A polling company has acknowledged that surveys it released in two closely watched Democratic contests were not genuine election polls, saying the project was instead designed as an experiment to examine how political polling information could spread without independent verification, as reported by The Post Millennial.
Median Strategies released polling data concerning the Los Angeles mayoral race and the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial primary. The company later acknowledged that the figures were fabricated.
The revelation came Monday, Aug. 17, 2026, after the company told the Los Angeles Times that its polling operation was created as a “short-term social experiment.”
In the Los Angeles mayoral race, Median Strategies had reported that incumbent Mayor Karen Bass held an approximately 12-point advantage over Los Angeles City Councilmember Nithya Raman ahead of the November election.
The purported survey claimed to have collected responses from 560 Los Angeles voters between July 30 and Aug. 5. It also reported a margin of error of 4.1 percent.
Median Strategies later explained that the numbers were not the product of an actual voter survey.
“Median Strategies was created as a short-term social experiment to examine how purported polling information could enter and spread through the political information ecosystem without independent verification. We are not seeking publicity or attribution for the individuals involved and are declining interviews.”
The supposed Los Angeles poll contained additional details about voters who had supported Republican candidate Spencer Pratt.
According to the published results, 16 percent of respondents said they had voted for Pratt, and 85 percent of those voters reportedly planned to support Bass.
Median Strategies’ accompanying analysis stated, “Faced with a choice between the incumbent and a Democratic Socialists of America-aligned challenger, most Pratt voters appear to be treating Bass as the more familiar, more moderate option rather than sitting out the race.”
Bass herself appeared to promote the polling results before the company acknowledged that the survey was fabricated. In a post that was later deleted, Bass wrote, “Doing the work, showing up, and gaining momentum. Let’s do this, LA!”
A spokesperson for Bass subsequently called for scrutiny of the circumstances surrounding the bogus poll.
“This poll was reported on by a news outlet. Any bad faith attempts to influence elections should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
The purported survey had been reported by outlets including the California Post, allowing the numbers to circulate beyond Median Strategies’ own social media accounts.
Median Strategies began posting publicly on social media Aug. 9. Its first post presented the company as an effort to address concerns over the credibility of political polling.
“Polling has a credibility problem. Ours is the fix: no partisan clients, no campaign or party money, numbers that go wherever the data takes them even when it’s inconvenient. Trustworthy polling, rebuilt.”
The company also released polling concerning the Wisconsin Democratic gubernatorial primary. That survey claimed socialist candidate Francesca Hong was leading by 20 percentage points.
Hong ultimately lost the Democratic primary.
Median Strategies acknowledged the discrepancy on Aug. 12, writing, “We got Wisconsin wrong- and by quite a margin too.”
The company’s subsequent admission concerning the Los Angeles polling clarified that the Wisconsin figures were also part of the broader experiment rather than a legitimate survey of voters.
The episode highlights the importance of independent verification when political polling is cited in news reports, campaign statements, or social media posts.
Polling results can influence perceptions of a race, affect fundraising and shape voter expectations, making the source and methodology behind such numbers particularly significant.
In this case, Median Strategies presented specific sample sizes, dates and margins of error for its Los Angeles survey before later acknowledging that the poll was not genuine.
The company said its purpose was to examine how purported polling could move through the political information system without verification.
The admission leaves the Bass and Hong polling figures without any basis as measurements of actual voter sentiment.
