An internal poll shows Chip Cravaack – the GOP-endorsed candidate for Congress in the Eighth Congressional District, within three points in his race against 17-term Representative Jim Oberstar.
The poll – by Public Opinion Strategies – was of 300 likely voters in the Eighth District. It has a five point margin of error.
It shows the race at 45-42 Oberstar, with very few undecideds.
Even if Cravaack were to finish in November within twenty points against Oberstar – who has been winning races by 40-odd points in recent memory – it would have been a huge moral victory.
Even if it’s only partly true – that Cravaack is even close – that’s going to be a huge kick in the head for the DFL.
But it gets better: with messaging thrown in at the end of the poll – Cap and Trade (which will devastate mining in the range), regulation (which has kept a couple of big precious metals mining projects from starting digging) and Obamacare, the numbers switch to 47-41 Cravaack. And the “re-elect” number – “would you reelect Oberstar” – is 40%, versus 48 for “someone new”.
If this is true – if Cravaack upsets Oberstar in the Eighth, one of the most traditionally, reliably Democrat-voting districts there is outside of Berkeley, Manhattan and Minneapolis – then all bets are truly off in this election.
I’ll be following this very closely.
Because you can bet the mainstream media will not.
Cravaack is an excellent candidate. If this is true, then you can assume that most every DFLer is in deep, deep trouble.
I am a former resident of said district. For the most part, the Democrats say they are Democrats because “my father was one, and my grandfather was one..etc”. But they hate the welfare state (espically with what has gone on in Duluth recently with “those people”). Are big on 2nd amendment rights. Support conservationalism, not radical enviromentalism. Last I heard, Oberstar didn’t even have a house in the district. Not since his mother in Chisholm died a few years ago.
And I can tell, as someone who processed some credit apps of steel workers…if you can get in, you are set with pay. But if the mines are blocked, good luck finding a good paying job.
Forced retirement of Oberstar, that’d be EPIC. I need to send the Cravaack campaign a check, he definitely has my vote. Believe me I know a ton of very unhappy people who normally vote straight DFL that won’t be voting that way this time around.
“”Cap and Trade (which will devastate mining in the range)….”
How many wind turbines do you think it would take to run a taconite processing plant?
Scott;
Further questions to address even before the taconite gets to the plant; how many solar panels, wind turbines, electric motors, etc; would it take to run one of those big shovels or Terex trucks to get it out of the mines?
Better yet, will those mines ever even get started?
Pingback: Tweets that mention Shot in the Dark » Blog Archive » Tie – Or Better – In CD8? -- Topsy.com
even if its a break even vote and oberstar wins by 1 point it means Dayton doesn’t because the Dayton name doesn’t have the same shimmer up there that it has in CD4 & CD5. To most rangers Dayton epitomizes whats wrong with the Boundary Waters and the crowd it draws.
Pingback: Let Freedom Ring » Blog Archive » BREAKING NEWS: Oberstar 45, Cravaack 42
the Dayton name doesn’t have the same shimmer up there that it has in CD4 & CD5.
Dayton himself might not have the shimmer up there that he does in the cities, but his Lt Gov, Yvonne Prettner-Solon, does. She is the reason he won the iron range. The Solons are an old political family in Duluth. Kinda the Kennedys of the iron range.
(I went to college with one of the Solon kids. Had a crush on her too.)
Boss,
You and I are thinking alike (disclosure, I’ve been in the power industry in excess of 30 yrs.). Coal power plants at Hoyt Lakes, Silver Bay, and Taconite Harbor provided reliable elect. energy for the mines (as well as the local cities and towns) for many years. Cap and Trade will surely shut them down. Imagine the “push back” there’d be to lining all of Hwy. 61 with wind turbines, plenty of wind along the lake (well some days). Being all things “green” didn’t affect the efforts of Kennedy and Cronkite in preventing the erection of wind mills off the coast of Mass. OK for everyone else but NIMBY!! Any opinions as to if Oberstar would be a reliable vote in favor of Cap & Trade legislation?
So, your saying AssClown wasn’t born in Paris, Mitch?
I’m sorry, but I’ll need to see a birth certificate before I’m convinced. He’s got cheese eating surrender monkey written all over him.
Perhaps.
How about that 8th CD! 🙂
Scott;
golfdoc may be better able to answer this than I am.
My info comes from people that are up on the Range frequently, working with the mining industry, so I’m only speculating here, but his record suggests that he is usually just a rubber stamp for Reid and Piglosi. I would bet that he will be a reliable vote for Cap & Tax.
