Updated at 1 p.m. with Bill Morris interview
This morning brought a pretty interesting 2010 gubernatorial poll that showed Democratic candidates 7 to 12 points in front of presumptive Republican nominee Tom Emmer. Independence Party hopeful Tom Horner, who notched 17-19 percent, ran stronger than in other recent polls — so strong he quickly bragged about it on his website.
However, the polling company's owner, former GOP state chair Bill Morris, is an acknowledged Horner supporter, according to Pioneer Press reporter Bill Salisbury, who broke the story. (Morris and Horner did not immediately call me back.) That fact — and that Morris' Decision Resources, Ltd. has worked for clients also represented by Horner's p.r. firm, Himle-Horner — didn't make the story.
Salisbury said Morris told him Decision Resources paid for the poll, not Himle-Horner or the Horner campaign. Decision Resources "does these polls twice a year," Salisbury notes. "Morris told me he paid for it, with the exception of 10 questions at the end added by the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce that I was not allowed to see."
Those facts were also missing from the 800-word piece. To me, they seem crucial: readers need to judge how independent a poll is from a candidate. "It would've taken about four paragraphs to explain," Salisbury says. "It was kind of a space matter."
Salisbury says Morris assured him the poll results weren't cooked. "He stakes his reputation on his polls, and he told me he would not doctor" the results."
Update: Bill Morris and I connected; he confirms he is personally supporting Tom Horner and says that while no money for this survey came from Horner or his p.r. firm, Himle-Horner accounts for about 20 percent of Decision Resource's business. This poll, he says, was done according to national polling standards; I'll have a copy of the questions in a bit.
He added that Decision Resources plans two to four surveys this election cycle; the next will probably come "after the clouds clear from the primary."
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
33 comments
-
30 comments
-
26 comments
-
20 comments
-
19 comments
Comments (10)
David: Salisbury's comments are fascinating. "It was kind of a space matter," (your blog covered the essentials in two graphs) and "...he [Morris] told me he would not doctor the results." And Salisbury simply took Morris at his word? I file this under "Things That Make You Go 'Hmmm.'"
I love it. Horner is bragging he's in last place.
I read the claim that the poll results aren't "cooked" and I think, boy that's a relief! But then I think, hey wait a minute. Ceviche isn't cooked either and I always worry just a little bit about eating it.
More independent, third party data, please.
The IP campaign budget will be far less than the DFL and GOP candidates. As such I would not expect a well funded polling effort from the IP that the two major parties will employ over the summer and fall months.
The polling that will matter will be done late summer and early fall. After Horner, Emmer and the yet to be announced DFL candidate have had the summer months to promote their policies and give the public an opportunity to judge how well their proposed budgets relate to reality.
This kind of journalistic problem comes up a lot. What does a reporter do when he receives information he regards as reliable from a biased source? To emphasize or even mention the source seems to undermine the credibility of the information, but if the information isn't credible, why is the reporter reporting it?
Now it is possible to be a purist on this and always report the interest a source has, but sources just about always have an interest, when dealing with reporters. I think what happens in real life is that if the reporter feels the information is good, he or she doesn't feel under an overwhelming obligation to reveal the source. That appears to be what happened here.
Hi All-
David: have you often referenced to bragging when talking about a candidate discussing polling numbers.
All: THe reason it matters is because we IP have increasingly used a strategic voting strategy to minimize the effects of wasted vote. It was first used in Tammy Lee's campaign but we needed a few more weeks. It has been borrowed from Angus King, for governor of Maine, who visited MPLS to talk about it. THere is an interesting white paper on his strategy out of the University of Maine (sorry...it is an obscure pdf and you will have to search online for it.
As far as making up survey results...never have I seen that done before. I suspect that many pollsters support many candidates. I have also seen instances where media have referred to Democratic and Republican House polls in post election analysis.
I think this is a little contrived....but maybe someone paid of the interviewers to inflect their voices a little.
Peter Tharaldson
SD60 Chair IPMN
What I found amusing about this story is the strong reaction that it's getting from Republicans. I agree with Mr. Schulze in his suggestion that a lot can happen between now and election day. But I also think Republicans are upset because the poll does reflect the early indications they are getting from voters, that they are just not accepting Tom Emmer.
Just who does Horner think he is; Matt Entenza?
I'll bite on the troll:
Amazing how Horner is in "last place" now (there will be three names on the ballot?) but when it's convenient there's only two candidates that matter. Talk about moving the goal posts!
If Minnesotans even begin to understand the candidates, I wouldn't be surprised if Tom Emmer finds himself in last place.
If that happens, this race becomes a referendum on who can best balance our budget responsibly. It will be so much better than a referendum on whether we should drown government in a bathtub and drive to work on rubble instead of roads. We cannot accept four more years of structurally broken budgets.