Where we changed our minds.
We say we're centrists by evidence rather than by default. That claim is worthless without a public record of the times evidence actually moved us. This is that record — dated, specific, and with the original wording preserved.
- March 2026Crime & public safetyWhat we said
We framed the post-2020 crime spike as a durable trend and wrote about it as an ongoing emergency.
What we say nowViolent crime fell sharply through 2023 and 2024, and the framing was wrong. We rewrote the issue page to lead with the decline and kept the original wording visible in the footnotes.
What changed itFBI and CDC data revisions, plus reader mail pointing out we'd cited only peak-year figures. - January 2026AI governanceWhat we said
We treated federal preemption of state AI law as obviously preferable to a patchwork.
What we say nowState laws turned out to be the only meaningful guardrails in force, and several were more careful than the federal proposals. We now argue the patchwork is costly but currently load-bearing.
What changed itReading the actual texts of the California and Colorado statutes rather than the summaries. - November 2025Common-ground methodologyWhat we said
We reported a single common-ground percentage per issue without showing the disagreement.
What we say nowThat was flattering to our thesis and unfair to readers. Every issue now reports the gap alongside the overlap, and the methodology is published.
What changed itA reader asked how we'd calculated a number and we didn't have a good answer.
A position you would never revise isn't a conclusion. It's a loyalty.
Think we've got something wrong?
Tell us, with a source. Corrections happen in public on this page, with the original wording left visible. That's the whole point.
Keep going.
Vote the midterms well
What's on the November ballot, and ten questions for any candidate.
Read the issues
Deep-dives mapping common ground vs. real disagreement.
Take the stand
8 questions, no login. See where you actually agree with your neighbors.