Paul Gallegos, at least so far, in the race for District Attorney. Interesting indeed, according to this story in the Eureka Reporter, that Gallegos has outraised Dikeman in the first reporting period with Gallegos bringing in $32,258 in monetary contributions to Dikeman's $13,505.
Even more interesting is where Paul "Vote Local Control" Gallegos' largest contributions came from: $10,000 from some "retired NEW MEXICO resident"(???) and $5000 from some "retired BERKELEY resident"(???). Oh, I guess that's ok. Those are people, not corporations, right?
Worth Dikeman's largest contributions were local.
************
Jerry Partain had a commentary that dealt a little with the Gallegos campaign in today's ER. He tells of his daughter getting a phone call. The caller was from out of the area doing one of those "push polls" on behalf of the Gallegos campaign. Push polls are those polls where they ask loaded questions to set you up for their sales pitch.
While the phone calls from outside the area for a local campaign seemed to raise concerns with Jerry Partain, I was more interested in why they would ask his daughter how she felt about Rob Arkley. Hmm... I mentioned before I wondered if the Arkleys would be backing Gallegos again as they did last time around. So far I haven't heard anything in regards to that.
So what were they going to ask her that involved Arkley? Too bad she hung up on the caller. I can't help but wonder if they had it set up with two possible answers:
If the girl said she felt ok with the Arkleys, the caller could then say how the Arkleys supported Gallegos' last run for the D.A.'s office. If she said she thought the Arkleys were greedy, rich people, the caller could then say that Gallegos opposes the Arkley's Marina Center proposal, or some such. I could be wrong on that. That's just my guess.
I never hang up on those political push poll type calls. There's often interesting info that can be gleaned from them. Again, it's too bad Jerry's daughter ended the phone call prematurely. Anyone else get one of those calls from the Gallegos campaign? If so, please do tell us how it went and what exactly the questions about Arkley were about.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:06 AM
52 Comments:
At 10:27 AM, Rose said...
So-o-o-o-o-o - I am just wondering - - - -How can you be AGAINST outside CORPORATE influence, and then PAY BIG BUCKS for a push poll by AN OUTSIDE CORPORATION?At 10:37 AM, Anonymous said...
That push poll is being conducted by a large non-local corporation, Pacific Crest Research.
Pacific Crest Research has a record of doing exactly what you said, Fred - using Push Polls to attempt to influence, not measure, public opinion. A Push Poll is a particularly nasty little tool.
In this particular poll, they ask several times throughout the approximately 35 minute session - "if the election were held today, who would you vote for - Paul or Dikeman?" Then several times they say "OK - I'm giving you a second chance - if the election were held today..." - then "Last Chance, if the election were held today..."
They also define "Progressive" as "mainstream."
Here are some links to give you more information about Pacific Crest Research. (Paul's campaign disclosure, according to a story in the ER today lists payment to Bellavia Research (could that be these guys? Bellavia Research Institute on Addictions), not Pacific Crest Research.
Here's one piece of info on Pacific Crest Research... http://www.morankikerbrown.com/CM/Articles/EVIDENCE%20ELIMINATOR%20CASE.pdf#search='Pacific%20Crest%20Research'
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 (PDF)
... Pacific Crest Research Corporation, which is named as a co-defendant ...
www.morankikerbrown.com/CM/Articles/EVIDENCE ELIMINATOR CASE.pdf - 114k - View as html - More from this site - Save
Matthew Hewitt, incorporated and operates PACIFIC CREST RESEARCH CORPORATION
Essentially - When being sued in Federal Court, the guy destroyed evidence when ordered to produce his original hard drive, he erased it - they caught him at it, and struck his statement, and entered a default judgment against him...
Here's another where Pacifc Crest is working for a big developer:
http://www.brooklynpapers.com/html/issues/_vol28/28_13/28_13nets1.html
Pollsters push Ratner arena
"...Hagan, who has spoken out against Atlantic Yards since she first heard of Ratner’s plans for the mega-development just blocks from her home, said several of the questions featured “leading” or inaccurate and biased language, a key feature of “push polling.” Push polling attempts to influence — rather than measure — public opinion — by using questions worded in a manner intended to spread information that is often incorrect about people and positions that run counter to the position of the poll’s client."