As I posted in comments before on this blog, he was the moron that proposed installing GPS devices on all US vehicles so that they could be taxed on the miles that they drove. His flawed reasoning was that people would drive less if they had to pay “environmental” taxes. I doubt that too many Rangers heard about this, as the dear leader’s propaganda machine buried it pretty fast, but, with the distances that Rangers have to travel just to go to work, I couldn’t imagine him surviving (either politically or physically) if he championed the passage ot something that moronic. Of course, I haven’t read through the entire C&T bill yet, but I wouldn’t count on that idea not raising it’s ugly head again if he stays in.
If I’m not mistaken, he is also a closet anti-gun supporter, supposedly supporting both HR45 and HR3534, both of which completely ignore the 2nd Amendment. The latter is Hilary’s doing to enact the UN’s small arms treaty. If either of these pass, remember the old saying, “if you ban guns, then only the outlaws will have them”. There will a lot of legal gun owners turned into “outlaws” over night!
The mines use incredible amounts of power. Minnesota Power has a deal with some of them that during peak summer usage (think air conditioners), that some of the lines do a voluntary shut down as to allow more electricity to be diverted to homes and businesses.
Related to “why are usually safe Democrats in trouble?” When Republicans were spending money and growing gov’t, (and having ethics troubles) they couldn’t figure out why they did poorly in 2008/10.
Now, Democrats just don’t get it. I see the Mpls paper has another article online talking about how “angry” people are in the Dakotas. Star-Tribune says they should be happy as the economy is good in those 2 states. They just don’t get it. Which is fine. Instead of listening to those unhappy with current gov’t, the left just slams them and ridicules the people. Not a receipe for success.
Anyone seen any recent polling in CD4? The only “legit” poll I have seen was back around Memorial Day and surprisingly showed Betty up only 41-37 on Teresa. Considering her low name ID back then thats huge.
Funny that Pravda Minneapolis slams South Dakota, when people like Lori Sturdevant, who is from there, is one of their most reliable useful idiots!
If they really want to make a splash, why don’t they do some real investigative reporting (insert loud chuckle here) and dig into why they let the Daytons shelter their money in that state? I won’t hold my breath waiting for that one!
You’re getting that excited about a poll of only 300 people?
That is an insignificant sample size, far too small to be credible for drawing any conclusions.
Have you looked at the size of CD8?
Apart from the probability that at least some voters might change their minds between now and the election, I don’t think you will find other polls showing anything like these stats.
But keep waving those pom-poms, cheerleader Mitch!
And thanks again for lettiing me quote you on the Tea Party and rallies, and your observations on polls.
I would make the same argument here that I made to you on Penigma. I’m a little distrustful of any polls right now, but I think this poll you are so excited over is far less reliable than the Newsweek poll that you criticized.
Looking at other measurements of voter preference than just polls– like contributions, letters to the editor, etc. — I think you are seriously underestimating Oberstar’s popularity in the 8th.
But keep waving those pom-poms, cheerleader Mitch!
His blog, his prerogative. Most of us here get that.
I have to admit, however, your use of “letters to the editor” as a metric of voter preference is a laugh-out-loud scream.
DG anxiously awaits the Strib/MSM/DFL poll (sorry for the triple redundancy).
Deegee unsteadily lifts her head from the vomit covered kitchen floor to assure us that “I don’t think you will find other polls showing anything like these stats.”.
We hate to make that ethanol hangover any worse than it has to be but I’m betting that team Oberstar has polling of it’s own. If the news isn’t as bad for him as it appears, seems to me that he’d be rushing to put out the flames of doubt.
So what has Oberstar to say?
*crickets*
You go ahead and get back to your nap now, dear…it’ll be dinner time soon and that fresh bottle of Victory gin will require you to attend with gusto.
No, Scott Hughes, I’m not waiting for any Strib poll. But I know a little bit more about the 8th CD, and this doesn’t track. It is silly to put that much significane into a poll of just 300 people, no matter what they say. It is too small a sampling.
In response to Mitch’s tutelage on polls, I did a little checking of my own on how the polls are ranked for reliability. There is a difference in seriously looking at polls, for objective resuls, from just looking for a poll to pander to what you want the outcome to be. This is the latter.
Mitch was absolutely correct to caution me on Newsweek polls reliability – not that I was really relying on them too heavily anyway in Tea Party Hot,Tea Party Cold, Does it really matter? on Penigma.
