New poll shows Gov. K comes alive!

http://enews.earthlink.net/article/pol?guid=20061026/454032c0_3ca6_1552620061026 606007874

[from the associated press]

"PORTLAND, Ore. - A new independent poll shows Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski pulling ahead of Republican challenger Ron Saxton in the once-tied Oregon governor's race.

Kulongoski had the support of 47 percent of likely voters polled, while 36 percent said they supported Saxton.

The Riley Research Associates telephone poll of 445 likely voters, released Wednesday, found that Kulongoski has made significant gains among independent voters, the fastest-growing sector of the Oregon electorate."




Since the ballots are already in the hands of voters now, Saxton doesn't have any time to do a major media blitz to reverse things.


But then, as the losers, ahem, the other party likes to say, its only a poll!

W IGNORE RULES APPLY!

I think the recent debates, where Saxton really looked inept, along with the surge of adversting on Kulongoski's part has allowed Kulongoski to pull ahead. However, I wouldn't count those chickens just yet, as I think the final tally will be closer than the poll indicates.

I'm not taking anything for granted.

Neither one of them are qualified to run this state.

I've received no less than 8 (fricking eight!) direct mail pieces for Saxton. Most of them attacked Ted.

These are not crap either. Full color, solid weight, glossies with Saxton written all over them. One every few days for each fricking issue.

What have I heard from Ted?

Zip.

Scares me frankly. The way this is going, I'm not sure they have a clue as to where the big K is in his standings.

Saxton, like most Republicans, think they can buy elections with "full color, solid weight, glossies." It's helpful to get letters from organizations for/against measures, but when a candidate floods your box, at least to me, it's a sign of an inability to get a message out through more conventional and less expensive means ... i.e. participating in events THAT AREN"T FUND RAISERS, being totally available to the press, and being positive.

Negative politics works on the stupid vote.
Just look at the presidency.

Doug, how are you registered if I may ask? The parties have very specific, targeted lists for their mailings and phone calls, culled from the "Voter File" (list of registered voters, public record for anyone who can pony up the money to buy it). Saxton's campaign isn't mailing glossy fliers to every registered voter - they have filtered that list fairly carefully. Believe me, I've seen the lists the Democrats have used in the past. For example, on a canvass, Democrats DO NOT visit homes that are registered Republican (all that info is in the public voter records). So no Republican homes will get ANY lit from Ted on their doors. Sometimes independent voters get special targeting because they are seen to be swing voters, or one side or the other may give them special consideration.

So it could be that somehow you got on a targeted Saxton list and not on Ted's list. That in no way is representative of the general amount of lit either side is sending out.

FYI, I don't think I've gotten any lit from either campaign - but I also have a PO Box listed as my mailing address. Not sure if that makes any difference. I also know that my phone number is, gosh darn, wrong in the voter file, and I keep forgetting to change it. So I have yet to get a single phone call from anyone about any political issue this season. Maybe I'll remember to get that updated by 2008. Or 2010...

Andrew

Hopefully the PDX reputation for being a well educated city holds despite the incoming population growth...

Direct mail lit has very little impact on campaign results, according to studies. Phone calls have a slightly better but still low impact. The most effective direct campaign tool campaigns can use is a direct canvass. If some friendly young face knocks on your door and says, "Hi, I'm a volunteer for the Kulongoski campaign and going around today asking for your support for the Governor on November 7. Can we count on your support?" that has the best chance to change people's votes or at least get them to vote if they weren't motivated voters.

Andrew

I switched to Dem this year. I've leaned that way for a while, but never worried about it until now. The GOP is never getting another vote from me ever, after this mess.

Good question actually.

You know, my wife didn't do hers! She's still a registered Republican. That's gotta be it. That's bound to put us on a "who knows target list". I should put up a Ted sign.

Funny though, the pieces are mailed to me. I must still be on the list and they could care less about her!

Didn't know about the door to door avoidence thing. On one hand, I would think it makes the most sense to hammer everybody. On the other, that just might get out the vote for the other guy. That must be how they all see it working.

Believe me, if the campaigns had unlimited numbers of people so they could knock on every door, regardless of voter registration, they would. But they have only a limited number of people willing/able to canvass, so they have to deploy those resources carefully. A vote is a vote; if you get one unmotivated Democrat out to vote for Ted, that counts the same as persuading a Republican to vote for Ted, but it's much less of a sales job. If you knock on 50 Democrat/independent/Green party doors in an afternoon, you are statistically more likely to swing more votes than if you knocked on 50 Republican doors.

Plus, canvassing is hard enough given the abuse you can take knocking on strangers doors. It's worse if you have to deal with the likelihood that many doors you knock on are ADAMENTLY opposed to you, no matter what.

The hardest canvasses I did in 2004 were in swing districts, although I personally enjoyed them the most. In 2004, most everyone was motivated to vote; persuasion made more sense then. I knocked on a lot of Democrat doors in swing districts (in both Oregon and Ohio) where even registered Democrats were not voting for Kerry, some vocally and angrily so. But in an off-year election like 2006 with low turn-out, just getting people to vote at all is the biggest challenge in a close campaign.

