Six people chose our political club's endorsement and now the flyer says the community supports it

I joined a local political club this year because its meetings were one of the few places where people discussed city races before the final week. The club recently endorsed a candidate. The announcement says the candidate has "the support of our community."

What actually happened is that nine members attended the endorsement meeting, six voted for the candidate, two voted for someone else, and one abstained. The club has more than a hundred names on its mailing list, but I do not know how many are current members or eligible to vote. The meeting notice mentioned endorsements in a long agenda email without explaining the threshold or whether remote voting was possible.

I am not claiming the endorsement is invalid. The club may have followed its bylaws exactly. Six votes can be enough for an organization to act if the rules say so. My objection is the leap from "the club endorsed" to "the community supports." The first is an institutional decision. The second sounds like evidence about residents who were never asked.

I raised this with an officer and was told that political communication needs confidence. She offered to add the vote total in small text but said emphasizing low turnout would weaken the endorsement. That is precisely why I think the number matters. If transparency makes the claim look weaker, the claim may be carrying more authority than the process earned.

I am considering proposing three changes: publish eligibility and quorum rules before endorsement meetings, report the vote count with every endorsement, and use language that attributes the decision to the club rather than the whole community. None of that prevents the club from taking a position.

Am I being overly procedural? What information should accompany an organizational endorsement so outsiders can understand who actually decided?