SurveyUSA: Merkley/Novick tied; Merkley leads among women
Tonight, SurveyUSA released their latest poll in the U.S. Senate race. The poll surveyed 650 likely voters - and had a margin of error of 3.9%.
The latest numbers (crosstabs here)
30% Steve Novick
28% Jeff Merkley
8% Candy Neville
4% Roger Obrist
2% David Loera
2% Pavel Goberman
26% Other/Undecided
Three weeks ago (crosstabs here):
23% Steve Novick
12% Candy Neville
11% Jeff Merkley
4% Roger Obrist
2% David Loera
2% Pavel Goberman
40% Other/Undecided
SurveyUSA's summary:
Oregon U.S. Senate Primary: Merkley Support Nearly Triples, Now Tied with Novick -- In a Democratic Primary in Oregon for United States Senate today, 05/01/2008, three weeks till votes are counted, attorney Steve Novick and state House Speaker Jeff Merkley tie, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for KATU-TV Portland. Novick today gets 30%, Merkley 28%, within the survey's 3.9 percentage point margin of sampling error. 4 other candidates in single digits. 26% of voters say they are undecided, or will vote for some other unnamed candidate. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll released 04/07/08, Novick is up 7 points, Merkley is up 16 points. Among women, Merkley's support has tripled and he now leads Novick 30% to 25%. Among men, Novick is up 7, Merkley is up 8. Among Pro-Life voters, Merkely's support has quadrupled. Among voters age 50+, Merkley had trailed Novick by 12, now tied. As evidence of how closely matched and fiercely fought the contest now is: Among Conservatives, the two are tied. Among Moderates, the two are tied. Among Liberals, the two are tied.
Discuss.
|
May 1, 2008 |
in the news | Comments (84 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | May 1, 2008 8:21:39 PM
Fixed.
Posted by: 18yearoldwithanopinion | May 1, 2008 8:25:14 PM
This is huge for Merkley considering all the ad's and press that Novick has been getting lately.
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 1, 2008 9:17:51 PM
It's not surprising that after putting a ton of ads on TV Merkley would be better known than he was a month ago. Steve went back on TV a week later than Jeff started on TV, so I'm sure that was a factor too. They'll both be on TV from now on.
Should be a fun 19 days!
Posted by: Kevin | May 1, 2008 9:25:23 PM
Here's another, much less partisan question:
How much can either of these polls really tell us about where any of the candidates were at those points in time if less than half of those surveyed were deemed likely to actually vote on this race by SurveyUSA's own analysis?
I suspect that the stats in both are ballpark accurate. But I'm as skeptical about getting overly hot and bothered by Merkley's surge in the new one than I was about Novick's showing in the first one.
Posted by: torridjoe | May 1, 2008 9:35:39 PM
I assume Canter will dismiss this poll as illegitimate too? :) After all, Candy Neville has essentially the same support as before, give or take the margin.
The buys are certainly having some effect, but it's interesting that this poll is much less youth-skewed than the previous one. It'd be a stone cold shock if Oregon's youth vote didn't do what every other state's has--double, sometimes triple from 2004. Those new Obama registrants, mostly youth skewed, right? And Novick leads in this poll by 24 in that group. Merkley actually tripled his support--to 11%.
Who ever said it was a walk? I heard a lot of people saying Novick's ahead, and asking how is it that the guy with the advantages has to be playing catch up. Novick's ahead, and Merkley's playing catch up (and is indeed catching up).
The Patriots put up the TD midway through the fourth quarter, and add the extra point. It's Hosftra by 2!
Note on timing; the 28th through the 30th is right around the time Steve amped up his buy and swept the Portland general papers. Next week would have been better to pick up any effect from that, but there it is. You don't get to choose when they poll.
Merkley owned the airwaves the last three weeks. He's about to share the stage with a bunch of other folks in the last three. Can't wait to see what happens.
Posted by: Randle McMurphy | May 1, 2008 9:43:49 PM
I am deeply skeptical of SurveyUSA's work in Oregon in this election. The first problem is that until recently, nobody had a high enough name-id to allow a meaningful comparison poll. Second, these polls have Roger Obrist of Damascus holding steady at four percent, which is absurd. Nobody I know in Damascus has even heard of the guy, much less four percent of likely Democratic voters statewide.
