconsistent findings, McDaniel boldly marches forth to render conclusions about the impact of RCV on different groups of racial voters, even though his conclusions are not remotely supported by his data. This looks like the worst kind of “data cherry picking” to cover up a puzzling conclusion based on a poor data set involving only two RCV elections, neither of which were remotely competitive. McDaniel’s cherry picking didn’t stop there. In calculating voter turnout for the three non-RCV mayoral elections in 1995, 1999 and 2003, he failed to mention that in each of these years there was a two-round runoff election, with a first round election in November in which no candidate garnered a winning majority of the vote, followed by the decisive runoff in December. So there were two non-RCV elections in each election year. But McDaniel only decided to include one of the two elections in his data set, apparently the December runoff in each year (which had higher turnout in two out of the three mayor’s races, and lower turnout in the third). So he ignored the November 1995 election, the November 1999 election when turnout was only 45 percent, and the November 2003 election when turnout was only 45.7 percent. This is flawed methodology based on blatant cherry picking, since McDaniel simply omitted three elections worth of data that did not fit within his frame. His study should never have made it through a peer review process, and it is an embarrassment to political science that not only was it approved for publication, but it has been uncritically cited by dozens of other political scientists. Share A “study” without wider context or credible data Lacking a data set that included even a single competitive RCV mayoral race, McDaniel declared that RCV lowered voter turnout in 2011, when turnout was 42.5 percent. But he also ignored -- or did not realize -- that voter turnout in mayoral elections during 2011 had sharply declined in all big cities, including far more steeply in nearby Los Angeles and other cities. In fact, San Francisco’s election in 2011 had the second highest turnout of any mayoral election in the nation’s 22 largest cities from 2008-2011. Was 2011 just a particularly low turnout year all across the country, perhaps because the country was still reeling from the aftermath of the housing market collapse in 2008-2010? McDaniel ignored this factor and did not search for alternative explanations beyond his flawed thesis. Furthermore, while McDaniel suggested that RCV leads to more “overvotes” – which is an invalidated ballot in which a voter, in either a non-RCV or RCV race, makes a mistake and selects two candidates for a single choice – he failed to address that in the June 2012 US Senate primary contest, which used the typical “one-choice” plurality method and did not use RCV, there was more than five times as many overvotes in San Francisco and Oakland than in the RCV mayoral elections in those cities. Additionally, turnout had been significantly higher and more representative in RCV elections for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors races -- that McDaniel didn’t even bother to study -- as compared to previous “delayed two-round runoffs” for those offices, often higher by as much as 40% in the RCV races. Perhaps the most surprising irony was that an earlier study co-authored by McDaniel (Overvoting and the Equality of Voice under Instant-Runoff Voting in San Francisco by Francis Neely and Jason McDaniel, 2015, California Journal of Politics and Policy) found that overvotes are often more common in lower-income precincts, but that the pattern of overvoting is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. Wrote Neely and McDaniel: “[Overvote] errors appear to be a function of complexity in general and not IRV per se…. the pattern of overvoting is similar in both IRV and non-IRV contests…Even among votes cast in a top-of-the-ticket race like U.S. Senate, overvoting occurs in an uneven fashion” (IRV, or ‘instant runoff voting,’ is another name for ranked choice voting in single-winner contests). So McDaniel not only contradicted his own conclusion in his earlier study with Neely, but the earlier study had been an important corrective for one of the most frequently made mistakes made by anti-RCV political scientists – a continual failure to provide crucial context by pairing a comparative analysis of real world RCV elections with an analysis of real world plurality or other electoral methods. Unfortunately McDaniel’s earlier study does not get cited much by other researchers, and McDaniel did not even cite it in his own flawed study analyzed above. Incredibly, McDaniel cherrypicked McDaniel, even as his flawed study has been cited dozens of times. Despite being a textbook example of poor political “science,” featuring both inadequate as well as cherrypicked data, the shelf life of McDaniel’s study has been extended endlessly by other political scientists and media outlets who have cited it uncritically. Equally troubling, the Journal of Urban Affairs put this paper through its peer review process and published it despite its numerous flaws. McDaniel gets it wrong, Part II Not content with producing one shoddy, confused paper, McDaniel produced another one a few years later, here is the link: Electoral Rules and Voter Turnout in Mayoral Elections: An Analysis of Ranked-Choice Voting by Jason McDaniel. San Francisco State Univ. (McDaniel, 2019). In this paper, McDaniel extended his previous flawed research focused on San Francisco, about voter turnout and voter impact, to multiple RCV cities through the 2018 elections. In his data set he included San Francisco, Minneapolis, St Paul, Oakland, Berkeley, San Leandro and Santa Fe. He then compared their turnout in mayoral elections to