This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on March 13, 2008 2:54 AM.
The previous post in this blog was The taste of shoe leather.
The next post in this blog is OHSU Florida.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
Man, with all the finger-pointing that's going on among candidates for various offices around Portland about alleged campaign misdeeds by their opponents, I hate to start any more trouble. But yesterday a reader sent me what purports to be a copy of an e-mail message that he sent to Michael Dembrow, one of three candidates who are running for the Oregon House seat in my district (45). The reader also addressed the message to Dembrow's campaign manager, Logan Gilles. It reads as follows:
For shame! Last week I was about to sign up and contribute to your campaign, but after the "push-poll" I just endured, I feel obligated to support Ms. Boston. Your "polling" outfit, Standard Market Research in Denver CO, left no doubt in my mind what they were up to. You should know that I will share my experience with my favorite Law Professor. This is exactly what progressive democrats are sick and tired of. Take your coveted endorsements and stick them. As a lifelong resident of Northeast Portland I want progress, not regress. Stay out of politics, do not pass go, and you will not collect my $200.
Wow. Even though beauty's only skin deep, perhaps our choice is becoming clearer.
Comments (21)
That same outfit called my house last night, wanting to speak with my son who no longer lives here. I tried to pin the caller on what he wanted. He was rude and abusive. He handed me off to a supervisor, who was also rude and abusive. At that point, I resorted to some good old fashioned Anglo-Saxon verbiage and they terminated the conversation.
So what was the "push poll" about? Can your emailer be more elaborate? Is he sure he's using the term "push poll" correctly? Can he be sure it was a push poll and not just a traditional message-testing poll? I was polled last night re. the Charles Lewis/Amanda Fritz/Chris Smith race, but would never use the term "push poll" as it lasted at least 10 minutes, which is way too long for a traditional push poll.
(The call, btw, seemed probably paid for by the Fritz campaign, given the messages being tested.)
Yup, Dave J is right. People are starting to throw around "push poll" way too often these days.
Remember: candidates don't care who is winning today, they want to test messages. When a campaign polls, they may ask "who would you vote for today" but only as a prelude for message-testing questions.
It's perfectly reasonable for a campaign to read a positive bio and a negative bio (simulating a campaign) and then ask, again, who they would support.
In my recollection, I don't think there's been a substantiated claim of a push poll in Oregon in the last decade. Every time it comes up, it turns out that it's a regular ol' poll that someone misunderstood.
In a push poll, you're trying to deliver a single message - and fast. You need to deliver tens of thousands of calls in ordrer to affect the outcome, so they need to be short. In a regular poll, you're only going to call 400-600 people, and you wants lots of data, so the calls are long.
Two more things: Dembrow and Boston aren't the only two candidates in that race. Jon Coney is also a candidate.
All three people are good and decent folks. My firm happens to be working for Michael Dembrow, but I speak only for myself. Also, this is the first time I've heard of the campaign doing any polling at all, so I'm speaking in generalities here, not with any specific knowledge of that side of the Dembrow campaign.
Didn't Marc Abrams get push-polled by Jim Francesconi's campaign four years ago and tell Steve Duin about it? I seem to recall reading about it in the O.
I would certainly trust Marc to know if he was being push-polled.
It's perfectly reasonable for a campaign to read a positive bio and a negative bio (simulating a campaign) and then ask, again, who they would support.
Maybe in your world, Blue Boy. I think it's sleaze.
it's a regular ol' poll that someone misunderstood.
I think the reader understood perfectly.
Two more things: Dembrow and Boston aren't the only two candidates in that race. Jon Coney is also a candidate.
Already covered in the post linked to above.
My firm happens to be working for Michael Dembrow, but I speak only for myself.
Sure. As always. I'm sure you'd drop a negative comment about him, too, if that is how you really felt.
From Wikipedia, "a push poll is a technique in which an individual attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll." That's what it was, no doubt about it. The questioner, a very nice lady by the way, agreed with me when I said that this souds like a push-poll. And by God it worked, it altered my view of Mr Dembrow.
One more thing: A push-poll would be one-sided, only attacking one candidate. A legitimate poll, testing messages, would have a negative profile of each candidate that it's testing.
A call recipient won't know how many other people are getting called, but can listen to the questions. If it lasts more than 90 seconds or so and tests negative against each candidate, that's your tip: just a regular poll.
Also, a push poll usually contains a substantial mis-truth, or misrepresentation of the truth. The classic would be the one sanctioned by the Bush campaign in 2000, in which South Carolina voters were asked if their perception of John McCain would be changed if they knew he had fathered an illegitimate child with a black woman. Of course he had not, but that wasn't the point of the poll--the point was to get that information into the public sphere.
