To repeat something I said in another thread, I've taken all the polls up to this point with a grain of salt, because until just now, Merkley has yet to run any ads, and he's sitting on a pile of cash that's bigger than Novick's. In the meantime, Novick's put out a couple clever ads that have given him some name rec and the poll numbers (and donors) that come with that.

While I understand the rationalizations for this poll, it seems ambitious and reckless for Merkley to initiate state-wide advertising just 6 weeks prior to the primary. This poll does reflect name recognition, but you'd think that the Merkley campaign would realize that real voters (as opposed to the establishment Dems) don't know who he is and that they would try to tackle that problem earlier without the election looming.

While an ad campaign will help with this, the particular ad he has chosen essentially says, "Hey, I'm Jeff Merkley and I am a Democrat." It's not going to help people remember his name.

Thank you bdunn. I also have questions when I look at the crosstabs.

• If 87% of voters are white, 7% hispanic, and 5% asian... that's 99%. Sure, Oregon has a lower percentage of blacks than the country, but blacks plus native americans plus "other" is under 1%? In a Democratic primary? (When Obama is on the ballot?) This doesn't smell right.

• According to the poll, 70% of voters said they had their minds made up. Of the 70% who have made up their mind, 37% said they were undecided. Does this make any sense at all?

It upsets me that the current trend in politics is to dismiss bad news as trivial, inconsequential, or illegitimate. This survey (even if one wants to argue its imperfection) is by no means lethal for the Merkley campaign, but nut up and acknowledge that its not good news. This is in line with Clinton calling Richardson's endorsement of Obama meaningless. Its fine to spin bad news, but don't be dishonest about it. Better yet, don't spin it at all and just show us how much integrity you have and be a straight shooter.

Boy the innumerate are out in force

"According to the poll, 70% of voters said they had their minds made up. Of the 70% who have made up their mind, 37% said they were undecided."

What the crosstab actually says is the poll asked a question designed to test if some of those who are undecided actually are decided, first, and whether some of those who act as if they claim to be undecided because they believe it indicates to others that they have an "open-mind" actually don't.

"597 voters surveyed in an automated poll..hmmm."

Cryptic comments which on the face indicate ignorance about the science of pollings really are failed attempt to cover up plain ignorance.

"Oregon has a lower percentage of blacks than the country, but blacks plus native americans plus "other" is under 1%? In a Democratic primary?"

This seeming intelligent comment indicates a fundamental lack of knowledge about how statistical sampling works and how unknown votes from those segments are reflected in the margin of error. The only valid question, and it is unanswered in the crosstabs, is whether the sampling protocol representatively included phone exchanges where African-Americans and Native Americans live. A bigger question, though, is whether the population reachable by land-lines these days is representative of the population as a whole.

i'm not a poll expert by any means, and there is a good reason to take this poll with a grain of salt (specifically, 40% of voters are undecided). that said, i learned a painful lesson in the 2004 presidential race; an exceptional amount of energy, especially on dkos, was devoted to digging into the internals of poll after poll showing another bush lead to explain how it was actually a tie or a win for kerry. it was always very "reassuring", but a lot of good it did, and it really felt horrible the day after the election because i was so unprepared for the loss.

i am not saying that this poll is very important, or that merkley is going to lose (though i obviously think he might, since i am a novick supporter). just offering the words of advice that when you find yourself trying to explain away unfavorable polls, do yourself a favor and find something more productive to do.

This poll means two things

A) Novick is doing a much better job campaigning than Merkley to this hour and

B) With that many undecided voters, means that no one really cares about this race at this point which also means that the candidates messages and styles really haven't been tested yet.

For the rest of the way in my opinion, the road looks like this,

Novick MUST temper his style at least a little to viewed as electable, a word that I detest but I think that in this race is important. His firebrand style is his strength. It could also be his weakness.

Merkley MUST show more personality. This is why Novick is ahead right now. Merkley is clearly an experienced and able legislator regardless of what Novick supporters may think. But Jeff, your running in Oregon home of Keep Portland Weird!

Hilary Clinton is running on her experience and look where that has gotten her.

PRD: "What the crosstab actually says is the poll asked a question designed to test if some of those who are undecided actually are decided, first, and whether some of those who act as if they claim to be undecided because they believe it indicates to others that they have an "open-mind" actually don't."

I can't tell if this was a joke or an attempt at a serious explanation.

Merkley MUST show more personality. This is why Novick is ahead right now.

Very astute observation. In a year when Obama is driving record voter turnout (and appears to be on track to win big in Oregon), the electorate is giving the edge to candidates who can inspire. Novick's ads, while humorous, were also inspirational, and clearly did wonders for his name recognition.

Merkley's first TV spot is astoundingly generic. You could substitute "Hillary Clinton" for "Jeff Merkley" and end up with the same ad.

If he's buying TV time with that spot, he's tossing his money down the drain at best, and at worst, reminding voters he's another interchangeable politician, running against an inspirational outsider.

paul, the question is whether you are trying to point out wording in a comment which can be taken a couple of ways, or if you are trying to take advantage of ambiguous wording to dispute what you should know is the point. Wording detailed concepts to a lay audience that thinks they know a lot is always tricky. I don't know if your paul gronke, erstwhile poli sci professor or not, but let me break it down for you.

On the surface, people can interpret the words in poll question such as "undecided" in multiple ways. Beyond that, a lot of people believe they seem smarter or more critical, or the questioner will think better of them if they say they are "undecided". A good poll will ask multiple questions about whether someone actually is undecidable, and therefore persuadable, or not.

So my first comment was that the poll at one point asked flat out if someone was undecided. Taking the crosstabs at face value and that Survey USA isn't a complete joke as a polling company, the poll than also asked how likely someone was to change their mind. Those who answered they weren't are likely to change their mind are more likely to be unpersuadable in part because they probably have already made a choice and just didn't want to share it.

My second point is that a percentage of those who say they are undecided and who actually are, just don't want to say that because they want to appear careful and deliberate, not making a choice until all the facts are in. Some of those, of course, just want to make sure they are voting for the winning team. By asking how likely people are to change their mind, even if they are undecided, you get an idea of how many are persuadable, regardless of the reason, from those who aren't.

Your comment paul besides juvenile snarking unbefitting a professor, if you are paul gronke?

So, the entire Senate campaign comes down to lawn signs in Portland?

The opinions of the rest of the state don't matter if there aren't a competitive number of Merkley signs in Portland?

There are, according to the poll, 40% undecided. Are these people really going to be convinced to vote for either Steve or Jeff by lawn signs and polls?

PRD: "Your comment paul besides juvenile snarking unbefitting a professor, if you are paul gronke?"

I'm not.

Your initial post was insulting and condescending, implying that anyone who questioned the poll results or disagreed with your interpretation was "innumerate" and showed a "plain ignorance" and a "fundamental lack of knowledge." Forgive me for being confused about why your unintelligible post didn't match your professed expertise. I understand how polls work, I understand why pollsters ask multiple questions to see if people truly are undecided or how persuadable they are, I understand statistical sampling, and I understand how to read crosstabs -- and whether it was poor wording or typos your original statement still makes no sense.

There are plenty of good reasons to be skeptical of these poll results, and you have not explained them away.

And to think that Kari mocked me as to why there had been no posts when Candy Neville announced. hahaha

Oh and Schumer, get out of my state. We'll accept DSCC money AFTER WE THE PEOPLE select our challenger for Smith.

Out Schumer.

I can't say that I've ever voted for someone based on the number of lawn signs, though I particularly like Teddy Keizer's lawn sign. Too bad I don't live in his precinct.

I'd like to say Way to Go Candy Neville!

Two months ago, polls were 70% undecided with Novick showing a slight lead. Now, polls are 40% undecided with Novick ahead by a decent percentage. That's pretty good.

Still the majority of the electorate isn't paying attention yet, and the barrage of TV ads is going to help those 40% make up their minds. It's all going to come down to good creative, big ad buys and the voter's pamphlet.

I'm hopeful that Steve wins the primary, but if Jeff wins, I'll do everything I can to get Gordo out, and Merkley in.

It's how I feel about the Presidential campaign too. We have two strong democratic candidates who will do a GREAT JOB. I hope Obama takes it, but if Hillary does, I'll do my part to get her elected.

LT: So, the entire Senate campaign comes down to lawn signs in Portland?

The opinions of the rest of the state don't matter if there aren't a competitive number of Merkley signs in Portland?

Blah, blah blah

Are you for real? Of course lawn signs are not dispositive to this race. Jamais Vu did not say that and for you to insinuate that she has is either disingenuous or just silly. I am fairly confident the point was (and Jamais feel free to correct me if I am wrong) that a wide discrepancy in lawn signs, while trivial in and of itself, is often times indicative of one campaign being badly outmatched in energy, excitement, and grassroots activism.

The Merkley crowd -- or as this poll suggests, gathering -- are engaging in a rather simple game of label and dismiss:

Posted by: bdunn | Apr 8, 2008 2:18:23 AM I know Im a Merkley supporter and I usually like SUSA's work but this poll just doesn't feel right.

'Yes, not this time, I disagree with the results.'

Posted by: paulie | Apr 8, 2008 6:54:57 AM 597 voters surveyed in an automated poll..hmmm.

Paulie uses seeds of doubt. It fails.

Posted by: Ben | Apr 8, 2008 8:39:42 AM Yup, agreed! That's why Jeff's new commercial, its related ad buy, and the debate wins can go a long way to raising his name ID and eating into that undecided electorate.

