Well, the 10th District Dem primary battle turned up another notch on Monday, as the Dan Seals campaign team released the results (but not the crosstabs or other details) of a poll conducted by the campaign of 404 likely primary voters. The poll results showed that 58 percent of likely primary voters would vote for Dan Seals, while only 6 percent would vote for Jay Footlik. The poll also shows Seals leads in name recognition over Footlik, with a 69-24 advantage.
The response by the Footlik campaign was somewhat predictable, in that Footlik's campaign manager cited the advantage in name recognition enjoyed by Seals as a carry-over from the 2006 campaign. “Dan Seals spent $2 million last year introducing himself to voters, so his current lead is not surprising at all,” said Footlik campaign manager Simon Behrmann.
The more interesting quote from Behrmann, however, was that he stated, “What is surprising is how Dan Seals lost in the best Democratic year by over six points.”
Ow. Footlik's strategy is revealed, and the gloves are officially off. If Dan Seals could not do the job against Mark Kirk in the Democratic landslide of 2006, how is he going to do it this time???
It's certainly a fair question, and one I would be asking likely voters if I were Footlik. And none too soon, either, as Footlik should have come out swinging against Seals much earlier. Now Footlik's got some serious ground to make up.
Well, you can bet the Seals folks will be crowing about these results for everything they are worth. However, the lack of the complete polling data with crosstabs raises several questions, besides the obvious one of 'what are they hiding?' For example, I would like to know where the sample came from. Leaving aside the fact that 400 voters is not a huge sample, the big questions is, was it a truly random sample of the 10th District or were some geographical areas (say, WILMETTE?) perhaps overrepresented? Were other areas where Footlik is likely to be stronger (Highland Park, Buffalo Grove) represented equally? And, as one commentor here already queried, was a head-to-head question between Seals and Kirk asked, and if so, with what results? I can't believe they would go to the expense of conducting a poll without asking that question, and clearly since they did not release those results, the answer probably wasn't too good. Also, did the poll test negatives against Seals?
Footlik's camp seems confident that they will narrow the name recognition gap once Footlik starts spending his money in earnest, which has already begun with cable spots last week. A major weekend Footlik fundraiser headlined by a former ambassador was apparently a big success, while Seals spent his Sunday afternoon with Dick Durbin and Melissa Bean in the 8th District.
I just know that I hope both Seals and Footlik spend every last dime they have slugging it out before February 5 and then basically have to start over against Congressman Mark Kirk. May the best donkey win!
UPDATED: Well, I guess poor TA simply assumed that the Seals poll was a fair one, and that the sample strategy was the questionable issue. Silly, naive me. Based on the comments coming in, it appears that the Seals campaign poll was a classic negative "push" poll, which may well explain the 52 point swing...
UPDATED x2 11/13/07: Well, it seems that only Team America readers are asking the tough questions about the legitimacy of the Seals poll (see comments). Here a blurb from this morning's Waukegan News-Scum that is absolutely FAWNING over Seals and the lopsided poll results. Will Footlik challenge Seals to release the complete results of the poll, including the questions? He better, or the take-what-you-feed-us nature of the media is going to conclude that Seals has already won, without any serious questioning on the legitimacy of the poll.
UPDATED x3: I've been corrected by some readers and Rich Miller over at Capitol Fax Blog that the Seals poll wasn't really a "push" poll in the sense that classic "push polling" is characterized by a mass calling with a series of very short negative questions, designed simply to inflame negative opinion, without really looking to analyze the data. So, clearly no one is going to label a sample of 404 respondents a "push" poll on that basis. Our question remains, however, whether the results of the poll were skewed by the nature of the questions and the way (and order) they were presented, and whether this amounts to more negative campaigning than legitimate scientific polling. Until the questions are released, we need to rely on those who were polled to share with us their thoughts and recollection of the questions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
46 comments:
I got polled on this. They asked about Jay not living in the district. They said he had worked for another government (Israel?) and mentioned that Footlik was like Sen. Lieberman. No wonder it turned out for Seals. This kind of negative campaigning turned me off.
Shari
My wife got the poll. It was all against Footlik (no residence, he is really a right winger, said bad things on immigration). They would not say who they were working for. Now we know.
Herb
That sounds like a classic "push poll," Shari. Did they ask all the leading negative questions and/or make the misleading statements before asking the big question at the end, or did they ask the question twice, once at the beginning, and once at the end, with the negative stuff in the middle?
Thanks too, Herb. Well, it sounds like the results are coming in. Anyone else get the call?
My guess is the Seals people polled for a general election match-up and it showed Mark trouncing Seals by a much bigger margin that 2006. If Seals is unwilling to release that, he is hiding bad news.
Releasing this poll seems extremely stupid on Seals' part. The results are so extreme that Footlik can only improve his numbers going forward. How easy it will be for Footlik to do a poll in a few weeks that shows him getting stronger -- much stronger -- results than six percent. He'll then be able to claim he has momentum, and that could kill Seals.
This is the opposite of smart politics. Seals has been committing error after error. He let Footlik announce his candidacy first then had to scramble a few days later to announce his own. He let Footlik out raise him in the second quarter of the year. He let Footlik bring in better fundraising talent -- Dennis Ross. Now, Seals has made sure he'll lose the expectations game.
That's not going to cut it in the Tenth. You've got to be a lot smarter than that to get elected around here.
Old Vike- an on-the-money analysis, as usual.
I think in retrospect, Seals folks will have reason to be very sorry for releasing this poll. My guess is that even IF anyone at Camp Seals was thinking down the road about Footlik being able to dramatically improve his numbers (which probably would happen today if a "fair" poll was done, as opposed to the highly negative push poll that our readers are saying was done by Seals), the short-term allure of the press pop to be gained because of such a lopsided result was just too much to resist for the Seals folks.
The main goal of Seals is to show right away that Footlik has no chance, and that giving money to him is a waste (they know Footlik will not give up no matter what, so that is not an issue). People hate wasting money on a lost cause, and Seals can use these results to make that argument. Less likely, but still a possibility, is that DCCC might look at these results and decide that it's "safe" to come in now for Seals, but there is almost no chance of that happening, especially since Rahm is (by many reports) much more favorable to Footlik.
That being said, Footlik cannot afford to take this poll lying down, because if he does not hit back hard, his less committed supporters will start to loose faith and it will be more difficult to keep his fundraising going. Based on the few news articles that already picked up the poll, it seems no one (aside from our faithful readers here) are asking the hard questions about that poll.
If I was Footlik, I would immediately go on the attack to dispute the legitimacy of the poll, and counter with my own, if I have it available, or get one done right away. I will give the Footlik camp a brief pass for not responding hard to the poll right away, as I myself did not fathom how negative that poll must have been, but now that the reports are starting to confim how slanted it was, Footlik cannot afford to take this lying down. He needs to do some press releases and be out in the community screaming 'dirty politics' and how unfair the poll was--trying to take the high road to avoid negative attacks on Seals won't cut it when the poll shows you 52 points behind. There's a bigger difference there than Seals' advantage in campaigning last time around, and it's based on the unscientific way the poll was taken.
Maybe Cap Fax will pick up on this; they HATE it when polls are disingenuous, but Footlik can't count on the Blogs to do the work for him.
Jay, you listening?
Hey, TA. That poll must also have asked THE question: Kirk vs. Seals. Don't you think that the Kirk number must have been very good and something that the Seals folks are not talking about with the "results". Since we don't see the tabs it's fairly obvious to those of us familiar with polls that there's some key info missing. Regardless, Mr. Footlik had a bang-up day on Sunday with Dennis Ross coming in to speak on his behalf while Dan was out in the 8th, far from "home". It's a good bet that the heat will be kicked up several notches in the coming days.
I doubt they would waste the money on a Seals vs. Kirk question in that poll. They already have a good idea of how Seals would do - in his first run for office with minimal party support and low name rec, he got 47% against a moderate Republican who probably had the highest favorability rating of any Illinois Republican at the time.
As for this: “Dan Seals spent $2 million last year introducing himself to voters, so his current lead is not surprising at all,” said Footlik campaign manager Simon Behrmann...
Wow that's some slam - Seals raised $2 million in his first race! Burn!
With the primary less than 90 days away, Footlik is going to need a heck of a lot more than 24% name rec to even make a blip.
GHY is too good a pollster to ask the head-to-head Seals/Footlik question only AFTER a string of negatives. Of course they are testing possible negatives; we're less than 90 days from a vote. The real question is whether or not the Seals campaign released the first head to head (before negatives) or if GHY did another head-to-head after the list of negatives. That said, usually the question that comes after negatives (and the commentors here who received the call should answer this) is "would this make you more or less likely to vote for Footlik". It's rare that they do a full-blown head-to-head AFTER a long string of negatives, because they're really interested in WHICH negative has the greatest impact, not the cumulative effect (it's too costly to make the cumulative effect work in a media market like this).
From the CBS/Politico link:
Both candidates have been prodigious fundraisers so far, though Seals outraised Footlik in the third fundraising quarter.
Toast.
i'm unfamiliar with campaign polls releasing their internals. could you point me to the crosstabs for one of mark kirk's polls? i'm specifically interested in the areas where he polls, as well.
it also appears that you don't understand what the definition of push-polling is. given that the term means something very specific and has a recognized definition -- one that describes something widely condemned by the professional community -- perhaps you should learn a little something about it. it would strengthen the credibility of your analysis...
Bored- what's YOUR understanding of the term "push poll" and how does it differ from the first few commentors who describe the type and tenor of the questions asked? I don't claim to be a polling or statistical expert, but it's my understanding that "push" polls are a common term used to describe a poll that seeks to manipulate the results of the poll itself by suggestive questioning or blatant slanted statements. If you have a different definition, please share, I'm always willing to learn.
Bored- here's the wikipedia definition of push poll:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll
While the Seals poll appears to have been conducted by a reputable pollster and clearly the Seals camp is taking credit for it, the types of questions and statements made to the respondents make it sound a lot like negative campaigning under the guise of a legitimate poll to me. The Seals camp also did not release other common polling data such as the margin of error, as far as I know.
Whereas many push polls are used to simply spread propaganda, they can also be used to pump up a candidate's poll results by "poisoning the well" by the clever use of slanted questions, to achieve the desired result.
If the Seals camp wants to refute that, they can release the questions and results. Their move.
Well, actually, it's Footlik's move.
Annie and Bored: As we've been discussing over at Capitol Fax Blog this morning, as to whether it is likely that the Seals poll did a head-to-head on Kirk v. Seals (considering it was only supposed to be likely DEM voters in the sample), my thought it s that such a question generaly would be out of place in a primary Dem poll, except in a place like the 10th, which voted for Kerry.
There are an awful lot of usual Dem voters that vote for Kirk, especially among certain demographics, so it would be telling information if that question were asked. Whoever wins between Seals and Footlik need to get these Dems back to the fold and abandon Kirk, so if Seals is not polling well among the likely Dem voters, that presents a problem, and something I would think they would want to ascertain.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html
Margin of error is 4.87% for a sample size of 404.
Whereas many push polls are used to simply spread propaganda, they can also be used to pump up a candidate's poll results by "poisoning the well" by the clever use of slanted questions, to achieve the desired result.
If the Seals camp wants to refute that, they can release the questions and results. Their move.
Shorter Team America: I don't understand how the poll was conducted, therefore it is invalid!
Kuz- take a look at the first few comments and tell me that's not a sufficient basis to raise the question of the poll's legitimacy? As one commentor on Cap Fax Blog put it this morning, even Mickey Mouse should have done better than 6%. Something here isn't right. Seals should be forced to defend his results if he is going to trumpet them to the 10th District.
I read the comments - no one said that they asked the negative messages first. That indeed would be shady. It is SOP to ask the name rec and voting preference first, then test the messages.
Also, what was Seals name rec in November 2005? Probably just as low. Footlik is in his first race, has run one cable ad, and his main endorsement is some Democratic Advancement PAC no one has ever heard of. Some of those undecided may vote for him, of course - there is no "undecided" hole to punch.
In a Dem primary, with only 24% name rec against the previous challenger, 6% is understandable, I think.
Kuz- you have some good points, so I guess we'll just have to see how Footlik responds over the next few days. If he is essentially silent over the accuracy of the poll, and he does not counter with his own polling data telling a different story, then he does indeed have a world of ground to make up in a very short time period.
i have posted a more complete definition for you (i'm not a fan of wikipedia, although you'll notice that i used it as a source, just because of the ability to alter the definition for self-serving purposes is available to all of us) over at capital fax. if you'd like me to post it here, i will (or like to do so yourself, you have my consent). i see no purpose at this point.
i don't think as many people who vote in the democratic primaries vote for kirk as you seem to. i'd bet that kirk's polling among democrats (people who vote in the democratic primaries) is not outside the normal range to be found in your typical congressional district. again, if you have access to information that suggests otherwise, i'd love to see it.
i can't imagine why a campaign would pay a pollster to ask a head to head question about the general in a poll of primary voters. you seem to think there's a reason, but it escapes me...
So Seals raised $2 million last time. Look at the donors, I recognized a large number of very sizable donors who are friends with Seals' father George. George was a member of the Bears and a soybean trader at the CBOT. The traders wrote the son some pretty big checks. I have spoken to a few of the donors who I recognized and they made the donations due to the father. Will those guys pony up again? For a guy who doesn't work? We'll see.
Great post TA, a commenter at Flying Debris wrote that he was reached with a similar poll and said that he had the impression that it was being run by the Wilmette Life.
