As much as I'd like to believe these results, without seeing the actual questions and the actual polling methodology, one has to treat them as interesting, but not particularly meaningful.

In fact, one of the huge red flags for interpreting the substance of polls such as this is when the poll taker releases analyses without the actual raw poll information, including the actual questions and all raw data. Polling represented and released in this matter, at this point in the campaign cycle, are typically part of the textbook challenger's electoral strategy of attempting to adjust media and voter expectations. (Which harkens back to my oft made, and mostly ignored, comment that casting a vote is by it's very nature amongst the most irrational decisions people make.)

At this point in the post-primary run-up to the general election, more than anything the challenger needs for the media to not write him or her off so that he or she will keep getting exposure to the voters in the media. And almost the only way to get the media to represent an average challenger as a serious competitor is to release "polling" which indicates the challenger is gaining ground, or at least holding his or her own, with voters.

Without seeing all the raw information, given the relative neutrality of these numbers and the fact this is such a standard campaign strategy another argument might be made: Brading's hopes appear to hinge almost entirely on the Republican base being disaffected enough that they turn out in lower than average numbers this fall, and that Democratic base being energized just enough to turn out in slightly higher than average numbers. While that is what we all need to hope and work for right now, the limited polling one can find in the public press suggests that right now disaffection is the more likely scenario.

I would think Blue Oregon, just as a matter of integrity if nothing else, would want to be careful to only take up discussion of substantive polling if the goal is to actually be instrumental in equipping progressives to regain some power in this state and country.

There is a burning in the belly for our state to get back on track and it can only happen if Minnis is defeated. Volunteer for Rob Brading, send your checks and if you know people living in that district talk to them about why it is essential that Minnis be defeated.

May I remind you folks that all things being equal if Brading is the only Democrat who wins because all energy went up to Dist. 49, there would still be a 32 GOP majority!

Marion County has some excellent challengers (Grisham, Garcia, Clem, Lee, Gilbert). If you really want a majority and not just deposing Queen Karen, the residents of counties other than Multnomah should be involved in their local campaigns. The order of those candidates is going south to north--I live near the boundary of Dist. 19 and 20.

Take a look at these websites and see some quality candidates who live down here near the state capital (once upon a time, most/all of these districts were Democratic districts).

http://briangrisham.com

http://conniegarcia2006.com/

http://www.brianclem.com/

http://www.charleslee2006.com/

We've got some lively campaigns going on down here. Go to Lee's site and read 2 stories ( from Newberg and Woodburn papers) about the infamous sign theft.

Are Republicans worried they are losing N. Marion County?

Undecideds usually break to the challenger, too.

Don't forget, if d's are majority she won't be speaker anyway - so get out there and volunteer for all d candidates!

Um...did anyone notice that Karen Minnis' approval ratings are higher than Ted's? Minnis 42% vs. Ted 35%.

Kari-

Right...the people that have Minnis on their November ballot (district 49) approve of her more than the voters (statewide) that will (not) be voting Ted. Ted is running for Governor and Karen is running as a state rep. I thought you knew that Kari ;)

Torrid-

Except that Ted’s approvals in PDX are abysmal (last time I checked the metro-region is still the population base). Ted's Portland numbers are even worse than his numbers in the "rest of the state". And his approvals among women have plummeted (even more important his disapprovals have skyrocketed). His disapprovals among older adults (read regular voters i.e. 55+) have skyrocketed. His approval among independent voters continues to drop (now 27%).

Check out the Historical Graphs (you can play with the crosstabs with the drop-down menu under "Track Points"

Tell me how he turns it around. 'Cause I don't see it.

FYI, looks like Bohan is inching closer in HD 27. Gained 17 in latest count in Washington County. Now at 77 votes difference best I can tell.

Bohan might be inching closer but he has to be within about 20 votes to force a recount (state law says 1/5 of 1%) unless he wants to pay for it. I'm looking at the #s and there is simply not the room left for him to make it up unless Washington County has A TON of ballots that didn't proccess correctly or something.

Having just said that, new numbers from Washington County make the HD 27 race like this:

Tobias Read-2730 Mike Bohan-2649

So we went from a 77 vote difference to an 81 vote lead for Read...

Posted by: torridjoe | May 19, 2006 8:19:32 AM

askq's--she DID provide the question text.

Um, no she didn't. Not really anyway. askq's point is well taken. In all the polling data released in this gubernatorial primary, did you ever read one where the pollster offered editorial language about the findings? No because numbers speak for themselves. I heard that this poll cost somewhere in the order of $11,000 and tested 400 people. There is no way a campaign would test that many voters (more than a typical gubernatorial sample size) without asking more questions, hence the $11,000 cost.

That's exactly why the "pollster" didn't reveal the questions or cross tabs, as the gubernatorial pollsters have. They asked about Minnis/Brading head to head yes. But only after they "educated" voters about the issues. This is why Democratic poll numbers for legislative races can't be trusted. Most are designed as push polls to sell fatcat contributors. Well Amy Simon hasn't convinced me of anything except that she knows how to take people's money and make them feel good about it.

