Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Election Education

Channel

Election Education

@ElectionEducation

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

1,143subscribers

-13 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001795845706
TypeChannel
Username@ElectionEducation
Created7 November 2022measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live23 August 2026
Measurements held7
Confirmed unchanged2 times, most recently 23 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/ElectionEducation

Topic

Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 60% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.

Growth

1,1431,1561,149.56 August 2026 — 1,156 subscribers6 August 2026 — 1,156 subscribers6 August 2026 — 1,155 subscribers9 August 2026 — 1,154 subscribers12 August 2026 — 1,151 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,146 subscribers19 August 2026 — 1,143 subscribers6 August 202619 August 2026
7 measurements spanning 13 days, net -13. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 1,141–1,158 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
19 Aug 2026, 10:371,143-3
16 Aug 2026, 05:341,146-5
12 Aug 2026, 15:331,151-3
9 Aug 2026, 09:111,154-1
6 Aug 2026, 15:071,155-1
6 Aug 2026, 12:021,156no change
6 Aug 2026, 10:451,156first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 17 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
18.8%
avg views ÷ 1,143 subscribers
Avg views / post
215
1 post measured
Reaction rate
7.91%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 27 July 2026
Posts held20 (17 July 202627 July 2026)
Views total215
Reactions total17
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken6 Aug 2026, 12:02 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

252 reactions across 20 posts, in 13 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 51.2% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍12951.2%
3915.5%
🔥259.92%
💯135.16%
😈93.57%
👏72.78%
😱72.78%
🤣62.38%
😨41.59%
🤔41.59%
🤬41.59%
🤯41.59%
10.397%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 252reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 27 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

27 Jul 2026, 01:05 UTC215 views17 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @thepeoplesauditPhoto

The biggest clue here is that all of these programs are administered by the states.

👍17

26 Jul 2026, 06:39 UTC513 views10 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Updated info on the ballot errors in Spokane Co, WA, including what to do if you are impacted by one of these errors.

👍9🤬1

25 Jul 2026, 20:06 UTC443 views9 reactionsread 6 August 2026

🚨🚨 Attention Voters in Spokane Co, WA: There is a possibility you had an issue with your ballot. Some voters will be sent a supplemental ballot with another measure on it. (Forgot which races, but none involve candidates) You will need to send BOTH ballots back. The county has reported 3 separate ballot issues this election and I find that unacceptable. There are several checkpoints in the process where these sho

🤔4😨4🤬1

24 Jul 2026, 07:04 UTC≈12,800 views10 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

There seems to be a misconception about what "duplicate voters" means in the EAC's EAVS report. It doesn't mean that anyone was registered multiple times. It means when their info was sent to the state, the system discovered that the voter is already registered. These numbers are self reported by the states. Think motor-voter and auto-registration.

👍10

23 Jul 2026, 22:30 UTC≈1,250 views14 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

Sharing this graphic again, as it's that time of year again!

11👍21

20 Jul 2026, 15:03 UTC432 views9 reactionsread 6 August 2026

BTW, my editor is busy. Please inform me of any typos you may find. 😜

🤣6👍3

20 Jul 2026, 14:58 UTC698 views10 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

In the "Vulnerabilities in Electronic Voting and Ballot Counting" folder released by the Trump admin, there is a file titled, "NICM_VulnerabilitiesInUS2020ElectionInfrastructure_15JAN2020_DECLASS_REDACTEDed" that was a memorandum by the National Intelligence Council discussing machine vulnerabilities. Here are the key points of their assessment. Gone are the days of "most secure in history," and "air-gapped."

👍81🔥1

19 Jul 2026, 20:02 UTC338 views16 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Forwarded from @auditthevotepa

The threat to our elections is real. Very soon True The Vote is dropping a new docuseries called Trapped. It's 🔥!! See the trailer. 👇 https://truethevote.org/trapped-detroit-trailer

🔥15👏1

19 Jul 2026, 19:20 UTC≈1,260 views9 reactionsread 6 August 2026
File

In the Michigan Voter Registration Investigation folder, there is a file called Michigan Witness Interview Widespread Fake Registrations. I'm attaching it here for you. Read this interview. There are several redactions, but there is enough there to get the picture. Some may think, "what is the big deal? They would have been caught." But what if they were intentionally not caught? Or what if the state doesn't ch

👍9

19 Jul 2026, 05:06 UTC619 views22 reactionsread 6 August 2026

I want to remind everyone here that while it is important to share the truth with people and talk about the vulnerabilities in our elections, it is equally important to still encourage them to vote! Some may say, "what's the point," then we get blamed for low voter turnout.. My answer is that when more people vote, the fraud is harder to cover up. If enough people vote, there is nowhere left to hide.

👍18💯4

19 Jul 2026, 04:55 UTC≈18,700 views6 reactionsread 6 August 2026
Photo

According to a report included in the files recently declassified by Trump, there have been several documented data breaches to voter registration databases across the country. Here are the documented breaches. You can use these when talking about vulnerabilities with election administrators and/or voters. These were documented, reported, and shared with the intelligence community of the US government. Note: There

🔥6

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @ElectionEducation. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 22,661 of 1,602,822entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels

The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.

David Clements
@theprofessorsrecord · 51,253
Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 25 August 2026
Captain Keshel and Co. American Election Integrity HQ
@ElectionHQ2024 · 70,463
Telegram ranks this channel #40 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 20 August 2026

This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 19 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Election Education” (@ElectionEducation), 1,143 subscribers as measured 19 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ElectionEducation.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.