Also, I'm somewhat amazed that a polling outfit would admit who they are working for. I usually try to amuse myself by guessing the identity of the candidate who paid for the poll as I'm being asked the questions (usually it's pretty easy), but I was always under the impression that pollsters didn't disclose their clients.
A "push poll" pushes down one side of the question. A "whispering campaign" offer untruths about a candidate under the guise of "polling" about reactions to those untruths. That's what was conducted against McCain in 2000 and describes what my neighbor experienced in a call apparently on behalf of Francesconi, and against Potter. A push poll is not necessarily a whispering campaign, does not necessarily involve untruths, and is not necessarily overtly negative.
A push poll might be used to influence the voter or to test a message. The point is that it asks a series of questions (the script probably has some kind of flow chart) to find out if some angle influences voters to turn a certain way. What is somewhat scurrilous about them is that the caller often starts the conversation as if it were a regular poll (which would simply measure voter opinion at a moment in time), and then leads the callee to provide useful information to the campaign. Also, some people getting the calls find the questions used offensive.
On a related note, my wife got a call from McGuire Research for the Macpherson/Kroger race. It wasn't simply to gauge opinion. They asked reaction to a number of positives about Macpherson, then a few negatives about Macpherson, then a whole bunch of negatives about Kroger. My wife, who figured out quickly what was going on, stopped the pollster and said he must have made a mistake because he skipped the positives about Kroger. The guy laughed, said he was just following a script. When she asked if this was a push-poll, he said "Well, I'm just reading the script, but if someone called me with these questions, I'd consider it a push-poll."
I figured out who Blue Boy reminds me of -- Dick Morris. Politics is business to them, and they got no sense of the civil, civic, communitarian, purpose, cause, or Justice of it. Worse than no heart, these are cases of no soul. My complaint and the prevalent feeling of many people who get that bad after-taste in the back of the throat, after every encounter with such goons, is not that they are vinegary cynics, which they are, and not that they are scorched-earth nihilists, which they are, and not that they are amoral opportunists, which they are, yet more than anything it is their brazen greed. That's it, simple greed. So long as they get more than a share, the consequences or anything else matters not.
In one pithy version, it's like this. These people I got a problem with tend to agree with Coolidge's (slightly misquoted) statement, "The business of America is business." And that is soooo wrong, completely soulless.
What's right is, the business of Business is business.The business of America is Justice.
It says so, first thing, right in the Mission Statement.
---
I'm upset to hear Macpherson is rumored to resort to dirty or defiling politics. The reflex, to defend it of and tolerate it in my favored candidate, is to say, 'oh, he has to, that's the way the game is played.' Well, but, it is not. Damn it, nice gals and nice guys can TOO finish first. And then I doubt so as soon as I say it, and doubt myself, and ideals, and doubt if I am being 'realistic.'
I don't like Kroger. I met him, we talked, he creeps me out. What the heck is he doing here, in Oregon? He gives me no sense he is authentic or sincere, and gives me a strong sense of veneer, facade, hiding something. I thought he aims to ambition from Atty.Gen. to Governor, and now (NY Gov.) Spitzer hit the silk (i.e., 'bailed out'), and I think Kroger should go back to that Empire State of mind he expatriated from, his career track has an opening there.
Sheesh, a person don't even want to elect nobody. Who needs 'em!! We can do it ourselves, take care of it among ourselves, in conference. Get the gawddammed blind ambitious greed goons out of the way and hands out of the till, they got no indentification with We, the People.
I know Dembrow. He'd probably be a very effective legislator but for all the wrong reasons. Truly Machiavellian. Convinced he knows better than you. Convinced he knows what's best for you.
you need to take YOUR meds, Earl is totally going DOWN this year! Can't you feel it? Tenskatawa is the voice of REAL PEOPLE, and this is going to be the year they finally rebel against guys like Earl and vote for that guy nobody's ever heard of.
I've known Cyreena Boston for several years and I'll stand for her character in something like this. I have no vote in it, I'm a 5hr drive out of that HD. Cyreena's ability to talk to people, listen and connect is tremendous, HD45 would be hard pressed to do better. Cyreena's job with DPO was exactly what is called for here, she was Constituency Advocate.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (21)
That same outfit called my house last night, wanting to speak with my son who no longer lives here. I tried to pin the caller on what he wanted. He was rude and abusive. He handed me off to a supervisor, who was also rude and abusive. At that point, I resorted to some good old fashioned Anglo-Saxon verbiage and they terminated the conversation.
Posted by Dave Lister | March 13, 2008 8:00 AM
Of course, that could be the way Ms. Boston's campaign wanted you to react ...
Posted by Roger | March 13, 2008 8:46 AM
So what was the "push poll" about? Can your emailer be more elaborate? Is he sure he's using the term "push poll" correctly? Can he be sure it was a push poll and not just a traditional message-testing poll? I was polled last night re. the Charles Lewis/Amanda Fritz/Chris Smith race, but would never use the term "push poll" as it lasted at least 10 minutes, which is way too long for a traditional push poll.