Andrew

Here's what the business journal posted today

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2006/10/23/daily26.html?surround=lfn

Send in your ballot, I did. Go Ted, Go.

It appears to me that Ted saved a bit of money for last minute ads. And, the good thing is, they are positive ads. Laying out the "you know which side he's on" theme. Illustrating what he's done, not slamming the other guy. Meanwhile, Saxton continues negative. All he's really got is that weak Oregonian endorsement. I challenge anyone here to give me one solid proposal he's put forth.

Doug-

I have been a registered Republican for 30 yrs. I am waiting to watch the results of this mid-term to decide if I need to change my party affiliation. To be honest I'm leaning towards being an Independent. Though becoming a Dem may ultimately be my choice.

I was having a conversation with my sister this week and she brought up some good observations about Ted. He's not a glitzy Governor. He doesn't seem to need loads of attention to fill some ego deprived side of his political life. What looks like ineffectiveness could truly be a person who simply works hard to get what needs to be done. No fanfare, just hard honest work.

Ted has been to every one of our Oregon soldiers funerals. Every one! That shows me a lot as a person not just as a governor.

Negative political ads can be very effective. I’m hoping Saxton’s ads put doubt in many undecided voters minds about his ability to govern this state.

I was really hoping for some good news on this front. Believe me, I know it's not a done deal. But after seeing Yahoo Headlines take the time to note that " Traditionally left-leaning Oregon " was on the brink of electing a Republican as it's Gov., I felt the smallest bit of panic.

All I could think was " Holy crap!! I didn't know it was THAT close. It would SUUUUUCK to have the rest of the nation enjoy a possible Democrat victory, and of ALL places have OREGON not get to enjoy it too."

I know that's overstating it a bit and there are all kinds of flaws in that kind of oversimplification. But I could not help feeling scared that we would get left out and some kind of tide would turn and blah blah blah.

I'm really pulling for a major Democratic victory in an many races as possible.

Sue me.

Saxton lost this race on the debates. He was proven to be an intellectual lightweight, and flat out refused to provide answers to some questions. Kulongoski took him to school.

Gov K showed up at a "grand opening" for my kid's school deep in the religious heartland - The school is named after the wife of a ULTRA-Bush supporter, Joan Austin (you should see the huge signs erected on all the properties the richest man in Newberg owns).

Anyway, the Gov gave an inspiring speech for the kids and smiled throughout all the presentations by the kids. (Oh yeah, Kevin Mannix was hiding in the background).

Things incumbucty (sp) can do for you.

(Yeah, I know, I live in Clackamas County, live closer to Wilsonville, but here I am paying taxes to the Newberg school district. I must be one of only a dozen such taxpayers. Oh, and I'm impressed, Newberg has EXCELLENT schools -- in particular Mabel Rush Elementary. Not a bad teacher in the whole school! Worth moving to Newberg for . . . now whats the topic??? Oh, Gov K! )

My gut feeling is that it'll be close- very close. 11 points really isn't all that much. It also depends on just where the poll was taken. you have to remember that there has small influxes in rural areas in the last four years that may act as a counter balance to Portland and Eugene.

IF the Oregonian didn't give Saxton the nod, then it probably would be all sewed up..

I don't think the Oregonian's endorsements really do that much anyway.

Saxton will lose for two reasons: 1. He's a Republican, and a lot of the non-partisan swing votes will not be cast to the GOP. 2. Saxton got KILLED in the televised debates. I actually think that the debates more than anything will seal his fate.

Kerry kicked Bush's ass in at least two of the 2004 presidental debates, yet obviously that didn't carry all that much weight. So I'll bet the Saxton-Kulongoski debates made little difference. I'll bet not a lot of the voters even saw them.

I'm still worried about this race. I'm glad we're seeing better ads now from Kulongoski and I'm seeing a few more lawn signs, but I'm still worried.

Andrew

I get a bonus vote this year. my wife gave me her ballot (she's an independent) to fill out for her. Make that 2 votes for Gov K.

Very few voters watched those debates.

How do you know?

How do I know? Because if you asked 100 people on the street MAYBE 10 could tell you both names of the people running for Governor. Quite sad.
They will watch "dancing with the stars" before tuning in a debate with two boring speakers.

radioboy, that is not proof. you're GUESSING. If you're guessing or just plain bullshitting, you need to say so in your post. So, to answer reinstate's question, you DON'T know.

UPDATE:

A Tim Hibbits poll in The O today pretty much confirms Saxton is going to lose -- mainly because of the Democrat tide that is coming in.

perception.....

Saxton comes off looking like a 'carpet bagger' shister, while the Gov. gives the impression of a decent person who tries, may not have all the answers but is genuine. At least that is the impression I have gotten from both.

Ted's commercials have improved a lot - gone are the crappy negative ads. The new positive ads are much better. Maybe they worked. Meanwhile, Saxton seems to have lost whatever momentum he had a few weeks ago. Thank goodness. I still am not sure Ted will win but I am feeling a lot better about it now!

Andrew

Crosses fingers.

It would completely suck to have a nice Dem wave and get stuck with Saxton...

Teddy can thank Geo W Bush and his cast of IDIOTS!