non-RCV cities, and to mayoral elections in those cities held before first RCV usage, and concluded “a significant decrease in voter turnout of approximately 3–5 percentage points in RCV cities after the implementation of RCV.” But he replicated many of the same mistakes as his first study presented above. While in this study McDaniel attempted to distinguish between various factors, such as odd year vs. even year elections, competitive races vs. noncompetitive, contests with open seats and other factors, the analysis is superficial and inadequate. He attempts to incorporate so many often-conflicting variables that his conclusions are once again unsupported by the actual data, and ultimately unconvincing (this second study never underwent a peer review process). For example, McDaniel declared that for RCV cities “in elections that are more competitive than average (margin of victory less than 20%), there is no significant RCV effect on voter turnout.” Yet McDaniel is a professor in a city, San Francisco, in which the 2018 special election using RCV to fill a mayoral vacancy was exceedingly close, decided by a margin of only one percentage point, and resulted in the second highest turnout in San Francisco history for a mayoral election. Illustrating the complexity involved in assessing the critical factors in turnout, that special election was held on the same election day as federal and state offices, which tends to boost turnout. Yet more voters participated in that RCV mayoral election than voted on the same day in the non-RCV primary for governor in which former San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom was running. Even more puzzling, in this study McDaniel inaccurately cited his own previous study from 2015 with Neely. McDaniel wrote, “Neely and McDaniel (2015) examine individual ballot image files within a natural experiment, and find higher rates of ballot errors in RCV elections compared to non-RCV elections” (emphasis added). However, we quoted from that 2015 study several paragraphs above, and in actual fact Neely and McDaniel actually concluded the opposite -- that the pattern of overvoting – which is the most common form of ballot error – is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. McDaniel also ignored the fact that in Bay Area RCV elections held in even years – at the same time as federal and state elections, when turnout is highest -- the “undervote” (that is, the dropoff in ballots cast for governor or mayor) has declined, which contradicts his thesis that the act of ranking ballots in RCV elections is too complex and presents a barrier for certain demographics of voters. To his credit, McDaniel actually acknowledged another contradiction in his own paper, which found a negative RCV turnout effect in some odd-year elections but not others, admitting that “may present a challenge to the theory that increased complexity [from RCV] will have a marginal negative effect on voter turnout.” But he tried to wallpaper over that contradiction by blaming it on an unlikely source -- bad election administration. McDaniels wrote, “This would suggest that the negative impact of RCV on voter participation may be alleviated by high quality election administration,” without presenting any data or even anecdotes to support such an unfounded theory. While competent election administration of any election, whether RCV or non-RCV, is crucially important, there is no credible research that supports the far-fetched notion that the quality of election administration has much of an impact on voter turnout in US elections, whether using RCV or otherwise. Upgrade to a $5 subscription The unvirtuous circle of academic research It is puzzling how McDaniel’s first study could have survived the peer review process for the Journal of Urban Affairs. The mistakes in McDaniel’s first study above should have been obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of ranked choice voting as well as elections in general, and elections in San Francisco specifically. It undermines faith in the credibility of the peer review process to think that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the egregious errors and reject McDaniel’s sloppy research and paper. And it remains a black mark on political science that this thoroughly discredited study has been cited dozens of times by other researchers. Indeed, in our research paper it became apparent that many political scientists cite each other’s flawed research to pad their list of citations and to legitimize their own flawed research, creating an unvirtuous circle of political science. More broadly, McDaniel’s voter turnout studies, like other studies evaluating RCV’s impact on turnout, lacked a recognition that no credible opinion or research can claim that RCV increases voter turnout merely because so many voters are excited to vote for their favorite candidates instead of “lesser evil” candidates without worrying about spoilers. Instead, with respect to turnout, the advantage of RCV has always been that, in most places where it has been used, it has eliminated a pre-November primary or post-November runoff, which usually saw about half the turnout of the November general election. This is especially true during even years when there are state and federal elections on the ballot which substantially drive turnout more than local contests. Any study that does not adequately account for this non-November primary/runoff vs November general election dynamic, or odd year vs even year election factors, is simply not credible. Both of McDaniel’s studies largely failed on those grounds. Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to a $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS…your digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe