Editorial 2

WHEN PUSH COMES TO POLL

It’s now a little easier to tell who the good guys are in a given election. They’re the ones targeted in “push polls.” “Push Polls?”

From Wikipedia: “ A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll. In a push poll, large numbers of respondents are contacted and little or no effort is made to collect and analyze response data.”

Ethics Issues

How esteemed are push polls? You might think that political consultants wouldn’t have a problem with them. But their front organization, The American Association of Political Consultants has condemned push polls. In New Hampshire they’re illegal. (Note to Mike Eng: Looking for a new law to sponsor?) Most push polls are little more than thinly disguised political attack mechanisms. And they ain’t cheap.

Hit or Legit?

So how can you tell if you’re being pushed? For one thing, legitimate polls tend to be short with only a handful of questions. Push polls can be extensive; they are, after all, a marketing effort. And what kind bouncy castle for sale of questions do they pose? Perhaps the most famous, and a great example of the genre, was the query used by the Bush campaign against John McCain in the 2000 South Carolina Republican Presidential Primary: “Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?” Maybe down south they don’t do subtle.

You can identify push pollsters by their reluctance to name an organization, by giving a phony name or being evasive about contributors. You’re not likely to be hearing Gallup, CNN or Pew given responsibility.

Local Push Polling

In the last election there was push polling against Sharon Martinez and David Lau. The pollster spouted an unfamiliar organization name and refused to say who was paying for the poll. There was also push polling locally in favor of the May 19 Propositions. This poll focused largely on lottery expansion Prop. 1C. Scientific Games just signed a four-year extension to continue as the lottery’s chief supplier of instant tickets and related services including marketing. A clue for anyone starting a likely suspects list.

CCMP suggests that when devious means are used to sway public opinion it’s fair to assume that rewarding them (with a vote) will almost certainly produce more of the same. Still, if those tactics didn’t work we wouldn’t have them.

usccmpk@yahoo.com