* Yesterday’s poll results that showed Democrat Dan Seals in the hunt against Republican Congressman Mark Kirk drew one of the most unusually harsh responses from a pollster that I’ve ever seen. The poll, by the respected firm Research 2000, was slammed by Kirk’s pollster for its sponsor, partisan Democratic blog DailyKos, and for its methodology.
Here’s the “executive summary” from McLaughlin & Associates…
The ultra left-wing Web site Daily Kos commissioned a poll by Research 2000, which was conducted in Illinois’ 10th Congressional District from 9/30-10/1. The survey was flawed on three levels. First, the survey over-sampled voters age 18-29 while under-sampling voters 60+. Second, the survey over-sampled Democrats and Independents while under-sampling Republicans. Third, the survey was intentionally conducted on the Jewish High Holy Day of Rosh HaShanah that would exclude observant Jewish Democratic voters who lean more toward Kirk than average Democrats.
* I contacted Research 2000’s president, Del Ali, yesterday. Ali seemed shocked at the McLaughlin’s allegations, and wouldn’t respond to some of the harsher language in the McLaughlin press release, which included this particularly nasty passage from Kirk’s pollster…
It’s no surprise that DailyKos, which has come under attack by Democrats like Harold Ford Jr. and Lanny Davis for anti-Israel and anti-Semitic content, chose to conduct its poll on the Jewish High Holy Day of Rosh HaShanah. The 10th District is almost 20 percent Jewish – one of the larger Jewish districts in the nation. In addition to being disrespectful, the poll excluded observant Jewish voters who tend to vote for Mark Kirk more than average Democrats. In our last survey, Kirk did 25 percent better among Jewish voters than a typical Republican.
* It seemed obvious to me that the Kirk campaign was trying to stir up a hornet’s nest, so I temporarily ignored the McLaughlin response while I figured out how to touch this delicate topic.
On the merits, however, Ali staunchly defended his likely voter screens, charged that McLaughlin had “way undersampled” young voters in McLaughlin’s brushfire poll of just 300 respondents and claimed that too many pollsters today were using outdated polling models designed in the early 1980s.
Kos, himself, was far more blunt in his reaction to McLaughlin’s charges of anti-Semitism…
The timing of the poll was mentioned in our post announcing the poll, but unlike the hyperventilating Kirk campaign, we argue that the timing depressed Democratic-leaning voters that would support Seals, rather than Kirk. While Kirk may have some Jewish support, that community is still Democratic leaning and will deliver a majority of its support to the Democrat this November. Arguing that excluding some Jewish voters is actually an anti-semitic ploy to depress Kirk’s numbers is laughable. And desperate.
But let’s thank the Kirk campaign for 1) betraying their insecurities. No campaign goes nuclear on a poll they consider to be an outlier; and 2) giving the poll higher visibility. These things have a habit of falling through the media cracks. Thanks to their outsized freakout, they’ve created the sort of conflict that will ensure a higher profile for the results.
They are freaked out, that much is clear
* And now a new poll conducted for the hugely respected publication RollCall shows Mark Kirk trailing the Democrat Seals…
In Illinois’ 10th district, marketing consultant Dan Seals (D) led Rep. Mark Kirk (R) 52 percent to 44 percent. [emphasis added]
* More bad news for Kirk from the RollCall poll and a possible explanation for Seals’ apparent surge…
In the SurveyUSA poll, Obama led McCain in the district 62 percent to 36 percent — a margin that’s 20 points greater than Sen. John Kerry’s (D-Mass.) margin over Bush in the 2004 White House election.
* And in perhaps the greatest blow to Kirk’s overheated argument, RollCall’s pollster, SurveyUSA, used the same partisan makeup that was used by Kos’ pollster…
Kirk’s pollster also took issue with the partisan makeup of the Research 2000 poll — which was similar to the partisan makeup of the SurveyUSA poll conducted for Roll Call. Kirk’s own polls have shown him with a substantial lead over Seals.
So, to summarize, the anti-Semitic argument used by the Kirk campaign was backwards. SurveyUSA polled after the Jewish holiday and came up with much stronger numbers for Dan Seals. RollCall’s pollster also used a similar partisan breakdown used by Kos’ pollster, which undercuts the Kirk claim that the Kos poll was inherently flawed and out of whack.
* SurveyUSA details…
Poll of 623 likely voters taken Oct. 4-5. 3.9-point margin of error.
