Politico's "Sinema rakes in Pharma and finance cash..." A salient issue and an exceptional pattern of donations, or just cherry picking of statistics? may be a bit atypical here. It received one answer so far, and my guess is many in the community will not venture an answer as it may require some serious research.
But I don't understand at all how to address
Add details and clarify the problem you’re solving. This will help others answer the question.
There is a comment beginning:
What would you consider an exceptional pattern?
but what is normal and exceptional is really the purview of the answer author. In politics SE it's common to distinguish between normal and exceptional events or patterns.
Exceptional ones are newsworthy for example, and that's why I'm calling into question whether the linked Politico piece is really reporting news, or just cherry picking a few numbers and presenting them in isolation.
I'm trying to find out if the pattern of donations to Sinema and its relationship to their committee assignments and recent/upcoming voting responsibilities is so unusual that it is newsworthy or not.
Since the literal question "Is this newsworthy"? could easily attract opinion-based answers, I've asked if all the numbers shown in the article are statistically significant.
I'd assumed that there are reports out on how money flows from donors to elected officials, and that there would be some in the community who would be familiar with how to find them.
Surely political scientists and others that follow politics are not unfamiliar with statistics!
Question: What kind of "details" can I add and what further "clarifying" might be necessary to get one more reopen vote?