Kuhl will also appear at a press conference on C-SPAN C-SPAN2 this morning at 11.
Kuhl will also appear at a press conference on C-SPAN C-SPAN2 this morning at 11.
<!--break-->
Kuhl will also appear at a press conference on C-SPAN C-SPAN2 this morning at 11.
Kuhl will also appear at a press conference on C-SPAN C-SPAN2 this morning at 11.
<!--break-->
The DCCC has released its response to the Freedom's Watch ads announced earlier this month. The ad is embedded after the break. Freedom's Watch has not released their ads anywhere that I can find them, which is odd. Usually third-party ad campaigns get a lot of buzz from blogs and media outlets, even if the ad buy isn't very large, so those organizations are eager to release their ads.
]]>The DCCC has released its response to the Freedom's Watch ads announced earlier this month. The ad is embedded after the break. Freedom's Watch has not released their ads anywhere that I can find them, which is odd. Usually third-party ad campaigns get a lot of buzz from blogs and media outlets, even if the ad buy isn't very large, so those organizations are eager to release their ads.
<!--break-->
DCCC Radio Ad:
Americans United TV Ad:
]]>DCCC Radio Ad:
Americans United TV Ad:
]]>
The WHAM13 blog post on the poll has the detail released by the pollster. Here's the tell:
Interview selection was random within predetermined election units. These units were structured to correlate with actual voter turnout.
One of the most important characteristics of a poll is its likely voter screen, the questions that pollsters ask to judge whether the person responding will actually vote. These weasel-words dodge the question of how voters were selected. With a sample size of 300, a slight tweak of the voter screen will lead to a huge effect in the poll's outcome. That's where this ham was watered.
What's more interesting is why the NRCC would release a poll so old that the Presidential choice section doesn't even include the presumptive Democratic nominee. The answer is that campaigns release these polls when they want to goose fundraising by convincing donors that their candidate has a chance. Since Kuhl is trailing Massa in funds raised, this poll is no surprise. What's really interesting is the weakness of this effort. The NRCC is so broke that they can't even afford to pay for a fresh poll, so they release this chestnut.
Update: As Zabriskie points out in the comments, the poll was conducted by McLaughlin and Associates on January 27-28. On January 30, the Kuhl campaign paid $16,215 to McLaughlin and Associates for a "Survey". So the NRCC press release is leveraging an old Kuhl poll. And the following assertion reported in the 13WHAM post is laughable:
“As far as the NRCC, Randy is a completely separate entity from the NRCC and really has no idea what they will or won’t do,” said Meghan Tisinger of Kuhl’s office.]]>
The WHAM13 blog post on the poll has the detail released by the pollster. Here's the tell:
Interview selection was random within predetermined election units. These units were structured to correlate with actual voter turnout.
One of the most important characteristics of a poll is its likely voter screen, the questions that pollsters ask to judge whether the person responding will actually vote. These weasel-words dodge the question of how voters were selected. With a sample size of 300, a slight tweak of the voter screen will lead to a huge effect in the poll's outcome. That's where this ham was watered.
What's more interesting is why the NRCC would release a poll so old that the Presidential choice section doesn't even include the presumptive Democratic nominee. The answer is that campaigns release these polls when they want to goose fundraising by convincing donors that their candidate has a chance. Since Kuhl is trailing Massa in funds raised, this poll is no surprise. What's really interesting is the weakness of this effort. The NRCC is so broke that they can't even afford to pay for a fresh poll, so they release this chestnut.
Update: As Zabriskie points out in the comments, the poll was conducted by McLaughlin and Associates on January 27-28. On January 30, the Kuhl campaign paid $16,215 to McLaughlin and Associates for a "Survey". So the NRCC press release is leveraging an old Kuhl poll. And the following assertion reported in the 13WHAM post is laughable:
“As far as the NRCC, Randy is a completely separate entity from the NRCC and really has no idea what they will or won’t do,” said Meghan Tisinger of Kuhl’s office.]]>
Update:Note the time change.
]]>Update:Note the time change.
]]>The radio ad features quotes from Maj Gen (ret) John Batiste, "I tell you...Randy Kuhl -- this guy needs to go. He's not informed, he doesn't have moral courage. That's not the kind of leadership we need in Washington right now."
Video and audio links below:
Here's the mp3 of the radio ad.
]]>The radio ad features quotes from Maj Gen (ret) John Batiste, "I tell you...Randy Kuhl -- this guy needs to go. He's not informed, he doesn't have moral courage. That's not the kind of leadership we need in Washington right now."
Video and audio links below:
Here's the mp3 of the radio ad.
]]>Here are some clips of him speaking on three major issues: Iraq, the economy and health care. They're each from 2-3 minutes long and give a pretty good impression of his "standard stump speech" on each issue.
Randy Kuhl will appear on the same program sometime next month, and I hope to be able to post some clips of his responses on the same issues after his appearance.
Iraq:
Economy:
Health Care:
]]>Here are some clips of him speaking on three major issues: Iraq, the economy and health care. They're each from 2-3 minutes long and give a pretty good impression of his "standard stump speech" on each issue.
Randy Kuhl will appear on the same program sometime next month, and I hope to be able to post some clips of his responses on the same issues after his appearance.
Iraq:
Economy:
Health Care:
]]>