* Related…
* Dan Seals says he raised $700,000 in funds in 3rd quarter
* Kirk up in campaign money race
* Ozinga, Halvorson debate at ISU cordial
* Foster, Oberweis clash on bailout package
* 18th Congressional District candidates square off in debate
* Schafer campaigns outside debate
* Bean, Greenberg square off on energy
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:05 am:
Now Now Rich, that poll showing Kirk behind was a robo-poll. I don’t think those are as accurate as a live person poll are they? How do we know who was answering questions, maybe the 5 year old that picked up the robo-call when it came in?
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:13 am:
Seals has been on tv a ton up here with spots linking Kirk to Bush. Maybe it’s working.
How do you oversample young voters anyway? Most don’t have land lines. Are pollsters buying cell phone lists?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:16 am:
===I don’t think those are as accurate as a live person poll are they? ===
SurveyUSA had the best ratings of any pollster in the ‘04 presidential race. They’re very good.
And I seriously doubt that a 5-year-old would answer all questions on a poll, including demographic questions.
Also, “Now now”? Thanks for the patronizing attitude.
One last point: Kirk’s entire argument is based on a brushfire poll of 300 respondents and a very high MoE. Now now, indeed.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:17 am:
Who really knows?
The recent market meltdown is having an effect.
If Seals is gaining, it isn’t because of anything he has done, rather it is due to circumstances beyond anyone’s control.
- ConservativeVeteran - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:31 am:
Kirk should be linked to Bush because both of them are too liberal. However, Seals is very liberal. He’s probably more liberal than the majority of the district’s voters.
- Team America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:36 am:
My word, Seals is even more out there and egotistical than I thought. I just got an e-mail from his campaign stating:
“The latest poll conducted in this race has declared to the world what we have known all along: the 10th District wants a representative who will bring the change we need to Washington!!”
Holy moley. And I thought Barack Obama was trying to play to the world stage. At least he gave a speech in Germany. Seals has trouble getting an audience at local high schools unless they’re bussed in by the unions from Chicago.
- shore - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 10:51 am:
seals has been polling and you’d think he would jump at the first chance to show him with a good poll and yet he hasn’t released any general polls since january. Also the poll was done during an horrendous week with the bailout and market crashing so there’s a lot that can change in a month, particularly if you have $3 million to spend in one market.
- Scooby - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:05 am:
Is someone who calls himself “Team America” questioning someone else’s ego?
- George H.W. Bush - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:09 am:
@shore:
Also the poll was done during an horrendous week with the bailout and market crashing so there’s a lot that can change in a month, particularly if you have $3 million to spend in one market.
Indeed, a lot can change; McCain could tank even more, dragging down Republican turnout even more. Which state will he pull out of next, Wisconsin? Minnesota? Indiana?
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:09 am:
Anyone who doesn’t understand why a blogger would call himself “Team America” really needs to get out more.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:10 am:
Concerning Kirk/Seals, I guess we will know in roughly 30 days which polls were correct. But such a wild swing by such a large margin in just a couple of days? Something somewhere does not compute.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:15 am:
The good news is that the pro-Kirk forces here are back to simply nitpicking at a new poll.
The bad news is that none of them will own up to the grotesque overreaction from yesterday.
- Scooby - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:15 am:
I haven’t been outside since all those hippies ransacked the city in ‘68 so why don’t you explain it to me.
- Team America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:21 am:
You’re right to be skeptical about the unexplained swing, Lou. Considering that the SurveyUSA came three days after the pro-Seals DailyKos poll (which showed Kirk leading Seals 44%-38%), the SurveyUSA results suggest a 14 point swing in THREE days. So far, no other survey – Republican or Democrat – taken this year has shown Seals above 39%. Someone also reminded me that in 2006, similar robocall polling showed Dan Seals leading Mark Kirk 46%-44% just a week out of the election. Kirk defeated Seals by 7 points. Robocall polling has been shown to be so inaccurate that a lot of political pundits/media outlets won’t even publish such results.
- Carl Nyberg - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:23 am:
Has Kirk ever voted against the Republican leadership on a close vote?
John Porter was a legit independent. Kirk is a dishonest party hack trying to sell himself as an independent.
Kirk got a bunch of money from Exelon and penned an op-ed published in the Sun-Times.
Kirk argued that nuclear waste needed to be allowed to be sent to Nevada. This part I don’t especially disagree with.
But it was Kirk’s reasoning that struck me as completely dishonest.
Kirk reasoned that keeping nuclear waste at nuclear plants made it possible for terrorists to steal nuclear waste.
Let’s think this through.