The push poller identified himself as being from Pacific Crest Research out of Oakland. Non-local Corporation!At 10:43 AM, Anonymous said...
check them out there are articles about them
or just google them.
The questions were very inaccurate and biased The poller seemed to be trying to influence " rather than measure my opinion. The questions had misinformation and seemed intended to spread misinformation about Gallegos's poor record. They also were designed to spread misinformation to malign Mr. Dikeman.
Generally, anyone with ethics would never stoop so low. Guess that is why Gallegos and Salzman chose them.
And yes Fred - I have ALL OF THE QUESTIONS.
If Gallegos were in touch with the local community, he would not need to hire pollsters to find out how they feel.At 10:56 AM, Rose said...
This is not about finding out how people feel about him, its about misinforming and misleading people---but hey, isn't that what the past grand jury foreperson (Marlow) accused him of in a letter to a judge. At least that is what was in the Times Standard article I read.
Fred, I just sent you a list of the question. While quickly scribbled it is a pretty accurate rendition of the session.At 11:05 AM, Anonymous said...
In the questions you can see what Gallegos hopes people will get out of it - particularly interesting is the notion that he has brought innovative new programs (new focus) to the DA's office, and that this appears to mean 'Homeless Court' and 'Drug Treatment on Demand.'
While it may be that he wants to take credit for it - to my knowledge Paul did not think up Homeless Court; it is something that is done in other parts of the state, and a defense attorney in the Alternate Conflict Counsel Office had more to do with it than anyone else locally.
Regarding Drug Treatment on Demand - The voters passed "Prop. 36," which requires drug treatment for possessory offenses, absent limited other circumstances. So, by law defendants must receive drug treatment in many instances.
The way I see it - Paul's handlers are weaving a fairy tale around him, wrapping him in the flag and making claims like these.
"Local Control"?At 11:06 AM, Rose said...
Gallegos hires out of area corporation for polling and takes out of area contributions. How surprising that once again Gallegos is speaking out of both side of his arse.
Here are the questions: (note scribbled during the call, caught the gist of it)At 11:27 AM, Fred said...
Regarding Paul
Rank: Strongly agree, somewhat agree, Somewhat disagree, Strongly disagree
1. Violent crime has gone down while Paul is in office.
2. Politics have become unnecessarily negative
3 Non-local corporations should be prohibited from contributing to political races
4. As top law enforcement official the DA should be independent from the cops
5. We should protect the environment
6. Recall wrong?
7. Community is safer today than it was 4 years ago
8. Do you believe that crime can be prevented through drug treatment?
9. Humboldt County is too Progressive? (he defined it as mainstream when questioned)
10. DAs job to manage the office but also to prosecute
11. Regarding people and associations (positive or negative)
DDA Dikeman
Eureka Police Department
DA Paul Gallegos
Palco
Rob Arkley
Terry Farmer
12. Rate how the DA is doing his job - excellent good fair poor
13. Who do you support in the DAs race
14. How did you vote in the Recall for or against?
15. Paul has done his job since then - agree or not?
16. Statements Paul makes in the DAs race:
Leadership of the Da
No one is above the Law (Palco or tree-sitters equal)
Paul prosecutes cases unlike his predecessor
Paul brings a fresh perspective
As father of 3 young kids, Paul cares about quality of life
Under budget cuts, does more with less
More criminals going to jail now
New focus - drug court and drug treatment on demand
Taking old index cards and computerizing the information, modernizing the office
AG stats, lowest crime rate under Paul
If election held today, Dikeman or Gallegos (second chance)
Statements against Paul by Dikeman
Victim Witness
Salzman tarnished his image
Paul has a poor relationship with law enforcement
PL lawsuit a waste of time?
Grand Jury report hurt him, yes or no?
Fraud lawsuit proved Paul had an environmentalist's agenda?
