Priority selector

Tap the problem most likely to change your vote.

Each issue opens a voter question, the evidence needed, and the path to follow next.

Tap an issue Housing

Selected issue

Who will make it easier to live here?

Evidence needed: Public stance, dated plan, and attributed source.

Open issue

Issue guide Housing Change tracking Evidence strong

Position comparison

Housing: what to ask before trusting a stance

This page shows whether public stances exist, what evidence is missing, and which records can explain context without publishing sensitive details.

View public receipts View protections

Already have an exact issue, candidate, or claim? Question guide

The short answer

There is not a candidate-by-candidate housing stance comparison yet. Use this page to see which questions matter and what evidence should appear before trusting a position.

See comparison

People in this race

Now ask this issue of each candidate.

Names come from public race sources. Positions appear only when there is public wording, a date, and a receipt.

Active issue Housing

Candidate Words Date Receipt

Keisha Lance Bottoms Advanced to general election

Issue stance: Not confirmed yet
Question to open: What has Keisha Lance Bottoms said about housing?

2 race sources Open profile Rick Jackson June 16 runoff

Issue stance: Not confirmed yet
Question to open: What has Rick Jackson said about housing?

2 race sources Open profile Burt Jones June 16 runoff

Issue stance: Not confirmed yet
Question to open: What has Burt Jones said about housing?

2 race sources Open profile

Ready to read 5 minutes

Choose your path

Turn an issue into a decision you can use.

Start with the outcome you want, then check promise, source, money, and changes.

Already have an exact name or topic? Question guide

Ballot starting point

Selected path

Open the right race first.

Avoid comparing people before the office, date, and ballot context are clear.

Open

Voter path

Turn an issue into a decision

Do not start with an ideology label. Start with the outcome you want, check the promise, confirm the source, then compare candidates.

1. Outcome What do you want changed? Define the problem before reading a stance. Open step 2. Promise What does each candidate propose? Require text, date, and source before comparing. Open step 3. Incentive Who benefits? Money adds context, not a conclusion by itself. Open step 4. Change Did the stance change? The archive helps reveal moved or removed promises. Open step

What to check now

Choose by the question you have

What are they promising?

Look for concrete proposals, not just slogans.

Did the position change?

The date matters when a promise appears late.

Who benefits?

Connect money, interests, and likely outcomes.

Is there proof?

A position should have a public source and evidence path.

Open race Return to the main race Compare candidates See source-backed candidates; positions appear with direct receipts Related money Review influence context See archive Confirm changes and captures

Issue families

with confirmed housing positions

Confirmed positions

visible stances now

Confirmed changes

dated changes

Source gaps

need more sources

Position comparison

No confirmed position comparison yet

Pending

When candidate profiles and public statements exist, this view will show position, basis, date, confidence, and evidence path.

Keisha Lance Bottoms Democratic nominee · 0% Direct stance receipt needed Rick Jackson Republican runoff candidate · 0% Direct stance receipt needed Burt Jones Republican runoff candidate · 0% Direct stance receipt needed

Evidence sources

Public position movement

Public position movement
Candidate	Earlier	Later	State
Keisha Lance Bottoms	No compared statement attached	No compared statement attached	Needs direct archive receipt
Rick Jackson	No compared statement attached	No compared statement attached	Needs direct archive receipt
Burt Jones	No compared statement attached	No compared statement attached	Needs direct archive receipt

Explanations ready

How each issue will be explained

Claim vs. record

Compares exact words with dated votes, filings, archived pages, and public statements before calling something a contradiction.

47%

Issue movement

Shows when a position appears to change and which dated public source supports that reading.

53%

Public record check

Shows which public record areas were checked and which details stay summarized instead of exposed.

42%

Proof strength

Rates whether an answer has enough public receipts, dates, and source variety to be useful.

57%

Public rule

No unsupported claims

A stance is only shown as a comparison when it has a public source, date, care status, and evidence path.