This poll is all messed up because we're not running ads. Screw this poll.

LOL!

Bottom line: Steve is running a fantastic campaign. Merkley isn't.

Lisa Grove said it best in the Portland Tribune, back in August: “He’s authentic,” says Portland pollster Lisa Grove, a longtime friend of Novick. “Voters are sick of hair-sprayed candidates, and this bland-platitudes stuff,” she says.

“This is a very change-oriented electorate,” Grove says. “And if he’s not the face of change, I don’t know what is.”

People understand that Steve is brilliant, hard working and a leader on issues. Merkely is a manufactured candidate, maybe with a good heart and well intentioned, but doesn't take risks. Merkley wasn't the 1st, nor the 2nd, nor the 3rd, nor the 4th, nor the 5th, nor even the 6th, or 7th pick to take on Smith. (DeFazio, Kitzhaber, Castillo, Blumenhaurer, Bradbury, Edwards, Gardner were all much, much higher on the list)

Merkley got the nod from the "out-of'-towners" i.e. Schumer, who seemingly thought, incorrectly, that "just throw a little money to Merkley and this Novick guy will go away."

A poll is a poll. It's a snapshot, but this snapshot is revealing. GO STEVE!

Stephanie V: This post was the second post for all of last night, and the third post for all of the morning. It sat on top of a whole lot of posts that came out in one fell swoop last evening. If there's anything that's being hidden, it's whatever came right before that batch last evening. I think you're being a little paranoid.

I'm not partial to "this doesn't feel right because this or that crosstab is curious" arguments. But there's no arguing with the fact that Novick has more name ID because he's been advertising. And there's no arguing with the fact that Merkley just started advertising and has a pile of money. The takeaway is that these numbers are changing as of yesterday, and that nobody should be excited with 23, 12 or 11 percent.

"LT, I don't know how the "boots on the ground" campaign looks out your way--why don't you tell us?"

In my neighborhood, there is one Novick sign and one car with a Merkley bumper sticker. Period. Little if anything else on any streets where I regularly drive.

I know a few people in the next county over who actively support Novick. One Obama enthusiast who I have known for years guesses she supports Novick but couldn't believe the smart Steve Novick she admires would do the beer commercial.

Most people I know are more interested in either presidential or legislative races (some really interesting legislative candidates here this year).

But I have to disagree with those who say Merkley is a "manufactured" candidate. Yes, he has support from out of state. So what? Novick would do well to try cultivating more out of state ties (and $$$), especially if he thinks he has a real shot at squaring off against Smith. (There's a short game and long game, in the campaign and both campaigns need to tool up for both the primary AND the general.)

So you are implying that the DSCC will not support our nominee? Then Schumer is even more of an ass than I thought.

Out of my state until 5/21, Schumer.

Matt Cantor didn't do the Merkley campaign any favors on the Katu news report.

Matt: The poll is wrong. Reporter: Can we see your polls? Matt: No.

You can see it here: katu story

Matt Cantor didn't do the Merkley campaign any favors on the Katu news report.

Matt: The poll is wrong. Reporter: Can we see your polls? Matt: No.

You can see it here: katu story

Wow! That clip of Matt Cantor is hillllllarious. Someone should post a pic of Matt's frozen face when she asks him for his polling number. ROTFLMAO

From the "Agree to Disagree" topic:

Posted by: Runtmg | Apr 8, 2008 12:43:05 PM

Karol, wonderful post, I feel exactly the same way. These candidates are not perfect, your closing line though is. What do we give up? With how hard Merkley and Novick punchers are hitting each other right now, will we be too beat up to go forward in the general election? Cause that is where we are going.

Posted by: karol | Apr 8, 2008 2:26:20 PM

Thanks Runtmg. I watched the City Club debate as well and did not feel swayed in either direction. I wonder what that means for other folks.

Blue Oregon, and particularly Mr. Chisholm, have done a commendable job at ensuring that this site pushes hard for Merkley while appearing to be even-handed. This rapidly falling post is one example of that. Good job guys -- you work hard for your money!

The conventional wisdom has it that undecided voters usually break for the challenger. While there is no official challenger in this race, per se, one might assume that Merkley, as the annointed machine politician, is effectively the "incumbent", while the more unorthodox Novick is the challenger.

"Merkley, as the annointed machine politician, is effectively the "incumbent",

assumes that the 40% undecided in that poll, and the folks who change their registration to Dem (perhaps to vote for Obama) even recognize the names Merkley and Novick, much less know that Merkley is Speaker and thus considered "establishment".

Believe it or not, there actually are voters who don't care much for acerbic candidates.

"Believe it or not, there actually are voters who don't care much for acerbic candidates."

LT,

Would you please just declare that you support Merkley? It would feel so much better to have this be an open conversation instead of being lectured.

