Push-Poll Mystery in Southern Oregon

Who done it? And what did they do, really? 

CLICK; Maxwell Smart: "Would you believe. . . "

Advertising testing, probably.

Someone wants to know what lies and half-truths people will believe.

My current thinking is that we did not see a push-poll. In the long run, what we are seeing is worse.

It is too early in the season for push-polls. What local citizens experienced and objected to was some ad testing. It was a preview of coming attractions: ugly ads.  People weren't being pushed, they were being tested to see how they can best be pushed.

What lie will you believe?

Who is out there testing ads? PACs and organized lobby groups with the money to do it, and there is lots of money sloshing around. The Senate District 3 race is one of the swing districts which will determine whether the Oregon Senate has 18 Democrats, or perhaps only 16 or 17.  Either way, it is a majority--there are 30 Senators-- but if it is 18 then Democrats would have the 60% majority necessary to pass revenue bills without Republican votes. 

Who asked the negative poll questions that got people surprised and angry?

   1. Probably not National Research, Inc. That company got paid some $14,850 by the No Supermajorities PAC, an in kind contribution to Jessica Gomez, and they did in fact do a poll. They had been a prime suspect for me.  I don't think they are the ones with the nastiest questions. Alan DeBoer says he knows exactly the questions they asked--which he won't reveal, but said they were not the harshest ones. 

"Not my poll."

I spoke with the owner of the company, Adam Geller, and he, too, wouldn't reveal the questions. Their secrecy doesn't surprise me. Their thoughts as to Jessica Gomez's and Jeff Golden's potential weak spots would be too revealing of their campaign strategy. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the questions would come across as mean spirited, and contrary to their goal to present Jessica Gomez as "nice", not vicious, but there would have been no need to include statements that were memorable as vicious against Gomez.

Adam Geller suggested there was likely a second poll, taking place the same time as theirs, and the confusion comes because my informants are reporting two polls, theirs plus one that is harder-hitting. Alan DeBoer--one of the people who happened to have been polled--got the harsh one.

Am I naive to believe Alan DeBoer (who many would say is dishonest per se since he has two strikes against him, being a salesman of used cars and a politician, both) and Adam Geller (a New Jersey political operative and spin creator who works for Chris Christie and Donald Trump)?  Surely, I am a gullible fool to believe them.

In fact, I do believe them.

The poll they created was a poll, not a message piece, and it may well have tested negative statements, but not the worst of them. It was too long to be a simple hit piece, and the No Supermajorities PAC probably wouldn't attack Gomez.

I believe there is enough statewide interest and PAC available for there to be multiple polls. One of my informants, Gayle Lewis, felt quite certain she had pinned down a different name for the source of the poll: Long River Research.  Such a firm exists, in Beaverton, Oregon. I will see what I can learn from them.

I asked Geller why a second poll had not shown up on the Secretary of State's report.  He said that it might not show up until it had been fully paid for, and invoicing might be several weeks delayed. As an alternative  he said the organization that commissioned the poll might be attempting to construe it as internal background research for their own purposes and not an election expense, and therefore not report it at all. The money trail is not foolproof or prompt, he said.

   2. Probably not the OEA. The OEA PAC reports spending $40,000 for election related surveys, and I spoke with Trent Lutz of their organization. He said they favored Jeff Golden and that local people here might be helping his campaign, but said that they were not going to be fully engaged at the state level because Golden is refusing PAC money. He said they had not done polling down here. I believe him. He didn't seem that motivated.

  3. Probably not Curt Ankerberg or any other provocateur. The poll was too long and complicated to be a prank. A prankster would have asked four or five incendiary questions, then moved on. It was probably a real poll by a real professional, but one administered so poorly that my informants couldn't quite believe it was real. 

Occam's razor, again. When forced to choose between a clever, well designed conspiracy of evil-doing, or simple stupidity and incompetence, go with incompetence.

The take-away: Some group with the capacity to spend $10,000 or more is testing negative ads and messages, and it isn't being coordinated with the campaigns. The Republican side has the money to do this, but we don't really know which side is behind this. But people don't test negative ads unless they have the capacity and interest to run negative ads.

The real ugly stuff comes later.