We pay attention to these polls and thus endow them with the appearance of credibility because we don't have good data. The simple truth is that nobody, probably not even the campaigns themselves, know how this election will turn out. We're all blind here, and that goes for all the contested elections in this cycle: Senate, SOS, AG, and on down.
Posted by: pol watcher | May 1, 2008 9:48:38 PM
Survey USA does land-line automated telephone polling. We'll have to see if their polling methodology, which has been questioned but has managed to return reasonable results mainly because young people who tend to be mobile phone users also have not voted in high numbers, actually proves predictive.
If this is the year that young people finally carry through and vote, SurveyUSA is going to be spectacularly wrong and probably will either have to re-tool or focus on their main business of doing market research.
Posted by: 18yearoldwithanopinion | May 1, 2008 9:49:41 PM
While I agree with the points made by Stephanie, Kevin, and Torridjoe I did find something interesting in the crossbars. First Merkley really ran the field in regards to voters who ranked immigration as being a very important topic. Secondly I will say that Novick did a lot better among older voters then I expected. Overall a good poll for Merkley but doesnt really change the fact that this will be a really close primary between Merkley and Novick. I think that if Merkley can put out more ad's then Novick, he has a strong chance of winning.
Posted by: torridjoe | May 1, 2008 9:53:56 PM
I saw the immigration thing too--I assume they're reacting to the DL thing?
I think Novick gets the old cranks, Merkley the more sedate. :)
Let's boil it down: Novick's A1 worry is women; Merkley's is young people. I think both were probably a little undersold in this poll.
Posted by: Don | May 1, 2008 10:04:29 PM
It's going to be very close. I honestly think this primary will be determined not in the Portland area (where I think they'll run pretty close) but in who does better elsewhere in the state.
Posted by: Peter Bray | May 1, 2008 10:18:03 PM
Merkley is toast. He's the establishment candidate and, as such, undecideds will break heavily for Novick. This poll should be serious concern for Merkley.
Posted by: 18yearoldwithanopinion | May 1, 2008 10:25:29 PM
why would undecideds break to novick per say? Three weeks ago there were a lot more undecideds but Merkley still has picked up a bunch in the poll. Isnt that evidence that the undecideds will break for Merkley?
Posted by: Peter Bray | May 1, 2008 10:29:36 PM
Undecideds typically break for the challenger. Merkley, per conventional wisdom, is the machine politician in this race, while Novick is the challenger.
Oregonians are smarter to nominate yet another dull, ineffective Democratic candidate (despite his Zelig-like run-ins with corpses and shotguns) to take on Smith.
Merkley should go back to the back-office.
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 1, 2008 10:46:12 PM
As for the rest of the state, Steve just picked up the East Oregonian's endorsement, while in an openly acknowledged split decision, Jeff gets the Salem Statesman-Journal.
Posted by: torridjoe | May 1, 2008 10:48:51 PM
I think those are some rather reckless and unfounded positions, Peter. As 18yearold points out, if anything the undecideds are moving proportionally more to Merkley the last three weeks.
Posted by: verasoie | May 1, 2008 10:54:27 PM
Dull, ineffective Democrat?
That does not describe Merkley, who orchestrated the Democratic takeover of the legislature and the most progressive session Oregon has seen in a generation.
He's a great Dem, and people see that on the resume alone.
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 1, 2008 10:59:10 PM
If a great resume made a great candidate, both Bob Kerrey and John Kerry would have been Presidents of the United States.
Posted by: Blake C Hickman | May 1, 2008 11:01:01 PM
I don't believe its "conventional" wisdom that Merkley is the "machine candidate". I think most undecided folks will tune into this race the day they open the voters pamphlet. I just hope we can all rally together to beat gordo in November.
Posted by: Stinky Vase | May 1, 2008 11:11:54 PM
That does not describe Merkley, who orchestrated the Democratic takeover of the legislature and the most progressive session Oregon has seen in a generation.
Can we please DEAD this talking point? It's getting old. Merkley didn't orchestrate the OR Dem takeover in anymore than Pelosi orchestrated the one nationally. Merkley happened to be standing in the right place to TAKE CREDIT for the change in political wind.
Take advantage is more like it.