1. We have to protect nuclear plants from physical security threats whether we use them as waste holding facilities or not.
2. I’m not sure stealing nuclear waste in the United States is a very sensible thing for terrorists. If the stuff is valuable I’m sure it’s easy enough to purchase in France or the former Soviet Union.
3. Nuclear waste is far more vulnerable to be stolen from a train or truck in transit to Nevada than it is from a nuclear power plant.
I’ve talked to Kirk about service members on welfare and his arguments on that issue were some combination of misinformed and dishonest.
And when I lobbied on foreign policy issues, I liked dealing with Porter’s people. I thought they were really trying to understand the issues and do the right thing.
With Kirk he’s always taking the position of the GOP House leadership and then trying to make his version of the hard Right position sound moderate.
Remember Kirk talking tough about Iraqis needing to take over Iraq’s security? What did he do about? Nothing.
Kirk talks trash about holding the Bush administration accountable, but he doesn’t follow through.
He’s hanging around until he can get a promotion to a higher office, position in GOP leadership or a really powerful committee assignment.
Until he gets a promotion Kirk’s guiding principle is to build up chips with the GOP bosses and contributors. He’s never going to stick out his neck for his district if it means offending the GOP power brokers.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:25 am:
Kirk’s TV ads are mostly negative. The “Freedom Watch” organization’s Swift-boat style ads have also been playing heavily in the 10th district. The ads are over the top, in my opinion. Maybe these ads are backfiring on the Kirk campaign? Maybe voters in the 10th don’t like all the negativity? I am sure that the ads are influencing the polls one way or another, and the results of this latest poll seem to indicate that they are not helping Kirk at all.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:26 am:
===Considering that the SurveyUSA came three days after the pro-Seals DailyKos poll (which showed Kirk leading Seals 44%-38%), the SurveyUSA results suggest a 14 point swing in THREE days.===
Could be partially explained by the Jewish holiday calls in the earlier poll.
===Robocall polling has been shown to be so inaccurate that a lot of political pundits/media outlets won’t even publish such results. ===
For years, newspapers wouldn’t publish polls that weren’t taken door-to-door. That argument of yours holds little water considering the track record of the polling firm itself.
But, go ahead, nitpick away and ignore yesterday’s goofiness.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:32 am:
Just for the record, the poster “Team America” is an attorney and a volunteer for the Kirk Campaign. So take what he has to say with a grain of salt.
- Team America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:37 am:
Never claimed to be unbiased as to Kirk, Anon 11:32. But I’m not sure what being an attorney has to do with it.
But the facts as to the robopoll are the facts.
- kos - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:38 am:
While no polling outfit bats 1.000 (by definition, they’re wrong 5% of the time), SurveyUSA has the best track record the past six years. In the primaries this year, they had the best record of any pollster save Seltzer, and Seltzer only polled one state — Iowa. (Follow the link for the rankings.)
People criticized SUSA’s robo-polling back in 2002, and way too many campaigns learned the hard way that trying to discredit the poll didn’t do them any good (and it was Dem campaigns that year that got hit hardest). Few campaigns will do so today. It has simply proven too effective the last several cycles.
- Team America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:43 am:
It doesn’t look to me like the Roll Call survey methodology may have been too accurate. Here’s a rundown of the Roll Call SurveyUSA results:
http://www.rollcall.com/pdfs/Polls1007.pdf
Take look at what they list in North Carolina’s 8th District.
Then take a look at this link, the official ballot in NC-8:
ftp://www.app.sboe.state.nc.us/enrs/samples/RICHMOND/8GRICH01.pdf
See any problems? (Hint- there’s no libertarian candidate on the actual ballot though he was included in the poll) Think this poll might be unreliable? — they didn’t even know who the candidates were in one race!
- JonShibleyFan - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:49 am:
“If Seals is gaining, it isn’t because of anything he has done, rather it is due to circumstances beyond anyone’s control.”
Really? It isn’t because he is on TV. Or in the mail. Or working the doors. Or the phones.
Or because it is a D-leaning district, and McCain is doing nothing to win over Dems and Independents?
Nah. Mere circumstance.
Keen analysis there, sport.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:50 am:
TA, this has to do what with the IL poll?
Nitpick, nitpick, nitpick.
I hope your boat isn’t leaky while you’re on the river. lol
- Team Sleep - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:51 am:
Regardless of all the conjecture, let’s cut through the crap and realize Kirk is in “danger” of losing his seat.