I'd also like to see the transcript of one of the polls, and see the full results. It would probably be a good example of political maneuvering and deceit.
"Marine" said the following over at Capitol Fax:
- Marine - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 2:26 pm:
First off, I happen to know that when they polled, they made a bunch of bad comments and mentioned some of Footliks ‘shortfalls’, then conducted the poll. How can you expect that to go any way but the way it did? Not to mention, Seals didn’t even release the whole poll and mention that fact.
Also, did he even mention Kirk in his polls? Of course not, because he’s not winning or even close. If he was he would’ve mentioned that.
Lastly, since Footlik had a big fundraiser just YESTERDAY, this whole thing isn’t even indicative of the true race. I just don’t see how Seals can claim such a win when his facts aren’t even right.
While Footlik spends thousands of dollars to produce and run cable television ads in the district, and does a very early mailer, Seals spends far, far less on a poll and hits public relations magic by getting the results widely published.
I disagree with "old viking." The Seals response to the Footlik television advertising was smart and cost very little money. Who cares what questions were asked. The results were trumpeted all over the media which jumped on them.
This is shaping up to be a most interesting primary.
Louis G. Atsaves
TA
a few comments after reading everyone's post on this silly poll of Seals.
It seems as though Seals base is begining to erode. Seals did not release the entire poll because he didnt want to show all the negative questions on Footlik nor did Seals want anyone to see the positive numbers coming back for Kirk. I think it is funny Seals spending money on a survey from a high priced firm (he probably spent at least 20K)when he doesnt really get anything in return. In the meantime it seems like Kirk continues to raise money while Seals is spending down what little he has. I think it also shows that Seals is nervous and worried about Footlik. I heard Footlik held a huge fundraiser this past weekend in the district with several major donors who were with Seals in 2006.
Seals wants the Dems to think that Footlik is a nothing candidate. I get it but Seals still has to spend money and a lot of money to run against him. At the same time Mark Kirk seems to be working harder than ever. --I love the virtual town hall meetings he is hosting! And he has already raised $1.5 mil? Wow! I just don't see it in the cards for either Dem to knock him off in the General. When I talk to friends they think of Mark as someone who has protected Lake Michigan, got more money for schools in Highland Park and Glenview and is pro-choice. He is very popular with Independents and Democrats. It's just not going to happen for Seals no matter if he beats Footlik by 5% or 75%.
With all this talk about the poll being negative against Footlik, I think it's amazing that people still like him over Seals. Even using that poll as an accurate representation (which it is not), Footlik has managed to gain that 6% in the short time that he has been running, while Seals support has managed to shrink down to 58%.
Word from the Garin (the pollster) shop was that Kirk was 25 points ahead of Seals and that is why the poll was not released. Strange to release a poll that shows Kirk has a favorable rating among Democratic voters.
Jay has gone from Zero to 24% name recognition. Jay also outraised Seals in the second quarter. That is important.
Jay has gone from Zero to 24% name recognition. Jay also outraised Seals in the second quarter. That is important.
Now all Footlik needs is a winning third quarter and another nine months until the primary, and he'll be set. Oh, oops.
First T.A. great job on winning the eyes of capitol fax and beating ellen to smitherenes in only a month on this thing. Jay's people post here, Mark's people post here and the anti-america nuts post on Ellen's blog.
-both Jay and Dan are absolutely polling against Mark to show donors, activists and the media that they are viable and in good shape.
If they had great numbers they would throw them out there and we would know them. They are not and that SAYS A LOT.
Look at the presidential campaigns. Those guys chomp at the bit to show these head to heads.
So Footlik and dan's people can give all the rah rah they want but numbers talk and they have NONE right now.
Also interesting they are no doubt checking on W's numbers in the district and the fact those are silent is a good thing for us.
This poll was ridiculous, Seals only revealed small parts of the poll. The poll shows that Seals is afraid to share the rest of the results, which means that there were negative results for him. If Seals was truly even in close contention with Congressman Kirk, they would have for sure given that information out.
This poll was ridiculous, Seals only revealed small parts of the poll. The poll shows that Seals is afraid to share the rest of the results, which means that there were negative results for him. If Seals was truly even in close contention with Congressman Kirk, they would have for sure given that information out.
So tell us - what did the poll say, Mr. Anonymous? What were the results, since you obviously know what they are?
Let's face it. Seals is making a mash of this race. His own poll shows Kirk with higher positives than negatives among DEMOCRATS. That's going to kill Seals' fundraising and turn all the serious Dems to Footlik.