Posted by: Pete Forsyth | May 1, 2008 11:47:44 PM
Stinky Vase,
Jeff Merkley campaigned hard for Democrats, and spoke at house parties and other events with a great deal of expertise and enthusiasm for a Democratic takeover. Of course it was a group effort, but there is no reasonable case to be made that Merkley wasn't an enormously important part of the process. He articulated a vision of what could be accomplished with a Democratic majority, which made Dem. candidates more electable; then, he delivered.
That may not be enough to make you cast a ballot for him, but it is a point you'd do well to acknowledge.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | May 2, 2008 12:08:42 AM
Look, I've gotten used to people disliking Merkley for various reasons -- but let's not go pretending that his involvement wasn't critical in 2006.
What happened in Oregon in 2006 was NOT a foregone conclusion.
Since 1982, Oregon House Democrats had never had a net-gain of even a single seat in a non-presidential year. Not even in the very strong years of 1990 and 1998.
Since 1974, Oregon House Democrats had never had a net-gain of more than three seats in any election.
In 2006, a nonpresidential year, we had a net-gain of FOUR seats -- historic on both scores. To be sure, part of the success is owed to the national tide.
But let's also be honest: Part of it was because Jeff Merkley and his team recruited great candidates and mobilized hundreds of Oregonians from across the state to work on their behalf.
Jean Cowan beat Alan Brown, the tire dealer to everyone on the South Coast. Chris Edwards beat Debbie Farr, and even just three weeks out, I had locals telling me that "It's too bad; everybody loves the Farrs." Brian Clem beat Billy Dalto, and yes, in retrospect, it looked easy. But Clem worked very, very hard to make it look very, very easy. And David Edwards won the open seat in Hillsboro; an area held by Republicans for decades.
Full disclosure: My firm manages the websites for the House Democrats, Jeff Merkley, Chris Edwards, and Brian Clem. In 2006, we managed Jean Cowan's, too. I speak only for myself.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | May 2, 2008 12:15:41 AM
And he didn't just speak at house parties. In addition to recruiting the candidates, he organized the "Roadmap for Oregon" policy agenda (which was critical), led the fundraising effort, managed the staff and consultants, marshaled huge non-money resources, and made it happen.
Yes, it was a favorable year - but without all his hard work, and more importantly his strategic leadership, we could EASILY have only picked up one, two, or three seats... which was the conventional wisdom right up to election day.
Posted by: Daniel Spiro | May 2, 2008 3:33:18 AM
"Look, I've gotten used to people disliking Merkley for various reasons"
Kari, I don't dislike Merkley for any reason. But he does bore me, whereas the prospect of a Novick victory in November is exciting.
Posted by: Bert Lowry | May 2, 2008 5:45:43 AM
Peter Bray, it's hillarious that you think Steve Novick is not a political insider. I like both Speaker Merkley and Steve Novick. One of the things I like about Steve Novick is that he is a political insider -- and a damned smart, charismatic and effective one.
I think it's great that you've had an easier time deciding in this race than I have. But if you picked Novick because Merkley is part of some "Establishment" you think exists, you made a mistake. Steve Novick is well-connected, well-respected and well-liked by hundreds and hundreds of progressive volunteers, policy-makers, office-holders, party officers, etc.
Merkley is no more the "Establishment" candidate than Novick is. The "Establishment" is split. Look at his endorsements, for heaven's sake.
Posted by: Pat Malach | May 2, 2008 7:32:50 AM
Here goes Bert with his "there-is-no-political-establishment in-this-state" line.
Weeee make believe! It's fun.
Posted by: Masterpiece | May 2, 2008 7:45:52 AM
Here goes Bert with his "there-is-no-political-establishment in-this-state" line.
That isn't what he said, per se.
He said that there is no difference between Merkley and Novick's status in any Oregon political establishment.
In other words, any "outsider" or "insider" cred these two candidates have is essentially equal.
Posted by: Kevin | May 2, 2008 8:09:49 AM
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 1, 2008 10:59:10 PMIf a great resume made a great candidate, both Bob Kerrey and John Kerry would have been Presidents of the United States.
True enough. And by the same token, if being a sharp-tongued rhetorical bomb-thrower made a great candidate then Al Sharpton and Ron Paul would have been Presidents of the United States.
