How we source information

We look at official sources first. When we use news reporting, we say so, and only when the original material is not available from an official or campaign source.

1. Tier 1 — Official election / government source

2. Tier 2 — Candidate primary source

3. Tier 3 — Authoritative public record

4. Tier 4 — Civic / reference source

5. Tier 5 — Reputable journalism

A lower-tier source never quietly overrides a higher one. When sources conflict, the higher-tier source governs and we say the evidence is mixed.

We apply the same research steps, the same issue list and the same evidence standard to every candidate in a contest. We publish a contest's candidate information only once we have completed that work for everyone in it — so no candidate gets a fuller page just because their material was easier to find.

Stated position is what a candidate has said, on their own website or in an official statement. Public record is what an officeholder actually did: votes cast, bills sponsored, official actions. We label them separately, because they are different kinds of evidence, and we never merge them.

These describe the evidence, not the candidate. They are not scores, grades or ratings, and none of them is better or worse than another.

• Clearly stated

  The source states this directly.

• Qualified / nuanced

  The source states this with conditions or limits.

• Mixed evidence

  Sources point in more than one direction.

• Changed / updated

  The candidate's stated position has changed; earlier material is kept on record.

• No clear public position found

  We looked and could not find this candidate publicly addressing this topic. It is not a criticism.

• Insufficient evidence

  Material exists but is not clear enough to summarize fairly.

Order never means preference. We use official ballot order where an official ballot order exists, and alphabetical order by last name where it does not. Where a jurisdiction rotates ballot order by precinct, we use alphabetical order and say so. Order never depends on your answers or ours, on party, or on incumbency.

Every summary shows when it was last reviewed. We recheck more often as Election Day gets closer. If a candidate publishes a new policy or clearly changes a position, we publish an updated version and keep the earlier one on record.

We review reported errors and correct genuine factual mistakes quickly, pointing to the source that establishes the correction. Candidates and campaigns can report errors like anyone else — they do not get to edit or approve their page.

We use a candidate photo only where its origin and permission are documented. Otherwise we show a neutral placeholder — never an unflattering or editorializing image. Quoted material is kept short, attributed and linked to its original.

We use AI tools to help find sources, pull out relevant text and flag when a page has changed. AI does not decide what gets published, does not rate or rank candidates, and does not guess at positions. A person reviews and approves everything you see.

FFCNation does not endorse or oppose candidates through Voter Education. Candidate information is presented from documented sources to help voters understand the choices before them.

Anything you might one day mark for yourself is yours alone. It is private by default and is not shared with your church, your family, a candidate or a campaign.