LA Times: Pro-Clinton Push Poll Erupts In California

[VolcanoJen]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/breaking-news-p.html

Excerpt:

Ed Coghlan was just starting to prepare his dinner in the northern San Fernando Valley the other night when the phone rang. The caller was very friendly. He identified himself as a pollster who wanted to ask registered independents like Coghlan a few questions about the presidential race and all the candidates for Super Tuesday's California primary.

Ed, who's a former news director for a local TV station, was curious. He said, "Sure, go ahead."

But a few minutes into the conversation Ed says he noticed a strange pattern developing to the questions. First of all, the "pollster" was only asking about four candidates, three Democrats -- Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards, who was still in the race at the time -- and one Republican -- John McCain.

Also, every question about Clinton was curiously positive, Coghlan recalls. The caller said things like, if you knew that Sen. Clinton believed the country had a serious home mortgage problem and had made proposals to freeze mortgage rates and save families from foreclosure, would you be more likely or less likely to vote for her?

Ed said, of course, more likely.

Every question about the other candidates was negative. If Ed knew, for instance, that as a state senator Obama had voted "present" 43 times instead of taking a yes or no stand "for what he believed," would Ed be more or less likely to vote for him?

"That's when I caught on," said Coghlan. He realized then that he was being push-polled. That malicious political virus that is designed not to elicit answers but to spread positive information about one candidate and negative information about all others under the guise of an honest poll had arrived in Southern California within days of the important election.

Click for the entire story...

Update: Looks like they were push-polling Edwards, too:

For instance, the caller inquired, had Ed watched a recent Democratic debate? Ed said yes. And who did Ed think had won the debate? the pollster inquired.

Coghlan replied, honestly, that he thought Edwards had won because he was calmer and more reasoned didn't get involved in all the petty arguing and finger-pointing like the other two. Now, the pollster said, if Ed knew that most people believed John Edwards could not get elected in a general election, would Ed be more or less likely to vote for him?

Ed said, oh, well then, less, of course. And the caller appeared to make a note of that.

[abburdlen]

1. Which will be first?

Someone defending push-polling or the denial that it's coming from the Clinton camp?
:popcorn:

[VolcanoJen]

3. Check out the comments section.

Are they saying that people are paid $5.00 each to respond to these kinds of calls?

Interesting comments section all the way around.

[Azathoth]

2. They don't even pretend to be any different from Rove n/t

[populistdriven]

5. I can't stand how cynical her campaign is

[dkf]

4. When I get push polled, I deliberately mess with the pollster.

At the end of the poll I ask who they are doing it for...they usually say they don't know so I tell them. haha.

[southern_dem]

6. me too!

Although, I dropped my house phone recently so I don't get calls anymore. :(

[magatte]

7. k&r, for dirty tricks killing our democracy

[mckeown1128]

8. Nothing new..

the Clintons had been running dirty robocalls ever since IO. I guess they have decided to step it up a notch.

[Thrill]

9. Sad

[unblock]

10. let's not be so naive to think this came from hillary's camp

sure, it's possible that hillary's campaign organized this, or that some supporting group did it without hillary's knowledge.

but it's also possible that someone else -- a republican group or even a competing democratic campaign -- did it precisely for the blowback effect.


push polls are horribly inefficient because you generally convince, at best, one person at a time. they only work well if (a) they are 100% supported by the media, in which case the negative rumor spread like wildfire or (b) you do them the night before the vote, in which case the media doesn't have time to expose it.

if hillary's campaign was behind this, it was a very stupid move. if anyone opposed to hillary did this, it was a very smart move.

my money is generally against campaign strategists making very stupid moves.

[monarch]

11. Absolutely right!!

Whoever is doing this is probably the same bunch that did robocalls in SC saying despicable things and identifying themselves as supporting Sen. Clinton.

[unblock]

14. this is why push polls are usually so stupid to do

usually only a few people hear the rumors you're pushing, but EVERYBODY hears the backlash.

but if the ENTIRE POINT is to create the backlash....

[Bitwit1234]

12. LA TIMES didn't they say the support him .....

wonder if we can believe what they post. I sure as heck wouldn't.

[VolcanoJen]

13. What they post??

It's a reported, sourced story.

[Cha]

15. Once again they called the wrong

person..this has happened a few weeks ago when they called a DUer and we got the story of a hilary scam. Do they do this so her polls will read high and every thinks she's doin' so great so they vote for her? Or what?

[pnorman]

16. A question: Is "Push-Polling", if clearly established as such, illegal in any state?

I once listened patiently to one such "poll", until I smelled a rat. I said: "Hey! This is push-polling, isn't it?". He replied: "Have a nice day!", and promptly hung up.

The person being push-poll smeared was on the ballot for Washington State Supreme Court Justice. Many people casting their ballots, would probably leave suck positions unmarked. So with a relatively small electorate, such a candidate would be particularly vulnerable to such tactics. (I had just recently finished listening to the Audible.com version of John Grisham's "The Appeal", and this discussion triggered the recollection of that novel.)

pnorman