The nonbinding resolution, introduced by Rep. Jeff Crank (R-Colo.), asked lawmakers to condemn and denounce “socialism in all its forms,” including the increasingly influential Democratic Socialists of America movement, and oppose the implementation of socialist policies in the US.
Page A7From§Eachthe early evening edition — 1 September 2026
Same House vote: Post counts 192 Democrats refusing to disavow socialism, Examiner counts 8 denouncing it.
As it ran on the front
Two papers, one vote, and none of it was actually about socialism. Let me walk you through it because I did the math twice, sober both times. Same roll call, same 435 seats, and one paper counts 192 Democrats who wouldn't disavow socialism, framed like refusing to sign a loyalty oath is a character flaw, and the other paper — same week, same vote — counts eight Democrats who did disavow it, framed like those eight are the last honest men on the boat. Nobody's technically lying. That's the trick. You can print any number off a real vote depending on which side of the comma you stand on.
This isn't reporting, it's inventory management for outrage. The Post needs the big scary number for the reader who's already mad, the Examiner needs the small brave number for the reader who wants a hero, and they're both pulling off the same spreadsheet like a diner running the same soup as two different specials depending who's asking. The vote itself — whatever it actually decided, whatever 'condemning the DSA' even accomplishes on a Tuesday — never makes it into either headline. The number is the product. The vote is just the raw material they extracted it from.…
…(cont) Here's why you should care past the joke of it: this is how a country gets sorted without ever being asked a real question. Nobody polled you on healthcare or your rent, they polled you on a word — socialism — and reported the results like a horse race so you'd pick a side of a fight that was never about you to begin with. You're not the reader here. You're the subscriber base being tested with a roll call your own representative cast, and the actual policy underneath the word is nowhere in either story.
Next time you see a number in a headline about a vote, ask which comma it's standing on. Ask what got trimmed to make the number round, and who benefits from which rounding. Somewhere in a filing cabinet is the actual vote, plain, un-spun, and it says exactly what happened — which is precisely why neither paper printed it that way. They didn't lie to you. They just showed you the half of the ledger that keeps you subscribed.
“They took one roll call and printed two different countries out of it. One outlet says 192 Democrats wouldn't disavow socialism, the same day another counts eight who did — same names, same vote, different fear level sold to different mailing lists. That's not journalism, that's a subscription drive dressed up as a headline.”
“Look — refusing to disavow an ideology is refusing to disavow it, full stop, 192 Democrats had their chance and let it ride. Eight voted to condemn it, sure, but that's still only eight, which means... wait, that number's from the same vote our other paper called overwhelming this morning. Did I say 'overwhelming'? Strike that — I meant 'closely watched.'”
The receipts
Eight House Democrats voted with Republicans on Tuesday to condemn “socialism in all its forms” and the Democratic Socialists of America, marking the latest flashpoint in the broader ideological war between the Democratic Party’s establishment and its insurgent socialist wing. The resolution passed in a 220-192 vote.
This page is a back-issue: the story as it ran, receipts as they were. The current edition is at the front.