Here’s my question: are Obama and Kirk friendly? If they are on friendly terms, don’t put it past an Obama Administration to appoint Mr. Kirk to a military administrative post.
- Official Scorer - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:54 am:
For someone that has no background in election polling, I came to the same conclusions (*with exception to anti-semitic motive) separately that Kirk’s pollster apparently did, just by reviewing the information Rich posted.
With regard to the Jewish vote, and its impact on the outcome of this election, I do think the suggestion that this somehow motivated the timing of the poll in question is over the top, but I don’t think there is a need to be overly sensitive about this issue in general. The Jewish vote can be factually analyzed in the same way as all other demographic groups without mis-characterizing or malligning any sub-group of people.
To my untrained eye; but with reasonable knowledge of the district and its geographic and demographic voting patterns however, I do believe the sample was overweighted in Democrats, under weighted in Republicans, and due to ticket splitters history of voting for Kirk, do not automatically assume that those identifying themselves as Democrats will automatically vote for Seals.
The number of Democrats voting for Kirk far outpaces Republicans voting for the Democratic candidate in this race since the time Kirk was first elected in 2000. Nowhere is this likely more prevalent than in the Jewish Community however. If Jewish voters were indeed under-sampled; as Kos suggested, then I agree that his presumption of a supressed level of support for Seals; and how that might impact the outcome of the poll or the election is unsubstantiated and could be well off base.
I also agree that the relatively equal number of young voters to seniors in the Kos sponsored poll is not reflective of projected voter turnout or voting patterns and most likely creates an inherent bias in the polling results.
I would be interested to hear from others more learned in the field of political polling, but based on my reading of many of them it seems to me to be far more of an art than a science.
Can anyone provide a fact based defense; using real numbers rather than assumptions, projections, or perceived trends, as to why they believe that party identification and age groupings for the Kos poll can be reasonably substantiated?
I don’t see it, but I’m not always the most observant and I’ve been wrong before.
- Team America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:55 am:
Rich, your bias is showing. Where’s your admonition to Carl Nyberg’s rant on the horrors of nuclear power, if you’re concerned about relevancy on this thread? Didn’t see a question about nukes in the survey.
And my comment goes directly to the question of the accuracy of the robopoll.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:56 am:
He’s one comment. You guys are flooding the zone with this crud.
No more. Answer my question before proceeding.
- shore - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:00 pm:
I’m not with the kirk campaign and not a donor, but
-Rich, his opponent has been slamming him with some over the top stuff for 4 years, I think you have to look at it in context of a back and forth and I don’t think you picked apart those attacks.
-This is not your average district where the jewish vote goes democrat. Kirk’s single biggest source of cash is pro-Israel, and they are a swing vote that has stuck with him through a misreble IL GOP decade.
-Carl, porter’s foreign affairs advisor stuck with kirk after the transition for 7 years so not sure where you are with that.
-Politico was right yesterday, the race comes down to whether voters see him as Mark Independent or Mark W. Bush, and right now it’s probably looking Mark W. Bush.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:07 pm:
Also, the pdf file appears to be a misprint. The story itself has these results…
=== In North Carolina’s 8th district, teacher Larry Kissell (D) led Rep. Robin Hayes (R) 49 percent to 41 percent.===
As for the Jewish vote, it still leans Dem, even there.
- JohnR - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:09 pm:
Also, people may not realize how little we here in Illinois know about our Congress critters.
When Seals runs such an effective ad like he has lately - tying Kirk to Bush and himself to Obama using Kirk’s own words - you are going to have some movement.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:10 pm:
Also, TA, as far as that “bias” crack is concerned…
Bite me. This is not a good time for you to be playing that bogus card.
- Just Observing - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:11 pm:
Whether or not conducting a poll over Rosh Hashana helps or hurts Kirk is not the point; the point is that conducting a poll over Rosh Hashana very likely distorts the poll results in that Congressional District.
I am a Jew in the 10th CD — I don’t find it disrespectful as the Kirk campaign says, I just find it stupid from a scientific standpoint.
- Benjy - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:14 pm:
My parents live in Highland Park, which is part of the 10th that’s heavily Jewish… if the yard signs there are any indication the support is about 5:1 for Seals. I’ll assume Buffalo Grove, etc. is similarly for Seals. Thus the Rosh Hashanah polling depressed the numbers for Seals.
- archpundit - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:24 pm:
Actually there could be a very good reason why Seals does better in the SurveyUSA poll than in the Research 2000 poll. One of the big differences with automated polls is people tend to choose someone over undecided more often in automated polls.
