Quantcast
Home / strike everything / Many media outlets duped by bogus polls (access required)

Many media outlets duped by bogus polls (access required)

Regardless of what you may have read elsewhere, no one has a decisive lead in the GOP primary race to replace Congressman John Shadegg, who is retiring at the end of the year. There have been three “polls” released by candidates in the race so far, and none of them are worth a lick.

11 comments

  1. Lincoln Responds to “Small” Editorial

    Facts are stubborn things, and unfortunately, are hard to ignore. Clearly we believe, as do our clients that the survey research conducted on their behalf is not “bogus.”

    Of course we didn’t know that Jim Small was now an expert pollster, after reviewing his bio on the Cap Times website we didn’t see pollster anywhere on there. Apparently a major concern was that having 41% of respondents unsure of who they were supporting was too low for Jim, he claims that this is “alarming” considering we are only six months from election day.

    What is the basis for this you ask, well he doesn’t tell us. He does quote an Oregon pollster who has limited experience in Arizona later in his rant. After taking a quick look at the Oregon pollster’s website we found in the race for governor of Oregon, for example, a poll was conducted fully 11 months before election-day, but the average undecided’s of the expert used was an astounding 23%! And in nearly each of the results he had posted, the survey samples were smaller than Lincoln’s and the margin of error was larger.

    Interesting to say the least, but even more troubling is how Jim reports on other polls as if they were the bible truth. For example, reporters in this town trip over themselves to discuss the vaunted “Eight Poll” conducted by Bruce Merrill, although within professional political circles many don’t take Merrill’s work too seriously. Here’s why.

    In the 2008 elections Merrill predicted these results just days before election-day:

    • McCain would win by 2% in Arizona, he actually won by 9%.
    • Arpaio would win by 21%, he actually won by 13%.
    • Thomas would win by 7%, he actually won by 7%.
    • Prop 102 would win by 7%, it actually won by 12%
    • Prop 202 would lose by 44%, it actually lost by 18%

    Still, this highly praised pollster was wrong 80% of the time, by an average of 9%.

    On the other side, Lincoln provided survey research for 5 different municipal elections last fall, and in each instance our polling accurately predicted the winner, within the margin of error, unlike Merrill. It’s why our clients pay for our services, and why we don’t just give it away like other firms and individuals. Jim, in the future please remember we are an award winning firm with multiple Pollies, and we have a combined 50 plus years of experience, run over 37 races for Congress, 8 gubernatorial campaigns, 5 U.S. Senate campaigns, and 4 campaigns for President.

    We believe our record speaks for itself.

    Most sincerely,

    Nathan Sproul, Partner
    Brian Murray, Partner
    Meghan Cox, Partner
    Jay McCleskey, Partner

  2. Nathan Sproul has no credibility: “According to campaign finance records, a joint committee of the McCain-Palin campaign, the RNC and the the California Republican Party, made a $175,000 payment to the group Lincoln Strategy in June for purposes of “registering voters.” The managing partner of that firm is Nathan Sproul, a renowned GOP operative who has been investigated on multiple occasions for suppressing Democratic voter turnout, throwing away registration forms and even spearheading efforts to get Ralph Nader on ballots to hinder the Democratic ticket.

    In a letter to the Justice Department last October, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers said that that Sproul’s alleged activities “clearly suppress votes and violate the law.”

  3. From Boston Chronicle: “Sproul is currently under investigation by the Oregon Attorney General’s office, for altering the voter registration forms of several thousand students in that state. Whether the new numbers are in part mistaken, they represent a huge expense for the Republicans. Given Sproul’s history of serious electoral mischief, affecting countless Democratic voters in the last election, it is important that we ask some sober questions: Where did all that money come from? Why did the RNC suppress their real expenditures? And what exactly did Sproul do for all that pay? If we’re going to get some reasonable answers, the FEC must undertake a very thorough audit of the books.

  4. Jay McCleskey also has no credibility. In NM he was called, “the hatchet man” because he was known to run smear campaigns against the opposition, and in one case, even started a whisper campaign!
    not to mention some questionable personal background, filed in the NM court system.

  5. Great site. A lot of useful information here. I’m sending it to some friends!

  6. Damn! this is really interesting. Never thougth this subject before but that’s gonna change from now on! thanx!

  7. If only they’d do a version of Elektra like this

  8. Just embedded it on my site to see how it works . . .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top