Since we are covering this kind of topic these days, I thought it relevant that Boston voters are getting calls that, as the Globe puts it, are “floating negative messages against state Representative Martin J. Walsh.” The calls are from Braun Research, a New Jersey-based firm that John Connolly’s campaign paid $18,000 for polling services in July. As the article notes, “a call like this, one that polls on demographics and on strictly negative questions about one candidate, [is] a sign that a campaign may be gearing up for an attack against the opponent.”
[UPDATE]: Although the original post did not go into detail, I consider this a push poll rather than simply testing negative messages for reasons given by others in the comments below: (1) it’s coming too close to the election to allow much change in Connolly’s advertising; (2) the “messages” being tested are the kind Connolly could not include in advertising without risking serious backlash.
A sampling:
- “They asked recipients whether their votes would be affected if they learned that Walsh had filed legislation hurting the city’s finances, without specifying which bills were being discussed.”
- “They also pointed to Walsh’s past participation in the South Boston St. Patrick’s Day parade, which does not allow groups supporting gay rights to march. Both Walsh and Connolly previously marched in the parade, but have since distanced themselves from the event.”
- [UPDATE] The most egregious of all, a disingenuous allegation of racism not mentioned in the Globe article. As cannoneo explains in the comments below:
Leo Gosule, the grieving father who was the force behind the 2012 Melissa’s Law, has issued a statement condemning this push poll for insinuating Walsh backed a racist law.
“Rep. Marty Walsh voted in favor of the 3-strikes bill which will incarcerate hundreds of Blacks & Latinos.Will this make you less likely or very much less likely to vote for Walsh?”
(I know a lot of progressives say the same things about these kinds of laws, but this one was very carefully written–it’s main focus was limiting early parole after repeated violent crimes.)
Says Gosule: “It’s bad enough that Connolly voted the wrong way on this issue on the Boston City Council. But now his campaign is resorting to racial demagoguery on this issue, in a desperate attempt to gain minority votes.Shame on John Connolly.”
So we’ve got a couple of distortions of legislation peppered with despicable false allegations and one case of rank hypocrisy.
What does Connolly say about this? Not much:
While refusing comment on the matter Thursday, Connolly instead told the Globe: “We are not running a negative campaign. We are not going to run a negative campaign. And I will never run a negative campaign.”
Asked if his team could categorically deny involvement with the calls, Connolly replied: “I don’t know anything about the particular phone call you’re talking about.”
These calls themselves are either (1) Connolly breaking his pledge that he “will never run a negative campaign,” or (2) some outside group doing it on his behalf. As we all know, having an outside group criticize your opponent is a much bigger sin than basing your campaign on the demonization of public school teachers and organized labor, right?
and doesn’t answer the question. Look’s like it’s his campaign that’s conducting the push poll.
This is a campaign for Mayor, not a campaign for President. In a campaign for Mayor, Connolly should know about everything that is happening, including ads and polls. So, it damages his credibility when he claims that he doesn’t know anything about this push poll.
but I do hate these kind of polls, and it would have been much better for him to have said that he did not condone such polls and will make sure they stop immediately if they are happening.
I got a couple of push polls during the prelim. One of the was for Ross. I don’t remember who the other one was for, but it wasn’t Connolly.
Polling your negative messages is not the same as a push poll. The point of a push poll is to get the negative message out under the guise of a poll. You don’t ask for demographic data if all you care about is getting the message out. If Connolly is interested in what kinds of groups respond to what message, then it’s ‘just’ a messaging poll. A push poll is a fake poll. It sounds like this was at least a real poll that was done in preparation for some negative messaging in the next week.
Pollster.com defines a push poll as:
I agree message testing is often confused for push polling. But it is clear these are not messages so much as accusations.
Also, message testing doesn’t usually come 11 days before an election. Generally you message test with enough time to study the results, and adjust your message for mail and tv. That’s hard to do on short notice. Also, the things being said on these polls would never be said on mail or tv without serious backlash.
It might not technically be a push poll, but it feels an awful like that for the people who actually answer the poll. The danger with this kind of poll is that in the process of trying to see how people will respond to a negative message, you upset the sample of people you are polling from and ending up with people tweeting/posting their reaction.