Too much time in court, not enough managing the office
Unprecedented # of DAs left the office
Statements supporting Dikeman
Dikeman knows what the office needs (because he has had three years under Paul)
Dikeman work for restoration and stability in the office
Bring back experienced prosecutors
Restoration of stability seen under Farmer
Dikeman likely to be endorsed by EPD and other law enforcement
Leadership necessary to manage the office
More aggressive at prosecuting pot than Gallegos
Focus on violent crime, not white collar crime
Statements against Dikeman
showed unethical behavior by playing tape at press conference
if elected he will direct resources away from violent crime prosecution
to aggressively going after small medical marijuana grows
incorrect crime statistics released by Dikeman - is that a negative?
same people backing Dikeman that backed the Recall
Dikeman's poor prosecution record high number of trials lost
Dikeman elected, office will stop innovative new programs developed under Paul
Dikeman elected return to good old boy network
# of years you have lived in Humboldt Co?
Employed?
Political persuasion conservative, slightly conservative, progressive or liberal?
Thanks for the updates, all.At 11:35 AM, Anonymous said...
They asked,"Political persuasion conservative, slightly conservative, progressive or liberal?".
What...libertarian wasn't a choice?
Doesn't Libertarian encompass all, Fred?At 12:08 PM, Fred said...
I guess that depends how you look at it, 1135. I like to think libertarians are in their own separate category.At 12:33 PM, Rose said...
BTW, all; I still wonder why they brought up Arkley in their questionnaire? How are they planning to use that info in regards to Arkley?
Because Salzman is at war with Arkley.At 12:39 PM, Anonymous said...
How do you know it was a poll done by Gallegos?At 12:41 PM, Anonymous said...
There have been polls in the past that played this game of looking like one camp and actually being the other to create the controversy.At 12:47 PM, Anonymous said...
BTW - I don't believe there are any polling businesses in Humboldt.
For instance, there was a poll done during the Calpine / LNG saga that sounded like it was done by the anti-LNG folks and it was certainly not.At 1:00 PM, Fred said...
Just from the looks of the campaign finance reports, I wouldn't think Dikeman would have the money to pay for a poll.At 1:03 PM, Anonymous said...
Of course, it could always be some unknown benefactor that paid for his or her own poll.
Yes, and that happened in Kerrigan's campaign.At 1:13 PM, Anonymous said...
Gallegos' statement that the ER used for its article shows approximately 5000$ for polling to a place called "Bellavia Research". I checked the phone book and there is no such business listed.At 2:05 PM, Anonymous said...
My call on the Arkely question is if the person is anti arkley then the follow up would be "Paul is against the balloon tract" and if it pro-Arkley then the response is "Paul is supported by Arkley." This has got Salzman written all over it.
At 2:03 PM, Fred said...
That's what I was guessing, 1:13.
But, Rose, did you answer the question in regards to how you felt about Arkley? Did they follow up with a line, at least eventually during the conversation, as 1:13 and I were guessing they might?
If they didn't follow up on the answer, perhaps they're using the info for later action during the campaign?
I know I was watching some parts of the Democratic National Convention some years ago. They had a segment on how they did "focus groups".
They'd get Joe and Jill Sixpack, a whole bunch of them, in a room. They put biorythim(sic?) equipment on them and measured their response to how they'd react to certain political types saying things on a video. Then, they'd know what not to say, and what to say, and the way to say it, to get their message across in the most effective way.
I found that somewhat frightening, as it seemed akin to manipulation, but everyone does it. And, when you think about it, it makes sense.
If you want to sell something, find out the best way to present your sales pitch. That's what they were doing. Scary though it may seem to me.
I notice you left out the name of the person who gave the 10K to the DA. "...retired New Mexico resident Orlando Gallegos". Gee, why does that name sound so familiar? Good think you didn't include that FACT in your coverage or it might not have fit in with your "agenda".At 2:08 PM, Anonymous said...
Life must be great when you are not encumbered by the truth.