Hence, we see a floor of 44 percent who seem strongly decided for Kirk in two polls.
However, we see a higher rate of support for Seals in the automated poll which could well mean that people are leaning Democratic, but aren’t as solid in their choice–something not uncommon for a challenger.
The real timing issues for both polls is that they are at the height of the financial crisis. While I’d expect that to dominate from now to the election, it won’t be as dominating as it was on those days.
I can’t wait for Kirk’s pollster to call Wash U anti-semitic for having classes on the High Holidays. That’d be a hoot.
- archpundit - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 12:38 pm:
===Rich, your bias is showing. Where’s your admonition to Carl Nyberg’s rant on the horrors of nuclear power, if you’re concerned about relevancy on this thread?
Because Rich never criticizes Carl. Never. Really.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 1:41 pm:
” . . . The good news is that the pro-Kirk forces here are back to simply nitpicking at a new poll.
” . . . The bad news is that none of them will own up to the grotesque overreaction from yesterday . . . ”
I hope you weren’t talking about me. I stayed away from that stuff and just concentrated on some numbers I saw. WIth regards to the grotesque overreaction, I guess “hell hath no fury like pollster scorn.”
In the 10th, the motives of everyone and anything are being questioned right now so don’t get too alarmed if the discussion here gets a little heated. We’ve gotten used to over the top rants.
- PossibleFuture - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 2:11 pm:
My friend Team America has never claimed to be an unbiased Kirk supporter. His frequent lackey and fellow attorney Louis Atsaves, bravely tries to appear intelligent (he’s kind of TA’s Sarah Palin). But at least they provide some good entertainment.
Kirk is hanging his whole campaign on hoping that 10th District Democrats will once again split their vote. Tht’s why he doesn’t say anything negative about Obama.
However, this year it may not work for him. The anti-incumbent mood may overcome the “kick the bums out, except for my bum” pattern.
- Captain America - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 2:30 pm:
I thnk Kirk is really in trouble as a result of the recent economic meltdown and because of the Obama juggernaut in his District.
This morning I spoke with an affluent
moderate Republican male in the Republican bastion of Kenilworth, who told me he was voting a straight Democratic ticket for the first time in his life, because the Republican Party wasn’t listening to moderates like him. This anecdote ould be indicative of a trend in Kirk’s District that may be building to a crescendo, particularly because of the economic meltdowm.
Kirk is under 50% according to one poll, a recognized sign of incumbent vulnerability. It’s hard to understand how Kirk can survive a Democratic landlside in his district when Seals came so close last time.
Can Kirk withstand the disgust of an electorate totally fed up with Bush, who will inevitably be ranked by objective historians as the worst President in modern American history? It’s possible, but maybe not probable.
I agreed 100% with the blogger whe declared that Mark Kirk is no John Porter in terms of being a genuine moderate.
I don’really think any of us can predict the outcome in Kirk’s race with any certainty. It seems to be up for grabs to me.
- Official Scorer - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 2:38 pm:
=========My parents live in Highland Park, which is part of the 10th that’s heavily Jewish… if the yard signs there are any indication the support is about 5:1 for Seals.=============
Benjy
First yard signs don’t vote. Second yard signs on actual yards of households that intend to vote may be representative of only one voter in the household, and there can be others within the household who’s vote may end up cancelling out the other one, and this happens far more often than it used to. Third, yard signs often find themselves onto public property, property that is vacant or held for sale, and some sad to say it, onto property that is even in foreclosure.
In the 2006 election when there was no motivation for Republicans to vote at all, in Highland Park on a citywide basis with 65% turnout, the results were Seals 64%, Kirk 36%.
For comparison purposes in the 2004 Presidential election the turnout was 84%.
In the 2008 Primary election, with the Republican presidential contest effectively decided; and when Hillary was challenging O’Bama, and Jay Footlik was competing aggressively against Dan Seals and Mark Kirk had no opponent, the turnout on a Township wide basis (too lazy to go back and strip out Lake Forest (2), Highwood (2), and Deerfield (1) precincts) turnout was just 51%.
I am not sure if Hawk Harrelson lives in Highland Park or not but getting to 80-20 Seals based on yard signs seems like quite a
STREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETCH
Get on outta here.
I’ll assume Buffalo Grove, etc. is similarly for Seals. Thus the Rosh Hashanah polling depressed the numbers for Seals.