Bottom line: For every way that you try to dismiss Merkley's creds as irrelevant to the choice facing Oregonians, there are just as many ways to dismiss Novick's creds as irrelevant to the choice facing Oregonians.
Posted by: Lee Coleman | May 2, 2008 8:13:33 AM
If Novick wins the primary, Smith will win re-election. It's just that simple.
Posted by: trishka | May 2, 2008 8:37:59 AM
any chance of getting an in the news story up about a green party challenger to pete defazio?
http://www.gtconnect.com/articles/2008/05/02/news/community/3aaa03_beilstein.txt
Posted by: Lani | May 2, 2008 8:41:14 AM
Unfortunately, I think Lee may be right. Merkley's stance on the Second Ammendment mirrors Gordon Smith's. The head of OFF characterized Novick to me as "100 percent anti-gun". He's not satisfied w/ Smith or Merkley but sees Novick as the worst.
Novick's anti-gun stance might alienate enough voters in the Fall to guarantee Smith a victory. OTOH, there may be enough gun control advocates to put Novick over the top.
Posted by: Bert Lowry | May 2, 2008 8:48:52 AM
Who exactly is in the "Establishment" and what do they do?
I certainly agree that there is a very large, ever-changing group of people who are more involved than the average Oregonian. Some of them know eachother; some don't. But I haven't seen any evidence at all of some sort of cabal, or even an informal group of people who share specific goals and control access.
I suspect the problem is that your candidate isn't getting 100% of the support you feel he/she is due and, rather than acknowledging that different people choose candidates by different criteria and information, you take the lazy way out and postulate some sort of low-level conspiracy.
I've been active in Pennsylvania and Oregon. I can tell you that there is a political establishment in Pennsylvania. It's a machine of awsome power and size. And I can tell you that there isn't one in Oregon.
Posted by: Bert Lowry | May 2, 2008 8:55:35 AM
Lani, I'm a member of the Gun Owners Caucus and strongly support the 2nd Amendment. I read Novick's stance on gun ownership and I didn't see anything that concerns me. He said what I would hope any progressive would say: he staunchly supports the 2nd Amemendment and believes it 1is just as important as the 1st, 4th and 5th.
What concerns you?
Posted by: Evan Manvel | May 2, 2008 9:03:30 AM
First, I have to say that calling a 30-28 lead a "tie" is wrong. "Close" or "in tight race" are true, but "tied" is inaccurate. It's true, given the margin of error, that Merkley may be winning. That doesn't mean it's tied, though, it means that Novick could be leading by as many as six, or Merkley could be leading by as many as two.
Or, this could be the one-in-20 polls that is off by more than the margin of error (these are done with 95% accuracy). But regardless, I'd rather be the candidate up 30-28 than the candidate down 30-28.
Novick picked up the Portland Tribune's endorsement this morning. One of their core questions is who is going to actually provide voters with a contrast to Smith in November. Maybe that's not the right question, or the only right question, but if it is, the answer is clear.
We know Gordon's doing his soft-focus independent voice act again, and will attack either Novick or Merkley as being pro-tax, big spending liberals.
Who's best able to pierce that narrative? My money's on Novick.
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 2, 2008 9:17:18 AM
Wow, does that make the newspaper race 7-3 in Steve's favor?
Steve
-----
The Oregonian
East Oregonian
Medford Mail Tribune
Willamette Week
Portland Mercury
Portland Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Jeff
---
Salem Statesman-Journal
Bend Bulletin
Eugene Register-Guard
Am I missing any major papers?
Posted by: Lani | May 2, 2008 9:25:39 AM
My disagreement with Novick is related to two things: )Kevin from the Oregon Firearms Federation told me that he'd faced Novick in plenty of courtrooms and Novick was "100% anti-gun".
My other disagreement with Novick's statement that he agrees with the Clinton era gun laws. I was opposed to the "Assault Weapon Ban" then and disagree with it now.
In Bill Clinton's autobiography, he had Democratic members of Congress go to the White House to beg him to stop pushing the AWB so soon after the Brady Bill passed.
There was general agreement with the Brady Bill law by most gun owners & non-gun owners provisions like NICS were sponsored by the NRA. Democrats in Congress said that Clinton's push for the AWB could cost them re-election.