I think that "Paul" uses "Orlando" to launder his "dirty" money. Last time didn't he launder it thru you Richard?At 2:13 PM, Fred said...
Actually, 2:05, I missed that. I don't recall seeing the name. If I would have noticed it, I would have included it. Makes no difference to me.At 2:21 PM, Anonymous said...
Not encumbered by the truth? Nope, seems to me the fact remains that Gallegos claims to want local control of elections but he took his biggest contribution to date from someone who lives out of state.
I don't care if he's family, or not. And while I'm sympathetic to the idea of local control, this is exactly the point: He can take money from someone out of state, albeit family, but him and others are trying to make sure that certain others can't.
I don't have a problem with Gallegos taking money from out of state, whether it be from family or some corporation. He just shouldn't advocate others not be able to do the same.
So there. I sure told you! :-)
Fred: you are the voice of reason. Thank you. Anon 2:05 didn't pay enough attention to what you wrote - guess he can't see past his own biases. Me, I got it and you are right. If you are on the "local control/local money" band wagon - best not get approximately 53% of your money from out of town and out of state.At 5:05 PM, Rose said...
Fred, I wasn't the one who got the call, but I will ask my friend who did. The only comment I had so far from my friend was that the pollsters reference to Arkley was negative as was the reference Terry Farmer. They didn't mention any follow up except "Now I'll give you a second chance - if the election were held today..." and that the overall tone was more as if they were trying ot lead you and persuade you than really ask what you think.At 9:34 AM, Anonymous said...
But I will follow up on your question and get back to you.
What was Partain trying to say? His first paragraph and final paragraph are opposing statements.At 10:27 AM, Anonymous said...
I guess Partain is saying that while he wants to be hopeful that sooner or later there’s going to be a clean and friendly political campaign - he admits that clean politics is just a pipe dream given that many of those who use it as a "chant" really don't mean it. That it is simply talk with most local democrats - I'd have to add the republicans and greens to this mix to be fair. The fact is that Dirty Politics and empty words are not confined to any one party.At 5:09 PM, Rose said...
"His father, Orlando Gallegos..." (North Coast Journal - Feb. 19, 2004) apparently lives in Santa Rosa, New Mexico. In other words he does not live in Humbodlt County.At 5:11 PM, Rose said...
Under Measure T - Local corporations are defined as those in which all employees live in the county, all stock shares are owned within the county and both corporate headquarters and the primary place of business are in the county.
Local labor and nonprofit organizations are also exempt under the measure. Only one union member is required to live in the county for it to qualify as local; nonprofit board members must all reside in the county.
So-o-o-o-o the champion of the anti non-local corporations hires a big non-local polling Corporation as the first order of business for his campaign and takes his largest contribution from non-local family members.
Interesting.
credit:At 6:09 PM, Anonymous said...
Under Measure T - Local corporations are defined as those in which all employees live in the county, all stock shares are owned within the county and both corporate headquarters and the primary place of business are in the county.
Local labor and nonprofit organizations are also exempt under the measure. Only one union member is required to live in the county for it to qualify as local; nonprofit board members must all reside in the county.
Eureka Reporter http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=8768
Why in hell would you have a problem with a canidate who accepts money from a family member? Do they really need to live in the area? Can't they simply support their relatives?At 6:28 PM, Bill G said...
Rose, you are unbelieveable! You can't resist can you?
Well, anonymous....if my brother and I owned a corporation and he was a salesman in Oregon and the rest of us worked here, our corp we then be non-local, wouldn't it.....I think that is the point.At 8:48 PM, Rose said...
That is the point. bill g has it right. 100%At 10:17 PM, Rose said...
The Push Poll "format, according to the book, “The Polling and The Public,” by Herbert Asher, is “a telemarketing technique in which telephone calls are used to canvas potential voters, feeding them false or misleading ‘information’about a candidate under the pretense of taking a poll to see how this ‘information’ affects voter preferences.At 10:56 PM, Rose said...
“The intent is to disseminate campaign propaganda under the guise of conducting a legitimate public opinion poll,” wrote Asher.