- Ben - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 3:15 pm:
I’ve admitted my pro-Seals bias before on this site, but you just have to love the karma with regards to Kirk. His camp criticizes a Democratic poll that shows him LEADING only to have an independent poll show him behind. lol
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 3:20 pm:
Captain America,
I don’t know if Bush can beat Buchanan for that distinction!
- hisgirlfriday - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 3:29 pm:
In addition to the economic mess, I’d imagine the heavily favoring Obama voters in that suburban district are none too pleased with the stepped-up personal attacks on the senator from Illinois from Republicans like John McCain and Sarah Palin. Is it unnatural to assume at least some of that slime is going to drip onto Kirk.
I really think Sarah Palin is Alan Keyes on a national level. The last death rattle of a dying political party.
The Grand Old Party that Lincoln brought to prominence from our great state after the collapse of the Whigs has deteriorated into nothing more than a group of modern-day Know-Nothings.
- north shorer - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 3:40 pm:
Seals may be running lots of nice ads, but lets not forget that he bought a house in Jan schakowsky’s district because he didnt want to get too close to the “rich snobs on the north shore.” does he really deserve to represent us if he cant fit in?
- Ben - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 4:00 pm:
Source on that quote?
And the Tenth isn’t all North Shorers; although I am one in exile, there’s a large part of the district that isn’t “North Shore”. I’d venture to say that some of those in Buffalo Grove and Arlington Heights that will decide this election harbor the attitudes you attribute to Seals towards “rich snobs on the North Shore”. It’s a diverse district; Seals will fit in fine.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 4:13 pm:
2006 Survey USA — called 17 races.
Wrong 17 out of 17 - no wonder the Washington Post refuses to publish them
ENOUGH SAID–THESE FOOLS COULDN’T POLL A HIGH SCHOOL ELECTION. Kirk will carry with District by 8 points. I’ll be back the day after the election to follow up.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 4:19 pm:
Anonymous, perhaps you should check the Survey USA scorecard for 2006. You’re flat wrong.
You apparently don’t read at a high school level.
I don’t care who wins that race, but feel free to come back either way.
However, next time, please don’t use all caps in your post. It makes you look like a moron.
Just sayin…
- Focused - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 4:38 pm:
Just to clarify - Dan Seals’ house is 2 blocks outside of the 10th district. When he bought it it was in the 10th but later redistricted to the 9th. Seals has said if elected he will move into the 10th.
Kirk likes to pretend Seals is a carpet-bagger. Personally, I can’t get too excited about 2 blocks.
- George H.W. Bush - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 4:47 pm:
Just looked at Seals website, they are running field operations in all corners of the district. Kirk shows nothing that I could find.
- Ellen Beth Gill - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 5:44 pm:
I never comment on this site, so you know I must be really mad. Kirk’s reaction to the Kos poll is the same mob stirring nonsense we are seeing from the Palin/McCain campaign. They are lashing out in response to their well earned political collapse in ways that will be very bad for this country’s future and do not seem to care a bit about the ultimate consequences of creating racial/religious hate mobs.
- Official Scorer - Tuesday, Oct 7, 08 @ 11:17 pm:
{I never comment on this site, so you know I must be really mad.}
I am not sure why you never comment; it is always good to have a diversity of perspective, but I am unclear whether your self described emotion as “mad” in this case means angry or crazy because the rest of the irrational rant that follows could go either way.
Either way you seem to have shot yourself in the foot here by being guilty of the very thing you allege to so virulently abhor.
First; you describe the reaction to the comments on the poll being discussed here as those of Kirk himself, which they are not. To the best of my knowledge I don’t believe he has commented publicly on the published poll, but I could be wrong. If you have seen published comments by Congressman Kirk with respect to the results of this poll, especially those representing “mob stirring non-sense” please provide a link so we can review his comments on the subject before passing judgement. Don’t ascribe the words of the pollster to anyone other than the person that made them; and hold that person to account.
Next, dragging in the Palin/McCain campaign into the discussion about a pollsters coments is also a red herring as well and seems woefully off message because somehow you seem to have missed the memo about inserting Bush’s name whenever referring to either Kirk or McCain, and you seem to have left that out.
There is no doubt that 10th district voters are concerned about their future and part of that concern arises from the prospect of being represented in Congress by an unemployed perpetual campaigner that voluntarily refuses to pay property taxes to support the schools to which the people he wishes to represent send their kids to be educated.
It appears as though; much like the pollster who’s original comments seems to have sparked your outrage, your own inflamatory comments here suggest that you yourself don’t care about the consequences of what your sentiment represents; just so long as it accomplishes your own objectives as well.