TA,
It turns out you and cuz are both right. Since this was a Democratic voting primary sample, they probably did not poll a head-to-head of Kirk-Seals or Kirk-Footlik (though they may have and it remains a legitimate question for the Seals camp to answer).
However, according to the National Journal's House Race Hotline today, Seals DID poll Kirk's favorability among Democratic primary voters.
Again -- this poll asked HARD DEMOCRATS -- the most partisan of the left -- the base of Kirk's opposition -- how they felt about their Congressman.
Would you believe it? 46% had a favorable opinion of Kirk while 43% had an unfavorable opinion. According to Seals' own poll, KIRK IS WINNING DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY VOTERS!
Now that's a news story...
The only results that I know of are the ones that everyone knows. I can just infer my reasons by how it is obvious that there are things being left out
How embarrassing for Seals to release a poll showing Kirk leading among Democrats. His failed campaign manager, Mogge, should be let go for making such mistakes.
Harb
Did someone put up a link to that National Journal bit with Kirk's supposed lead among Democrats? I don't see this 46% favorability anywhere.
There's a difference between favorability and vote preference, BTW.
Sparticus- according to the Hot Race Hotline, the favorable/unfavorable marks for Kirk in the Seals poll were 36% favorable, 33% unfavorable, so I think your sources were off a tad. But, still, having Kirk come out ahead in favorability even among Hard D's is defintitely significant, and I'm a bit shocked that Seals owned up to it.
What Seals did not report, IF the question was asked (which we still do not know for sure), was the head-to-head Kirk vs. Seals numbers. While we've been arguing all day here and at Cap Fax Blog about whether Seals would have been likely to poll on this question, I would think that if you bother to ask the favorable/unfavorable question, the head-to-head is the next logical one, so why would you not ask it at that point?
Hopefully we will find out the definitive answer soon and leave all this speculation behind.
Perhaps the reason Seals left out the general election information is that he knows unless he is close to the margin of error he will get nothing from the DCCC and he has been telling everyone he has their backing. We know that is not true.
With so many open seat races with qualified Democrats like Dick Versasce and Debbie Halvorson, he will be lucky to get anything from the DCCC.
Footlik would not have made the mistake of releasing numbers showing Kirk was winning among Democrats. Dan Seals has a bad campaign team that already lost us once.
Herb
Wait a minute . . .We're spending time talking about a candidate running in the 10th who lives in the 9th and campaigns in the 8th? The sample size is a tipoff that something isn't quite right about this poll. I can't see using that large a sample for the 10th given a proper design. There is no indication as to rotating questions, how the design handled people who didn't answer the phone, and the confidence levels at which the poll numbers were measured. Those negative quetions by Shari and Herb sound like there were definate push poll elements, no matter how they repackaged them.
In short, this poll smells like last week's fish,and is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Agreed, Publia, but Footlik seems pretty silent. Is his strategy to just ignore it and hope it goes away, or wait a little and do his own poll, which will hopefully show better numbers? Time will tell.
Why is Jay Footlik running for Congress in the Tenth District of Illinois?And what has he ever accomplished besides introducing Monica Lewinsky to Bill Clinton? According to Lewinsky, it was Jay Footlik who helped her get her internship. http://a255.g.akamaitech.net/7/255/2422/16apr20041404/icreport.access.gpo.gov/hd105-311/vol4/tab21.pdf
According to his testimony to Ken Starr, he personally escorted her to a party at the West Wing where he facilitated an encounter with Bill Clinton. http://a255.g.akamaitech.net/7/255/2422/11may20041152/icreport.access.gpo.gov/hd105-316/1167-1170.pdf and http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5087/is_199810/ai_n18478684
He's a registered lobbyist from Washington, a job most people liken to pond scum. In fact, his firm was fired by the University of California at San Diego for charging $100 an hour for lunching with federal officials and congressional staffers, not notifying the university that they were registered lobbyists and failing to file articles of incorporation with the state of Virginia. http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2007/03/21/this_just_in/746dinovo.txt
Doesn't matter much that Jay helped Monica get the job. She was from a good California Democrat family who can't be faulted for failing to see how their political preference and liberal viewpoints would lead to the downfall of their very young and trusting (but very bad morals) daughter. The more facts that come out, the clearer it is that the district will again choose Kirk.
What has Jay Footlik being doing since 1998?
What does it mean to be a consultant "working for a secure peace in the Middle East?"
How does that qualify as foreign policy experience, any more than writing a blog?
He should be more specific on what he was doing if he's to have a shot at beating Seals.
Of course, it doesn't come close to measuring up to Kirk's experience before he was elected, much less since.
Post a Comment