There's more to an $11,000 poll than three pages with two questions. Without releasing the full list of questions this poll is nothing more than informed speculation. Besides, Karen Minnis has seen the worst of the assault and is still on top. Rob Brading isn't going to be the one to knock her off the hill.

And then there is this red herring.

Posted by: Charlie Burr | May 19, 2006 9:31:33 AM

The results of Tuesday's vote also point to Minnis weakness: Brading got more votes in the primary, and there appears to be more intensity on the Dem side.

Results: Brading: 2417 Minnis: 2307

This is a completely ridiculous argument as there is something like an 8% registration advantage for Democrats in this district, yet Brading didn't get 8% more votes than Minnis. If I were thinking of contributing serious cash to Brading's race, I'd wonder why this were the case.

I don't know what exactly Charlie Burr is referring to regarding intensity, but I would venture to say without having looked at the raw numbers in HD 49 that Democratic turnout was pretty piss poor for Brading to only be on top there by 117 votes. Yes, the "poll" numbers don't look good for Minnis. But polling and reality are two different things and the Primary Election results sure don't reflect the poll results.

Reality to the Brading bunch, with numbers like this, you're almost certainly not going to win.

No troll here. My statements were pretty to the point. Yes, Brading had more votes last time and he lost the general then.

2004 Primary Results KAREN MINNIS . . . . . . . . . 2,554 ROB BRADING. . . . . . . . . . 2,755

The margin has decreased in 2006. Despite what the "poll" said, her Republican base is not going south on Minnis. The numbers are down because there was not a presidential primary. As I said before, Brading will keep it competitive, but he will not win.

If you think the average live call poll is 600-800, you either have no idea what you're talking about or no idea how to keep a pollster out of your contributor's wallets. Either way, you should leave the polling up to the professionals. Like this one, this this one and this one.

Whatever you say. You're right and I'm wrong. But the links were to the Democratic poll that was done with 300 voters and a seperate poll done with 300 Republican voters.

You know, that pesky N=303 & N=310. Does that mean one poll or two? As you spent a decade in the mid 90s doing survey research on whether or not Ed McMahon is the right spokesperson for the Publisher's Clearinghouse sweepstakes, maybe you don't know the "N" means sample size. If your sample size was N=303, i'm not sure how you get 600 voters. Maybe you have to call 600 people to get 303 to answer your questions, but what do I know. I didn't spend a decade doing polling, thank goodness.

Regarding the presidential analogy, it was just to show that there was more voter interest in the 04 primary than the 06 and that's why both Brading and Minnis' numbers are down. Nothing more.

What was that line from Ocean's Eleven? I don't know about these four kings, but the ace is pretty high.

To Charlie Burr's point, I don't disagree with any of your last points. Yes, people are upset, but time heals all wounds. And grassroots works, but there's only so much love to spread around and with 7 house seats, 2 senate seats and the big chair in the middle to contend with, not to mention as many as 10 ballot measures, I'm not so sure it gets around. That's why I mentioned money earlier. Shoe leather can only introduce you to voters. Media reminds them of your conversation and Brading is going to need a hell of a lot of it to jog their memories.

I honestly don't believe there is the $250k to $300k out there that Brading needs to get it done. But I don't really know. Is Brading shown he can raise money? He's raised $50k in cash from the same sources over and over, 20% of which came from the Democratic campaign. And he's spent $24k on 4 pieces of mail. Did those 4 pieces of mail move Democratic numbers or turn out voters? Doesn't seem like it judging from the raw vote numbers (yes Torrid, raw numbers count in the end, like who receives more).

Six months and $1 million later (between Minnis/Brading), I believe Minnis squeaks it out 53-47 or 52-48. What a waste of money.

GreenHilly, Minnis spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign funds and ran TV ads before this poll was taken. She didn't do this before the 2004 primary election, btw. The fact that she had to run campaign ads to get this result is somewhat encouraging, don't you think?

Maybe if Jenni S. spent more time working instead of blogging, we wouldn't have to listen to her incessant whining about surviving on $28K a year.

Green is right, it's all about the math. Also, the premise of the poll is flawed, it's not a straight up head-to-head survey. As soon as the calls were made, reports came into the Minnis shop as to the "questions."

It was a PUSH POLL...after all sorts of negative questions were asked about Minnis (ie she hates gays, she's in the pocket of payday lenders, she shut down debate in the house, etc.) Brading STILL couldn't poll above Minnis.

I'm glad to see FuturePAC is still relying on the same strategy that's served them so well in the past. These "polls" had Pat Farr losing in '02, Chuck Burley losing in '04...brilliant.

Minnis will raise tons of cash, and she hasn't even laid a glove on Brading yet. All you blue types should focus on keeping the Governorship blue, because you're not going to make any headway in HD 49.