Thanks.

So you are implying that the DSCC will not support our nominee?

That's right. The DSCC is not under any obligation to support any candidate.

They've got limited money, and they'll spend it where they think it will make a difference. There are 23 seats up this year, and Democrats are running strong candidates in 17 of them. There are ten seats strongly in play (including Oregon).

If the polling shows that our candidate - either Merkley or Novick - can't beat Smith, then the money will go somewhere else. (Ask Bill Bradbury.)

The clear implication from their support of Merkley and lack of support for Novick is that they have clear and unambiguous numbers that show Merkley with a shot at beating Smith - while Novick can't beat Smith, regardless of the resources.

That may not be accurate, but it's clearly what they believe to be true. And they're within their rights to act on that belief.

Hawthorne, I did on another topic. I am not an unconditional supporter of Merkley, just someone disappointed that Steve's campaign did not live up to his potential. I'm not the only one unimpressed with the beer ad, or who thinks Steve could have asked more intelligent questions, used a positive approach (like his dynamite poverty video), etc.

But gee, if I don't think Steve is running the best campaign ever, I must be part of the Merkley campaign?

Steve Duin's column awhile back that humor serves Novick better than anger is something I agree with.

I DO NOT support everything Merkley has ever done.

I DON'T disagree with everything Steve has ever said.

I am one of those not impressed with the beer ad or Left Hook Lager, and if the Merkley ad is vanilla, then I am a person less likely to consider that an insult. I don't eat hot spicy food, but I am supposed to like the acerbic candidate over the vanilla candidate? Because otherwise I am one of those awful Merkley people who doesn't see Steve as the greatest candidate ever?

The people I know who are not overly political who are changing their registration this year to vote in the Democratic primary (incl. one who just did today to vote for Obama, and another who has read one of Obama's books) are more "vanilla" than probably a lot of people here. Also of an older generation.

Now, if that makes me offensive to Novick supporters, let me also tell you I have known Steve longer than I have known Jeff. He and I have argued over the years. A young friend I took to hear him speak to get a fresh perspective (someone who had never heard of him before) was not overly impressed. Does that make my young friend a Merkley supporter?

Mike is rightThe race will go to the candidate with the ability to attract that 40%, not the candidate with the strongest base.

Think very hard about anyone you know who is not politically active, not a blogger or otherwise intensely involved in this debate. Might they register Dem. if not already? Would you be able to convince them to vote for Steve if they are in that 40% undecided ? How would you do that--by saying the guy with the hard left hook will be a great replacement for Gordon Smith? What if they say "give me 3 reasons" and they don't agree with what you say?

Folks, let's imagine for a moment that Steve wins--maybe 51%, maybe closer, maybe even a recount (although having lived through a statewide recount, I wouldn't wish that on anyone).

Those of you who are avid Novick fans should start thinking about what you do around Memorial Day. If it is a recount, it probably won't be decided until June. If it is close but a Novick win, then you have to find a way to win over people who voted for Merkley, or convince those who aren't registered Dem to vote for him in the fall.

Do you really believe those folks who supported Merkley will pivot on a dime and say "Yeah, Gordon Smith is so bad I will donate all my spare time to Novick's campaign"? That they will say there is no more important election--not Congress, not President, not a legislative race or something else?

Or is it possible that people who have been told things like "Are you for real? "

"Someone should post a pic of Matt's frozen face when she asks him for his polling number"

"have this be an open conversation instead of being lectured"

"those who say Merkley is a "manufactured" candidate"

will decide that the legislative race or the Congressional race or whatever are a better use of their time?

Am I just wasting my time typing for those who think Steve will win overwhelmingly and anyone who was not impressed by the primary will forget all that by July?

Actually, what I asked for was for you to stop lecturing. In your parlance, "do you think that will convince me of your way of thinking?"

Clearly you have a ton of experience and perspective to share. I appreciate your critiques. I would appreciate a bit less talking down to.

And FWIW, I am not a die hard Novick supporter.

Sorry. I know these very nice people at church. Also this older gentleman in the neighborhood who hasn't been interested in politics until now but recently he re-registered so he could vote for Obama in the primary.

The husband in the nice couple in church has read one of Obama's books. These are people who don't drink alcohol and who are very mild mannered retired people.

I am not sure when they re-register Dem (recently asked me how to do that) and see the Dem. voters pamphlet if they will think of Jeff as the "establishment" candidate or if they will be impressed that he is Speaker of the House. If they ask me what I know about both men, I will say I think it would be great if the Speaker of the House runs against the former Oregon Sen.Pres., as there goes the "experience" card. I will tell them I have known Steve for years and agree with the Duin column that humor helps Novick more than anger.

That is a very specific story relating to my own life. I hope you don't consider that "talking down" to anyone.

<hr/>