Democrats from Texas, the South and West were right. After the AWB passed, the Democrats lost control of the Congress for 12 years and Bill Clinton stated that as the primary reason for losing control of the Congress in his autobiography.
Posted by: Chris Lowe | May 2, 2008 9:32:06 AM
Kevin, the Sharpton and Paul crack is sheer political hackery. Paul is a loon and Sharpton is demagogue or at minimum made his name that way and will never live it down. Neither of them have "sharp tongue" as their primary attribute when people think of them.
While I don't agree with people who have decided that Steve's "sharp tongue" is too much of liability, I respect that opinion and see holding it as a reasonable basis to decide a boat.
But Steve Novick is neither a loon nor a demagogue, and his "sharp tongue" issues, such as they are, do not make him anything like Paul or Sharpton.
This really is a smear. And a stupid, transparent one at that. It is simply an untrue, unfair comparison.
You should take it back. FWIW, while I have seen your zeal for Jeff as detracting at times from your thoughtfulness, it has not caused me to lose respect for you, just for the specific expressions in question, such as your refusal to answer a direct question from me to turn it to unrelated talking points on a different thread. That's fairly common. But if you stick with this line, it will cause me to lose respect for you. I may not be the only one.
Posted by: trishka | May 2, 2008 9:33:49 AM
yeah, what lani said.
because hunters in the west are ALL ABOUT shooting deer with assault weapons.
Posted by: Chris Lowe | May 2, 2008 9:34:02 AM
Nor an unreasonable basis on which to decide a vote, either ;->.
Posted by: Lani | May 2, 2008 9:47:01 AM
The Assault Weapon ban was an idiotic piece of political theater that had nothing to do with public safety.
It outlawed a number of hunting rifles and guns with "a conspicuous pistol grip". Congress let it sunset because it was a bad law.
Also, it's not always about hunting. Sometimes it's about shooting sports or self protection. It's also about a fundamental right not a privilege.
Yes, I know many will disagree with me. We don't need a big gun control debate--or Kari should start another topic for it.
I'm explaining why I'm not voting for Novick and why he may lose over the gun issue in the Fall if he becomes the nominee.
Posted by: LT | May 2, 2008 9:57:39 AM
In today's Oregonian profile, there was this:
As Novick gets deeper into his own candidacy, he's become more careful. In September, he said in an interview that he would be "more willing to be critical" of the U.S. Senate Democratic leadership than Merkley. But by April, he said: "I'll be a team player and I want to help. I think that part of your job is to help (Democratic leader) Harry Reid be the best leader he can be."
In the post, there was this comment,
"Among women, Merkley's support has tripled and he now leads Novick 30% to 25%"
This may come as a shock to some people, but all females (as in members of any other group) don't agree on everything. There are women who do not view acerbic comments as a virtue--esp. if they are parents or others (teachers, child care workers, etc.) who spend a lot of time and effort trying to convince the young people they know of the value of diplomatic language.
Chris, I think you meant vote rather than boat, but thank you for this,
"While I don't agree with people who have decided that Steve's "sharp tongue" is too much of liability, I respect that opinion and see holding it as a reasonable basis ....."
People who say "You're not allowed to think for yourself, you are supposed to decide your vote based on...." historically have lost supporters---from those who give thanks for secret ballot, to those who say that someone had their support until they said______.
Steve Novick is an amazing person who has lived an amazing life. But he as much as anyone should know there are people who believe their vote is just that---the vote any individual has the right to cast anyway they choose.
Steve standing up for principles HE BELIEVES IN shows he has a moral backbone. But if his rhetoric or that of his supporters ever strays into "Steve Novick stands up for principle, that is why you should vote for him" as if he is the ayatollah who decides what Oregon progressives are supposed to believe, that goes over the line.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | May 2, 2008 9:58:39 AM
It's not unlikely that the upcoming SCOTUS decision on gun rights will make the position of politicians on the matter a moot point.
Posted by: Lani | May 2, 2008 10:25:05 AM
I wanted to add that I'm not a single issue voter. The gun issue is the dividing line for myself between these two candidates with close platforms, but I'll vote for either one in the fall.
