Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Elections & voting fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about elections & voting. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

5,415 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYElections & voting

Manmohan Singh said I was helpless but not you, so press the button to vote for BJP and bring the BJP government to power.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerned a post showing a photograph of former Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh alongside a message urging people to vote for the BJP. The post attributed to Singh the words, “I was helpless but not you,” followed by an appeal to bring the BJP government to power. FACTLY says the post was being shared on Facebook and notes that it had attracted more than 390 shares by the time of its review; commenters were treating the supposed statement as genuine praise of Singh. The review identifies the allegation as an attribution of those words to Singh, rather than a report that he had actually endorsed the BJP. FACTLY reports that its Google search using the keywords “Manmohan Singh said to vote for BJP and bring BJP government” returned no relevant information confirming that Singh made the statement. It also says it found no report by a news agency: the article argues that a genuine statement of this kind would have been covered by major Indian newspapers and television channels. The review therefore treats the absence of corroboration in its search and in news-agency reporting as evidence against the attribution; the excerpt does not identify a source for the image or describe a separate forensic examination of it. FACTLY’s conclusion is that Singh had not asked people to vote for the BJP or bring a BJP government to power, and that the words were falsely attributed to him. The excerpt supports that conclusion through the reported search and lack of credible-source confirmation, not through evidence identifying who created or circulated the post.

NewtralElections & voting

Se pueden manipular los resultados del 10-N adulterando los patrones de imágenes de actas de escrutinio

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim concerned a supposed way to alter the results of Spain’s 10-N election: changing images of scanned polling-station tally records before figures were sent to the election-results system. The review traces the warning to a Facebook post sharing a screenshot of a tweet. It reports that the tweet was about elections in Argentina, although the screenshot was being circulated as a warning about Spain’s election. That difference in provenance matters: the post’s asserted method was not evidence that such manipulation was planned or occurring in Spain. (S1: “la publicación de Facebook que comparte la captura del mensaje pertenece a un tuit de un usuario que habla sobre los comicios en Argentina.”)

NewtralElections & voting

En el 10N también puedes votar contra el maltrato animal y con 5000 votos se aprueba

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim said voters in Spain’s 10 November general election could request a ballot booklet to vote against animal abuse, and that 5,000 votes would approve a law. Newtral’s review says the 10N ballot was for candidates to the Congress and Senate, not for that animal-welfare measure. It also reports that no such booklet had existed: “en ningún caso ha existido una cartilla para votar contra el maltrato animal.” The review contrasts the claim’s 5,000-vote figure with the threshold in Article 87.3 of Spain’s Constitution. It says that a popular legislative initiative requires at least 500,000 authenticated signatures to be considered. The excerpt therefore distinguishes a vote in a general election from the signature process for bringing a legislative initiative forward; the claim’s figure and proposed election-day procedure do not match the information provided about either process. Newtral also places the message in a history of repeated circulation, reporting that it had appeared in Spain’s 28 April election and had circulated in other countries. Those examples provide context for the recurring message, while the review’s direct response to the Spanish 10N claim rests on the election ballot description, the constitutional signature threshold, and its statement that no such ballot booklet existed.

YouturnElections & voting

மணிப்பூர் பிஜேபி எம்எல்ஏ மேம்பாலம் கட்டி தருகிறேன் என்று கூறி மேம்பாலம் கட்டாமல் 5 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு பிறகு மீண்டும் வாக்கு கேட்டு வந்த பிஜேபி எம்எல்ஏவை ஓட ஓட விரட்டி அடிக்கும் பொது மக்கள்..

Publisher’s rating: Fake

NewtralElections & voting

Pedro Sánchez puede amañar las elecciones hackeando el recuento

Publisher’s rating: Falso

Newtral examined a claim that Pedro Sánchez could rig election results by altering scanned images of polling-station records. Its review says that this account does not match the described Spanish election procedure: the results are not obtained by scanning those records. Instead, the representative of the Administration at each polling station manually enters the figures into a mobile application for provisional reporting. The review also notes that multiple copies of each polling-station record are made, including copies displayed at the polling place and made available to party representatives who request them. The review distinguishes this provisional election-night reporting from the legally official count. It says provisional results are provided to inform the public under article 98 of the electoral law, but do not have legal validity. The official general count takes place publicly three days after the election: the records delivered to the court are opened manually by members of the Electoral Board. Newtral adds that the court retains a copy of each record, making the specific image-manipulation scheme described in the claim impossible according to its account. The review identifies Spain’s Ministry of the Interior and Central Electoral Board as its sources.

DUBAWAElections & voting

Our diversity is our source of strength which is why in elections this year, our people backed the politics of tolerance, inclusion and community over the politics of protest and division.

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim links Nigeria’s diversity to an assertion about how voters behaved in the 2019 elections: that they backed tolerance, inclusion and community rather than protest and division. The review examines that election-specific assertion, rather than the broader proposition that diversity can be a national strength. [S1: “Our diversity is our source of strength which is why in elections this year, our people backed the politics of tolerance, inclusion and community over the politics of protest and division,” says President Buhari.]