To quote the great Megatron, "It's OVER Prime!" The "poll" was bogus. Continue waisting resorces here...that's playing right into their hands.

BTW...the line from Ocean's eleven was "I don't know about four NINES, but the ACE is pretty good." Money...

Candidates will win or lose depending on what voters in the district think of them. I live in a district where there was once a St. Sen. race between 2 equally qualified candidates: both well known in the community, each had been state rep. in that Sen. district at one time.

The winner? It turned out to be the candidate who sent out FEWER mailers. Which is why the challenger this time said in his campaign kickoff speech "this election will be won on the ground, not in the mailbox".

I'm glad you're back to work Jenni...it still doesn't change the fact that you've been complaining on this blog over the last year that you're low income...we've all heard it, enough already.

Second, there have indeed been advocacy calls on behalf of Minnis that have been put into the district, but they've been in repsonse to lies that have been spread by the Democrats (you) and Brading. The fact is the latest "poll" being spread by blueoregon is really a push poll being pawned off as a real survey when in fact it's anything but that.

Funny thing is that the results of the "poll" don't bode well for Mr. Brading...stop trying to sell your wares here. Screw around too much wasting resources in HD 49 when you're poised to lose the Governorship, and all those courageous little troopers going door to door will loose a lot more. Merkley and short-boy Isaccs should be smarter than that...but then again, they don't know any better....

Re: Charlie Burr's question on the last Oregon presidential primary where the race was still competitive. Might be as far back as the 1980 Carter vs Ted Kennedy race.

Elsewhere, Rob Brading has opportunity to splinter off some of Minnis' fundamentalist Christian support  I saw first-hand in the 2005 legislative session, that Minnis was the cat's paw for big booze and big tobacco.  That contradicts many conservative Christian tenets, and will hopefully make some fundamentalists reflect a little more in making their choice.

Mark Kirchmeier, former North Portland legislative candidate

Re: Charlie Burr's question on the last Oregon presidential primary where the race was still competitive. Might be as far back as the 1980 Carter vs Ted Kennedy race.

Mark, you may be right, but you may remember how hotly contested the 1984 primary was for Democrats, with one candidate coming to the state (insurgent candidate who won by about 59%) and the candidate of the establishment doing more poorly than expected. Thus there were Oregonians who under normal circumstances would never have been convention delegates who had that experience because of the primary upset.

As I recall, Mark was a journalist back then. And as one of those 1984 delegates, I thought he wrote the best account of the convention.

". . . Rob Brading has opportunity to splinter off some of Minnis' fundamentalist Christian support . . ."

Are you kidding? A disaffected Fundamentalist in Wood Village (all four of them) would more likely cast an undervote than actually vote for Brading, who did not win a single precinct in his last race in HD49.

Minnis owns the M36 crowd, which obviously is not all Fundamentalist Christians. But the 2004 results are insightful. M36 passed in HD49 by 15,307 (62.8%) to 9,064 (37.2%). Minnis strongly supported M36; thus she was aligned with the majority of her district on that issue, placed on the ballot primarily by her allies up on Rocky Butte.

Interestingly, next door in HD47, M36 also passed 16,309 (62.2%) to 9,913 (37.8%). Yet, Jeff Merkley opposed M36 and is strongly backed by BRO. I would not be surprised to see the McCain camp try to exploit those numbers in HD47.

If Brading topples Minnis, it won't be because he won the hearts and minds of Right-wing Christians. It will be because he won back those Dem's, a large number of whom must have voted for M36 in 2004, who keep returning Minnis to Salem.

• Wes

"Brading . . . did not win a single precinct in his last race in HD49."

My mistake. He won precinct 5871 by 903 to 654. Brading did his best in those western precincts bordering HD47, while Minnis was clearly strongest farther east, especially into Troutdale.

• Wes

Rob Brading is great, and its likely that many of us on Blue Oregon will work and donate to support Rob. But let's remember, unless we win in several other races as well, we'll just have Wayne Scott instead. I was out in Canby last week. I saw at least 60 Wayne Scott lawn signs, and not one sign for his Democratic challanger. Frankly, I don't see the difference between he and Minnis, except that the registration numbers tell us that Minnis is the more beatable. But in Salem, they seem to work hand-in-hand. Am I wrong here?

We've got a lot of close races and they need our work. It worries me sometimes how much time some of us spend reading and writing here and elsewhere...and therefore discussing polling rather than affecting voting. Fifty hearty souls showed up with the Bus Project to work the three races in Washington County this weekend.

But it's going to take that many every weekend, in every major population center in the state, as well lots of week nights of walking or phoning if we're going to win the votes. It's time we each ask ourselves to make a commitment: how many evenings or weekends shifts we're going to work with a candidate to accomplish the demise of the House Republicans between now and November 2. Maybe if we write our commitments here, we'll follow through.

[off-topic comment deleted. -editor.]

[off-topic comment deleted. -editor.]

[off-topic comment deleted. -editor.]