Also, I'm supporting Representative Wu's re-election although he has a diametrically opposed viewpoint to mine on guns. However, I agree on most everything else he's voted for.
Posted by: torridjoe | May 2, 2008 10:27:45 AM
evan (and everyone), the MoE is applied to each data point, not the gap. So the try range is Novick +10 (34-24) to Merkley +6 (32-26). Probability wise, that means about a 60% chance Novick is really ahead.
Posted by: torridjoe | May 2, 2008 10:44:41 AM
Oh, and for the same reason Novick is "ahead" but it's really tied, Merkley is "ahead" with women...but it's also really tied. Anything under 8 points is potentially not a real lead.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | May 2, 2008 10:59:13 AM
Nobody's mentioned so far that looking at the overall number comparison between now and three weeks ago:
Novick has improved his position by +7
Merkley has improved his position by +17
Again, this is over a three week period, and we've got about three more weeks 'til the twentieth.
I like the math...........
Posted by: Stephanie V | May 2, 2008 11:28:40 AM
One issue with landline polls is the way they underrepresent young voters, who often have only mobile phones, and eschew landlines completely.
Considering Steve's prodigious strength among young voters, and the number of young voters registered and energized to vote for Barack Obama this time around, I think that a 30-28 lead in a poll like this is a very comfortable place to be, two and a half weeks out from election day. It strikes me that Steve is ideally situated to take electoral advantage of the Obama-Clinton contest in Oregon in a way no one else is.
And yes, I completely agree with LT about this: Democratic women obviously are not a monolithic voting bloc in primaries. It surprises me that Jeff is doing so much better among women, frankly, unless it has something to do with the way he regularly repeats his mantra about protecting a woman's right to choose. Steve also supports abortion rights, of course, but does not dwell on that position in his ads or public appearances.
The women I know are pretty much all supporting Steve. The comment I hear from them most often is, "I LOVE HIM!"
%^>
Posted by: Miles | May 2, 2008 11:32:20 AM
It's not unlikely that the upcoming SCOTUS decision on gun rights will make the position of politicians on the matter a moot point.
Even if the SCOTUS finds that the 2nd amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms, that decision won't invalidate most of the gun laws in this country (which is partially a reflection of just how weak our gun laws are). The Court may strike down the DC handgun ban, but as with all other rights in the Constitution the right to bear arms will not be absolute. It will be subject to any number of time, place, and manner restrictions based on public safety, public interest, etc.
I've always thought the best way to defeat the Bush Administration's power grab is to show how it can be used to seize all the firearms in this country. After all, under the guise of protecting us from the terrorists the courts have allowed Bush to eliminate habeus corpus and the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Surely they would allow the president to seize firearms in order to prevent another terrorist attack.
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | May 2, 2008 11:36:16 AM
Fascinating numbers. I would love to know more about the methodology, because it's really hard to know what "650 were determined by SurveyUSA to be likely to vote in the 05/20/08 Democratic Primary." Really, how?
Oh well, grist for the mill. And Merkleyites like me can exhale a bit.
Posted by: Kevin | May 2, 2008 11:37:06 AM
Posted by: Chris Lowe | May 2, 2008 9:32:06 AM
Chris,
Not only did you miss the point of my comment, but you actually demonstrated WHY I replied to Stephanie the way I did.
Don't you think that I could have taken issue with Stephanie's lame analogy on a variety of points just as you took issue with my reply on a variety of points?
You helped me demonstrate the inherently demagogic nature of forced analogies. They invite knee-jerk reactions which end up being every bit as much a part of the problem as the demagogic analogies. The next thing you know everyone is involved in a STUPID spitwad fight.
Don't you think we've had more than enough of those kinds of exchanges here?
And yes, I'll freely confess to having started more than my share of spitwad fights.
Now, if you made it this far and still think I deserve to lose your respect for trying to short-circuit another spitwad fight before it gets out of hand then I gotta say in all blunt honesty that your respect isn't worth having and I wouldn't lose a nanosecond of sleep over the loss.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Kevin | May 1, 2008 8:20:24 PM
The stats for the previous poll need to be fixed. You posted the same stats for both polls.
That said... I think we all knew this was coming once Merkley turned his attention to getting his name ID up with ads.
The question I have is: will this trigger Novick's attack ad?