Favorite

You’re voting for her? 

So I picked up the phone the other day and a woman presuming to be chatty told me she'd like to bother me for just a second with a couple of survey questions.

She appeared to be a live actual person, rather than a robot, and I grumbled “sure.”

So, John, she asked cheerily, did I consider myself a certain or merely probable voter in the forthcoming Democratic primary? Apparently she had benefit of voter information suggesting I'd be going “D” in the primary, though once I went “R.”

I said certain.

Well, then, John, she asked still cheerily, did I intend to cast my vote for U.S. Senate for Blanche Lincoln or Bill Halter?

Here I must tell you what I told her. You deserve to know. I said Lincoln. I did not do so cheerily. It's a bit of nose-holder.

At this point my surveyor identified herself as a representative of some nebulous outfit that favored Halter. Then she set out to enumerate several supposedly sinister assaults by Lincoln on the American worker.

After this litany by which Lincoln was made to seem quite horrible, my cheery surveyor asked if I still intended to vote for Lincoln or whether I might have changed my position to Halter.

“Still for Lincoln, now more than ever,” I said, and hung up.

This is an old tactic apparently becoming more common: Some group with a vested interest in a political race pretends to do an honest poll, but then, having you on the horn, switches the survey into outright direct advocacy for one candidate and harsh assault upon the other, then tries to “push” numbers in its favored direction by re-presenting the choice after it has had its incendiary say against the non-favored candidate.

There are four uses for such information: First, it gives you, via that first open-ended question, an honest idea where you stand. Second, it gives you a chance to attack the opposition in a way different from the television advertising that is more expensive and that people may be tuning out. Third, it gives you an idea of the effectiveness of the smears you have in mind against the other candidate. Fourth, via that encore presentation of the choice after the attack on the opponent, it gives you a shot at more favorable numbers that you can leak to the media and show potential contributors to demonstrate the
supposedly vibrant viability of your candidacy.

When Steve Womack says he has a poll showing him way out front in the Republican race for Congress in the 3rd District, laugh it off. When Jim Keet says he has a poll showing his defeat of Gov. Mike Beebe a doable proposition, laugh louder.

By the way: I'd like to announce that I have a poll showing my column to be the most widely read feature in this newspaper.

Alas, this is one of those times when I must long for the good ol' days.

Back before the everything-goes coverage of the Internet by which a candidate touting his own silly poll could get his assertion of vibrant viability regurgitated on a blog or a tweet, the newspapers simply would decline to take seriously any poll results asserted by candidates.

Yes, it was a better time, when responsible newspapers filtered your information.

The late, great Arkansas Gazette had a rule that we didn't report attacks by one candidate on another on the last day of campaigns. The thinking was that these would be sucker punches and that the candidate attacked might not have a sufficient and fair opportunity to counter a smear.

I asked a grumpy old editor whether we'd report a last-day shooting of one candidate by another. He said only as a short item in the police blotter.

Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by John Brummett

  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • Can we talk? Can we get anywhere?

    Dialogue is good. It would be even better if someone would venture off script every once in a while.
    • Sep 21, 2011
  • More »

Most Shared

Latest in John Brummett

  • Gone to the DoG

    We're now longer carrying John Brummett's column in this space.
    • Oct 12, 2011
  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

July

S M T W T F S
  1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31  

Most Viewed

  • Narrow opening for Arkansas Democrats

    "Somebody in this room — it's time to go big or go home." At the Democratic Party of Arkansas's Clinton Dinner last weekend, Gov. John Bel Edwards of Louisiana used his platform as keynote speaker to embolden a candidate to step up to run for governor against incumbent Republican Governor Hutchinson.
  • Head-shaking

    Another edition of so-much-bad-news-so-little space.
  • Buyer remorse

    Out here in flyover country, you can't hardly go by the feed store without running into a reporter doing one of those Wisdom of the Heartland stories.
  • Not Whitewater

    Just think: If Democrats had turned out 78,000 more votes in three states in November, people could be reveling today in the prospect of impeaching and convicting President Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, as some Republican lawmakers had promised to try to do if she won.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: Another Jesus

    • I always enjoy reading your articles Autumn. You keep being the caring person you are…

    • on July 26, 2017
  • Re: Another Jesus

    • Sorry, I have never written about Hillary Clinton's "blunders" in Benghazi. Since you call them…

    • on July 25, 2017
  • Re: Another Jesus

    • IBS, were you there in Benghazi to personally witness all of Hillary's blunders like you…

    • on July 23, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation