Full Breakdown
Fact-Check of Senate Campaign Ads in Iowa, New Hampshire, and North Carolina
By Drooid · · How we work
Overview of the Campaign Ads Controversy
In the weeks leading up to the November midterm elections, both parties have saturated airwaves in three competitive Senate races—Iowa, New Hampshire, and North Carolina—with advertisements that accuse opponents of neglecting cost-of-living concerns.
Fact-Check Findings
Independent verification shows the ad’s central figure is inaccurate. Since taking office in January 2021, Hinson has missed 33 roll-call votes on the House floor and 163 votes in the committees on which she serves, totaling 196 recorded votes—not “nearly 200” in the sense implied by the ad. By contrast, the ad correctly notes that Democratic Senate candidate Josh Turek, a state representative in Iowa, missed 58 percent of votes in the Iowa legislature during the current year. The discrepancy lies in the ad’s presentation of Hinson’s record as an “apples-to-oranges” comparison to Turek’s documented absenteeism.
Response from Candidates and Supporting Groups
Josh Turek and affiliated groups countered the ad by pointing out Hinson’s own voting gaps, emphasizing the same committee-vote figures cited by fact-checkers. They argue that the ad’s framing misleads voters by juxtaposing a single-year legislative attendance rate with a multi-year congressional voting record. Hinson’s campaign has not issued a direct rebuttal within the source material.
Implications for Voter Perception
The ads illustrate how campaign messaging can selectively frame voting records to shape voter judgments on issues like cost-of-living policy. By presenting incomplete statistics, the ads risk obscuring the broader context of each candidate’s legislative activity, potentially influencing voter decisions in tightly contested battleground states.