(The call, btw, seemed probably paid for by the Fritz campaign, given the messages being tested.)
Posted by Dave J. | March 13, 2008 9:02 AM
Yup, Dave J is right. People are starting to throw around "push poll" way too often these days.
Remember: candidates don't care who is winning today, they want to test messages. When a campaign polls, they may ask "who would you vote for today" but only as a prelude for message-testing questions.
It's perfectly reasonable for a campaign to read a positive bio and a negative bio (simulating a campaign) and then ask, again, who they would support.
In my recollection, I don't think there's been a substantiated claim of a push poll in Oregon in the last decade. Every time it comes up, it turns out that it's a regular ol' poll that someone misunderstood.
In a push poll, you're trying to deliver a single message - and fast. You need to deliver tens of thousands of calls in ordrer to affect the outcome, so they need to be short. In a regular poll, you're only going to call 400-600 people, and you wants lots of data, so the calls are long.
Two more things: Dembrow and Boston aren't the only two candidates in that race. Jon Coney is also a candidate.
All three people are good and decent folks. My firm happens to be working for Michael Dembrow, but I speak only for myself. Also, this is the first time I've heard of the campaign doing any polling at all, so I'm speaking in generalities here, not with any specific knowledge of that side of the Dembrow campaign.
Posted by Kari Chisholm | March 13, 2008 9:58 AM
Didn't Marc Abrams get push-polled by Jim Francesconi's campaign four years ago and tell Steve Duin about it? I seem to recall reading about it in the O.
I would certainly trust Marc to know if he was being push-polled.
Posted by portlandia | March 13, 2008 12:07 PM
It's perfectly reasonable for a campaign to read a positive bio and a negative bio (simulating a campaign) and then ask, again, who they would support.
Maybe in your world, Blue Boy. I think it's sleaze.
it's a regular ol' poll that someone misunderstood.
I think the reader understood perfectly.
Two more things: Dembrow and Boston aren't the only two candidates in that race. Jon Coney is also a candidate.
Already covered in the post linked to above.
My firm happens to be working for Michael Dembrow, but I speak only for myself.
Sure. As always. I'm sure you'd drop a negative comment about him, too, if that is how you really felt.
Do you bill for these comments separately?
Posted by Jack Bog | March 13, 2008 12:41 PM
From Wikipedia, "a push poll is a technique in which an individual attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll." That's what it was, no doubt about it. The questioner, a very nice lady by the way, agreed with me when I said that this souds like a push-poll. And by God it worked, it altered my view of Mr Dembrow.
Posted by Bad Brad | March 13, 2008 1:04 PM
One more thing: A push-poll would be one-sided, only attacking one candidate. A legitimate poll, testing messages, would have a negative profile of each candidate that it's testing.
A call recipient won't know how many other people are getting called, but can listen to the questions. If it lasts more than 90 seconds or so and tests negative against each candidate, that's your tip: just a regular poll.
And thanks for the reminder about the Francesconi thing. Indymedia has a clip of the Steve Duin column about it. (Why, oh why, doesn't the Oregonian have online archives?!)
Posted by Kari Chisholm | March 13, 2008 2:33 PM
Oh dammit. here's the link
Posted by Kari Chisholm | March 13, 2008 2:36 PM
Also, a push poll usually contains a substantial mis-truth, or misrepresentation of the truth. The classic would be the one sanctioned by the Bush campaign in 2000, in which South Carolina voters were asked if their perception of John McCain would be changed if they knew he had fathered an illegitimate child with a black woman. Of course he had not, but that wasn't the point of the poll--the point was to get that information into the public sphere.
Also, I'm somewhat amazed that a polling outfit would admit who they are working for. I usually try to amuse myself by guessing the identity of the candidate who paid for the poll as I'm being asked the questions (usually it's pretty easy), but I was always under the impression that pollsters didn't disclose their clients.
Posted by Dave J. | March 13, 2008 3:05 PM
Hey, Kari,
Since your parsing minutiae - that was two more things.
Chisholm, who speaks only for whomever's paying him, offers his Clintonesque drivel about definitions, while ignoring the point of the post.
Maybe he misunderstands the quotes that the writer placed around "push-poll"; maybe he understands perfectly; maybe he thinks his BS doesn't stink.
I realize that obfuscation comes naturally for the big fella, but who does he think cares about these self-absorbed ramblings?
Posted by cc | March 13, 2008 3:07 PM
Dave J.
You guys have got to coordinate this stuff better - it goes Dave THEN Kari.
Get in rhythm, man.