The National Council on Public Polls warns that such push polls are used not to collect information, but to “spread rumors and even outright lies about opponents.
“These efforts are not polls, but political manipulation trying to hide behind the smokescreen of a public opinion survey.”
“‘Push polls’ are unethical and have been condemned by professional polling organizations,” states the council on its Web site."
Pollsters Push Ratner Arena
by Jess Wisloski
March 26, 2005
The Brooklyn Papers
NCPP - National Council on Public PollsAt 11:27 PM, Rose said...
How to determine if poll results are honest and useful. From the National Council on Public Polls.
www.ncpp.org/qajsa.htm
20 Questions A Journalist Should Ask About Poll Results
http://www.ncpp.org/qajsa.htm
http://www.ncpp.org/qajsa.htm#16
16. What about "push polls?"
In recent years, some political campaigns and special-interest groups have used a technique called "push polls" to spread rumors and even outright lies about opponents. These efforts are not polls, but political manipulation trying to hide behind the smokescreen of a public opinion survey.
In a "push poll," a large number of people are called by telephone and asked to participate in a purported survey. The survey "questions" are really thinly-veiled accusations against an opponent or repetitions of rumors about a candidate’s personal or professional behavior. The focus here is on making certain the respondent hears and understands the accusation in the question, not in gathering the respondent’s opinions.
"Push polls" are unethical and have been condemned by professional polling organizations.
"Push polls" must be distinguished from some types of legitimate surveys done by political campaigns. At times, a campaign poll may ask a series of questions about contrasting issue positions of the candidates – or various things that could be said about a candidate, some of which are negative. These legitimate questions seek to gauge the public’s reaction to a candidate’s position or to a possible legitimate attack on a candidate’s record.
A legitimate poll can be distinguished from a "push poll" usually by:
The number of calls made – a push poll makes thousands and thousands of calls, instead of hundreds for most surveys; The identity of who is making the telephone calls – a polling firm for a scientific survey as opposed to a telemarketing house or the campaign itself for a "push poll;" The lack of any true gathering of results in a "push poll," which has as its only objective the dissemination of false or misleading information.
Or - Push pollAt 9:43 AM, robash141 said...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A push poll is a political campaign technique in which an individual or organization attempts to influence or alter the view of respondents under the guise of conducting a poll. Push polls are generally viewed as a form of negative campaigning. ...Push polling has been condemned by the American Association of Political Consultants....
The main advantage of push polls is that they are an effective way of maligning an opponent ("pushing" voters away) while avoiding responsibility for the distorted or false information used in the push poll. They are risky for the same reason: if credible evidence emerges that the polls were ordered by a campaign, it would do serious damage to that campaign. ... push polls are most effective in elections with fewer voters, such as party primaries, or in close elections where a relatively small change in votes can mean victory or loss.
Why would anyonre believe third hand hearsay from the likes Jerry Partain anyway the guy is a straight-up partisan hack ..You got to love a guy rails against govenment spending but draws a fat pension from the state..At 10:14 AM, Anonymous said...
Hardly third-hand hearsay, robash, Gallegos paid for the poll.At 1:30 PM, robash141 said...
What proof do you have that Gallegos paid for the poll? It could just as easly be a reverse push poll in which Arkley is paying phone bankers to claim they are polling on behalf of Gallegos and being obnoxious All you got is some third hand gossip allegation by some contemptable old partisan hack like Jerry Partain.At 3:09 PM, Anonymous said...
Don't tell me Partain doesn't have an axe to grind...
Have you read the questions, robash?At 3:12 PM, Bill G said...
Also, "Gallegos has spent almost $5,000 on polling and survey research." From the TS Article.At 3:14 PM, Rose said...
"Nichols said the polling was done strictly for “research purposes.” Eureka Reporter 3/25/2006At 7:28 PM, Rose said...
Fred, my friend said there was no particular emphasis on Arkley, that he was grouped in with others that one would expect Gallegos' handlers to deem "negative." But that the long drawn out explanations were about Gallegos. And, again, that they offered "second chances" and "last chance" to see if they had changed her mind.At 10:16 PM, robash141 said...
