Why this isn't polling as usual
A multiple choice poll response tells you almost nothing about who answered or why, and there's no way to check it. Debatable is built so every response shows its source, can be verified, and can go deeper than a click, so the people reading the results know exactly how much to trust them.
From a bare poll response to a verified position
Every poll starts the same way, and each step after the first is optional. Nobody is required to do more than pick a side.
Answer one real question
Support, opposed, or cautious, on an issue your local government is actually deciding. No account needed. This alone is a complete, valid response.
Verify your voice (optional)
Add a phone number and your ZIP code and your response counts as Verified, the tier officials weigh most. A canvasser confirming you in person works the same way. Skip this and your response still counts, just at a lower trust tier.
Add depth (optional)
Write your reasoning or link supporting evidence. Written responses get grouped into themes and quoted in your own words on the results page, always traceable back to what you actually wrote.
Not every response deserves the same weight
A poll that reports one number hides all of this. Debatable reports each tier separately, so a loud reaction on social media can't pass as a representative sample.
A bare stance, no verification
Captures breadth: who noticed the issue and had an opinion. Useful for spotting what people are watching, not for measuring how they'd actually vote.
A stance with real reasoning
The respondent wrote why, in their own words. Grouped into themes for the results page, and the quote is always traceable back to the original text, never rewritten.
A confirmed real resident
Phone and ZIP confirmed, or identity confirmed in person by a canvasser. This is the tier a decision brief leads with.
Nothing is hidden from the reader
Every poll has a public results page. It always includes:
- The exact question wording shown to respondents, quoted verbatim, with any changes over time disclosed rather than blended together.
- Where responses came from: canvassing, a QR code, a text campaign, social media, and how each channel breaks down separately.
- The verified and unverified split, reported side by side instead of folded into one number.
- How many respondents added reasoning or evidence versus just selecting a stance.
- Common themes pulled from written responses, each one linked to the exact response it came from so nothing is summarized without a way to check it.
See it running on a real question
Downtown Lansing's tax incentive debate has a live poll open right now, built exactly this way.