Posted by cc | March 13, 2008 3:11 PM
A "push poll" pushes down one side of the question. A "whispering campaign" offer untruths about a candidate under the guise of "polling" about reactions to those untruths. That's what was conducted against McCain in 2000 and describes what my neighbor experienced in a call apparently on behalf of Francesconi, and against Potter. A push poll is not necessarily a whispering campaign, does not necessarily involve untruths, and is not necessarily overtly negative.
A push poll might be used to influence the voter or to test a message. The point is that it asks a series of questions (the script probably has some kind of flow chart) to find out if some angle influences voters to turn a certain way. What is somewhat scurrilous about them is that the caller often starts the conversation as if it were a regular poll (which would simply measure voter opinion at a moment in time), and then leads the callee to provide useful information to the campaign. Also, some people getting the calls find the questions used offensive.
Posted by Sue Hagmeier | March 13, 2008 4:11 PM
Hey, Kari,
Since your parsing minutiae - that was two more things.
Oh, the irony - *you're*
Posted by cc | March 13, 2008 4:27 PM
Now Kari Chisholm is lecturing us on the definition of push polls. Does he work for Websters Dictionary too? I wonder what he charges.
Posted by lw | March 13, 2008 6:55 PM
On a related note, my wife got a call from McGuire Research for the Macpherson/Kroger race. It wasn't simply to gauge opinion. They asked reaction to a number of positives about Macpherson, then a few negatives about Macpherson, then a whole bunch of negatives about Kroger. My wife, who figured out quickly what was going on, stopped the pollster and said he must have made a mistake because he skipped the positives about Kroger. The guy laughed, said he was just following a script. When she asked if this was a push-poll, he said "Well, I'm just reading the script, but if someone called me with these questions, I'd consider it a push-poll."
So Macpherson is clearly in on this game as well.
Posted by Miles | March 13, 2008 10:29 PM
I figured out who Blue Boy reminds me of -- Dick Morris. Politics is business to them, and they got no sense of the civil, civic, communitarian, purpose, cause, or Justice of it. Worse than no heart, these are cases of no soul. My complaint and the prevalent feeling of many people who get that bad after-taste in the back of the throat, after every encounter with such goons, is not that they are vinegary cynics, which they are, and not that they are scorched-earth nihilists, which they are, and not that they are amoral opportunists, which they are, yet more than anything it is their brazen greed. That's it, simple greed. So long as they get more than a share, the consequences or anything else matters not.
In one pithy version, it's like this. These people I got a problem with tend to agree with Coolidge's (slightly misquoted) statement, "The business of America is business." And that is soooo wrong, completely soulless.
What's right is, the business of Business is business. The business of America is Justice.
It says so, first thing, right in the Mission Statement.
---
I'm upset to hear Macpherson is rumored to resort to dirty or defiling politics. The reflex, to defend it of and tolerate it in my favored candidate, is to say, 'oh, he has to, that's the way the game is played.' Well, but, it is not. Damn it, nice gals and nice guys can TOO finish first. And then I doubt so as soon as I say it, and doubt myself, and ideals, and doubt if I am being 'realistic.'
I don't like Kroger. I met him, we talked, he creeps me out. What the heck is he doing here, in Oregon? He gives me no sense he is authentic or sincere, and gives me a strong sense of veneer, facade, hiding something. I thought he aims to ambition from Atty.Gen. to Governor, and now (NY Gov.) Spitzer hit the silk (i.e., 'bailed out'), and I think Kroger should go back to that Empire State of mind he expatriated from, his career track has an opening there.
Sheesh, a person don't even want to elect nobody. Who needs 'em!! We can do it ourselves, take care of it among ourselves, in conference. Get the gawddammed blind ambitious greed goons out of the way and hands out of the till, they got no indentification with We, the People.
Posted by Tenskwatawa | March 13, 2008 11:49 PM
I know Dembrow. He'd probably be a very effective legislator but for all the wrong reasons. Truly Machiavellian. Convinced he knows better than you. Convinced he knows what's best for you.
Posted by joel | March 14, 2008 10:55 AM
Jesse,
you need to take YOUR meds, Earl is totally going DOWN this year! Can't you feel it? Tenskatawa is the voice of REAL PEOPLE, and this is going to be the year they finally rebel against guys like Earl and vote for that guy nobody's ever heard of.
Posted by MSP | March 14, 2008 6:14 PM
"Tenskatawa is the voice of REAL PEOPLE..."
Dude, you left out the "SUR..."
Posted by cc | March 14, 2008 11:33 PM
I've known Cyreena Boston for several years and I'll stand for her character in something like this. I have no vote in it, I'm a 5hr drive out of that HD. Cyreena's ability to talk to people, listen and connect is tremendous, HD45 would be hard pressed to do better. Cyreena's job with DPO was exactly what is called for here, she was Constituency Advocate.
Posted by Chuck Butcher | March 15, 2008 3:26 AM