I smell a rat! I think its a sleazy set up by anti Gallegos people. Im sure Arkely could afford spend to hire obnoxious push pollers top harrass unsuspecting citizens on "on behalf" of Paul Gallegos.At 5:37 AM, Fred said...
There is also the distinct possibility that Partains daughter and Rose's friend are exagerating
Furthermore, Jerry Partain can sling mud with the best of them. Ive seen Partain be totally insulting and demeaning to people who disagree with him So his whining about How he wishes there were civil campaigns is totally bogus He just wishes everyone would just knuckle under to his radical right wing agenda
This is straight out of the Karl Rove dirty politics handbook. and Arkey no doubt, admires Rove and I think ,Arkely is a much more likely suspect
Robash; Here's the relevant portion of a recent Eureka Reporter article dated 3/25:At 6:22 AM, Anonymous said...
"In the FOPG’s statement, the second-highest expenditure made since Jan. 1 was approximately $5,588 to Bellavia Research for polling and survey research and fundraising."
"Nichols said the polling was done strictly for “research purposes.”
“Our poll confirmed that a majority of Humboldt residents think Paul is doing a great job and are impressed with his success of taking violent criminals off our streets and reducing violent crime rates in Humboldt County,” she said. “The failed recall definitely taught us that there are special interests willing to spend potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars to try to overturn the will of the voters. We’re not going to let that happen.”
"While the address for Bellavia Research, Julie Francis was listed with a McKinleyville address, no listing for the agency appears in the SBC phone book."
"Nichols said she did not want to provide specifics about the polling, but said it was something the campaign is pleased it did and that it doesn’t plan to do again."
You can read the entire article at
http://www.eurekareporter.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?ArticleID=9457
Interesting that they gave a Mckinleyville address to Belavia Research to make the agency appear local. That might well be illegal.
And if you "google" that name Julie Francis, you'll find she is a strategy and website usability consultant, married to an attorney with offices in Eureka, and Berkeley...so who is Bellavia?At 6:28 AM, Fred said...
I believe Bellavia Research is the outfit that did the actual polling.At 7:07 AM, Fred said...
And this just in from the Times- Standard confirming the Eureka Reporter story, pretty much settles the issue, seems to me, as to who was responsible for the polling:
http://www.times-standard.com/local/ci_3643711
So; who was responsible for the polling, is no longer an issue.
At 4:59 PM, mresquan said...
Let's see 216 in an area code in Ohio.Why would team Gallegos care to bother with them?At 5:13 PM, Rose said...
No, Pacific Crest Research did the polling.
At 10:18 PM, Anonymous said...
Gallegos is caught with his pants down and robash141 wants to blame it on Partain. O-K then.At 7:23 AM, robash141 said...
IMO Partain is still a thoughoughly dishonest partisan stooge who would not hestitate to make up something in order to smear a political enemy. I couldn't care less what some sneaky person who doesn't have enough courage to put their name beside their opinion thinks..
At 4:59 PM, Anonymous said...
robash141: thank you for continuing to post so we all the vast number of your brain cells that you have killed.At 11:42 PM, risky said...
And the push polls are unethical and dishonest and so Gallegos.
i wouldn't act so surprised about a survey used to attack the opponent. didn't chris kerrigan have a pollster ask about his pipe incident and about rex bohn's role in a cocaine-linked bar in the 80's? salzman was still involved with chris back then.At 7:52 AM, Anonymous said...
what i really want to see is some apology from gallegos for selling his donor list to the corporation freaks pushing measure t. of course that's if it wasn't stolen in the first place by michael twombly.
It wasn't stolen, it was given to them because Gallegos can't run on his record so he is running on something that has nothing to do with the DA's office - that something is measure T. He needs it to be his "orwellian chant" in order to avoid the issues.At 4:41 PM, robash141 said...
Hey there was a commentary in the Eureka Reporter That said pretty much the same thing
That Partain is a crank and his word can't be trusted..
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are closed for the time-being.