Connolly has come out and said it was a message testing to 500 people. A push poll would not call that small of a sample. A push poll is not a poll at all, it just a negative attack. WCVB. Sorry guys the frothing can stop (it won’t) but it can stop.
After first carefully parsing his words, Connolly now admits that these polls were produced by a company that he’s paid $18,000. He now claims that they were message-testing, but these aren’t messages. As already pointed out, the words being used are actually accusations that are unlikely to be used by his campaign.
At any rate, it certainly ends Connolly’s claim that he isn’t running a negative campaign. He is clearly running a deceptive campaign.
but I don’t like any of the messages.
Why would you “message test” messages that you never in a million years would put on a mailer or tv ad? And especially why would you do that so close to election day, and immediately after you said you wouldn’t negative campaign?
I guess we can chalk this up to “John being John” or something.
For very small money you can, maybe, inject the poison into news cycle for a few days. Disrupt the other guy’s momentum. All with plausible deniability.
I’m not saying that’s the case here, but the other explanation—”testing” offensive, deceptive messages—makes less sense. (And you asked “Why would you”; there is a reason why you might.)
To me the issue is not only whether the National Institute of Polling would classify this as a push-poll. There’s also the question of the messages being “tested.” They’re false and disgusting, in the Willie Horton and Liz Warren heritage league.
Connolly’s going to claim Walsh, who led the fight to preserve marriage equality in the House, is anti-gay for marching in the Southie parade 10 years ago while Connolly’s out campaigning with Ed Flynn TODAY? Again, substance over process.
…to give on this. This is right on point.
Leo Gosule, the grieving father who was the force behind the 2012 Melissa’s Law, has issued a statement condemning this push poll for insinuating Walsh backed a racist law.
“Rep. Marty Walsh voted in favor of the 3-strikes bill
which will incarcerate hundreds of Blacks & Latinos.
Will this make you less likely or very much less likely
to vote for Walsh?”
(I know a lot of progressives say the same things about these kinds of laws, but this one was very carefully written–it’s main focus was limiting early parole after repeated violent crimes.)
Says Gosule: “It’s bad enough that Connolly voted the wrong way on this issue on the Boston City Council. But now his campaign is resorting to racial demagoguery on this issue, in a desperate attempt to gain minority votes.
Shame on John Connolly.”
Quoting the post:
Yes, it’s a push-poll. And, yes, Connolly said absolutely nothing about it. His acquiescence speaks volumes.
You should do a factbook post so we can get this on the twitter etc. Please.
attacking Connolly. FYI
There’s a difference between “negative” and “deceptive”. The mailer is accurate. It’s also transparent, in that it says who is paying for it. You might not like a negative statement about your candidate, but at least you know who is paying for it.
The push-poll is clearly deceptive. Besides involving false messages, it claims to be from a neutral polling source. Shame on you, Connolly!
Is that it lets the candidate who is benefiting say he had nothing to do with them and thus keep his “hands clean”. Its a slimy tactic.
You might not like the mailers, but they clearly indicate who is paying for them. So, you can tell that they are coming from Walsh’s supporters.
This push poll is totally different. It comes from a contractor, and there is no transparency. We don’t know who is paying for it. It’s clearly deceptive, in that it pretends that it is originating from an independent polling organization. It clearly is harmful to Walsh, but Connolly is carefully parsing his words when he talks about it. Doesn’t pass the smell test.
Yes, I know where the mailer is coming from, but I find it disgusting that the union is taking advantage of its outside status to throw mud on behalf of Walsh so that he can keep his hands clean. While I don’t entirely blame Walsh for this, because it is not clear that he is complicit. It is also clear that he isn’t trying all that hard to stop it. And he did not try at all to turn down the outside money when it was almost inevitable that this kind of thing would happen.
In any case, this kind of behavior does not make me feel all warm and fuzzy about unions.
You might be anti-union, but it’s silly to blame your view on mailers. And it’s silly to lump all unions together.
Let’s look at Emily’s List, as an example. In the recent congressional primary (MA05), Emily’s List produced a series of deceptive mailers for Katherine Clark. So, as a result, are you opposed to all organizations in the women’s movement?
I said no such thing. I just decry their tactics. The Emily’s list incident did not change my attitude towards promoting women political candidates, but it definitely did lower my opinion of Emily’s List as an organization.