Turns out though that this poll service is considered not only heavily GOP partisan, but Public Opinion Strategies was ranked scraping-the-bottom-of-the barrel among the worst for accuracy and reliability. Newsweek was more or less in the middle, in comparison, not worst, not best.
http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/john-farrell/2010/06/11/Ranking-the-Political-Polls-for-the-2010-Elections.html
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/06/pollster-ratings-v40-results.html
Swiftee, poor soul. You really have to stop hiding from the real world with your fantasy adhominem attacks. It won’t change the outcome of the elections, and it is pathetic and mean spirited of you.
It is silly to put that much significane into a poll of just 300 people, no matter what they say. It
How many people do you think are in any statewide poll in Minnesota?
Between 700 and 900 – for the whole state. To cover 8-10 times as many people as the POS poll’s 300 people in one (relatively thinly-populated) district.
In proportion, the Cravack Poll is actually a better per-capita sample size than you get in the “bigger” polls.
And you have to cherrypick a lot of sources to find anyone that puts Princeton Research Study Group (Newsweek) in the “Middle”. You seem to have found them; lefty John Farrell and lefty Nate Silver.
A campaign’s Internal polls need to be accurate because they dictate the allocation of scarce resources. That said, internal poll data can be and is released or leaked to serve strategic purposes.
And here’s the problem with Dog Gone’s last comment: The first link to usnews just points to the 2nd link at fivethirtyeight. The fivethirtyeight story mentions right off that that they only measured accuracy for polls conducted within 21 days of the election. Thus, even if accurate, the story doesn’t say anything about any of the polling data that has been released so far.
Dog Gone, you consistently make this sort of epistemological error. Please learn to look at your own claims with a critical eye. I’m getting tired of doing it for you.
“Swiftee, poor soul. You really have to stop hiding from the real world with your fantasy adhominem attacks. It won’t change the outcome of the elections, and it is pathetic and mean spirited of you”.
If you can’t take the heat, DG, stay out of the damn kitchen!!
Brick – the first link provides a useful summary; noting that the poll service Mitch quotes is partisan, that summary notes that partisan polls are less reliable than non-partisan polls – BOTH GOP and DEM. That argues this is a less reliable poll.
The second link to fivethirtyeight provides not only more detail to the first summary – it has more extensive explanations for metrics and methodology as well as ADDITIONAL rankings of polls. The poll Mitch quoted is consistently near the bottom for accuracy / reliability… and below Newsweek, AND the Strib polls.
Fivethirtyeight also points out- as you note – that the analysis you mentioned is 21 days ahead of the election. What you OMIT to mention is that this analysis picked that time period as more accurate, for purposes of comparison, because polls PRIOR to 21 days ARE LESS RELIABLE PREDICTORS of outcome. The further from the election, the less reliability. The poll Mitch quoted is therefore less likely to be reliable.
Further, where a poll is indicating a really significant variation from other polls and indicators — as this poll is — the smaller the sampling, the greater the probability that it is a non-representative poll. Which I suspect is the case with this poll. If it is accurate, I would expect that other polls would reflect that trend. So far they have not, but if you want to believe that poll results are scientific, they should be reproduced by similar methods in other polls. If that doesn’t happen……it’s pretty certain this is just a fluke, or sloppy polling, or both.
Add to that, this Pew poll about the consistency of politics (I would point out that Pew is generally considered on the conservative side, if any partisan leaning) that states there is NOT a major shift in political leanings.
This pretty well debunks the notion that there is a major shift to a conservative position, and supports that moderates predominate. Oberstar is definitely a moderate, and therefore more likely to appeal to a majority of voters over someone less moderate/more conservative.
pewresearch.org/…/static-america-no-shift-political-values-elections
Given that people tend to hype the polls that agree with them and try to dismiss those that don’t, I think I can fairly fault this on objective criteria as being an instance of that. I would also respectfully point out that there were similar expectations and claims of victories made here in the last election, and most of them failed to materialize.
So, I repudiate your criticism Brick, and suggest you do more homework.
It noted that POS is partisan – which is true, in a sense – without noting that 538 is partisan.
boss – heat, kitchens? I hope that wasn’t a sexist remark.
So……you are critical of my rebuttal to Swiftee, as what? Too harsh? What a laugh. Swiftee is long on stupid and insulting comments, and short on substantive rebuttals, which suggests more about him than it does the people he insults.
Thanks for your concern, but I can handle a lot more heat than Swiftee’s sad little ad hominem.
I will gladly stipulate that 538 is partisan, on subjective matters – but this is not subjective. That wasn’t the only source I provide – note the Pew link.
The 538 methodology is sound, and their analysis is mathematical, not partisan or subjective. I find them more compelling, not only for that methodology and analysis, but because they fault the democratic partisan polls precisely the same way they fault the POS poll, for inaccuracy.
If you don’t find other polls confirming this……it’s probably wrong.
Other indicators also suggest to me that it is wrong — badly wrong.
I would point out Mitch, that the Pew research is generally regarded as far more substantive, and scientific, and ….not sloppy… the way POS is.
Bosshoss, I looked into HR45 and so far as I can tell only Booby Rush D-IL supports it.
Oberstar, may be a closet anti-gunner, but, if he is he has kept it well under cover by getting the NRA endorsement nearly every election cycle.
This is one of the only areas where an Range DFLer breaks from a Minneapolis DFLer.
Cap and Trade which Oberstar DOES SUPPORT will kill the way of life up on the range. He also supports Federal control of every Lake, River, Pond, Stream, swamp, and puddle.
Dayton won the Range in his Senate bid. Franken won up there. Amy K did also. All of them have F ratings from the NRA. The DFL brand seems to matter a great deal more than the NRA brand does.
One other detail worth mentioning. The 538 analysis, comparing polls 21 days in advance of elections with the election results, relied on a large amount of data from a variety of elections – presidential, gubernatorial, senate and house. The largest number of the polls compared with election results were congressional elections – just like the Oberstar Cravaak race.
So, your poll was done by a group that compared unfavorably for their poll results being less accurate…….in a lot of congressional races.
DG,
I’ve addressed 538 in the past. Their analysis involves assigning weights to existing polls, based on size, perceived methodology and age, and calculating a series of synthetic figures.
It’s of some value – depending on the value of the polls. But their latest take on the MN Gubernatorial race, for example, gives lots of weight to the deeply-flawed Minnesota and HHH polls, and (as I wrote a few weeks back) exceedingly disproportionate weight to polling done during the primaries, when Emmer was being outspent 16:1.
And since you dismiss POS because of their (rather thin claim to) bias, you should know (but probably don’t) that 538 is a liberal blog run by center-lefty statistician Nate Silver. The Times bought it to increase their online presence. Just saying – if you discount POS because of their “bias”, then 538 has a vastly stronger aroma of bias about it.
From Dog Gone’s comment:
Turns out though that this poll service is considered not only heavily GOP partisan, but Public Opinion Strategies was ranked scraping-the-bottom-of-the barrel among the worst for accuracy and reliability. Newsweek was more or less in the middle, in comparison, not worst, not best.
From the story Dog Gone linked to as proof of this claim:
— These ratings pertain to just one particular type of poll: those for which the field work was conducted within the 21 days preceding a public election, which surveyed people about their voting intention in that election, and which was released into the public domain in advance of the election.**
Dog Gone then dug herself in deeper:
The second link to fivethirtyeight provides not only more detail to the first summary – it has more extensive explanations for metrics and methodology as well as ADDITIONAL rankings of polls. The poll Mitch quoted is consistently near the bottom for accuracy / reliability… and below Newsweek, AND the Strib polls.
The methodology page (which you do not link to) does not mention Public Opinion Strategies. These “ADDITIONAL rankings of polls” do not seem to exist on the site either.
If you are making claims about facts not in evidence, you have an epistemological problem, QED.
I would point out Mitch, that the Pew research
DG, you need to learn a little about the context of these organizations.
POS does fast-turnaround opinion polling; it’s production work on tight deadlines. Things like media and campaign polling – which are of necessity sloppy compared to more structured, leisurely polling…
…like Pew does. Pew focuses more on larger, less time-constrained, more academic polls. It’s the kind of polling that allows the time and budget to get huge samples, and sand off all the statistical edges.
Not sure where you’re getting your info, DG, but you need to find a better source, stat.
Brick – either POS is good at predicting election outcomes or they are not.
I’m betting that this poll, which deviates substantially from the findings of any other poll, will NOT be an accurate predictor of the CD8 election.
Lets wait and see.
So far, from what I recall of the 2008 election, Mitch was very optimistic and enthusiastic, predicting wins – including McCain Palin – which didn’t happen.
We don’t have long to wait to see who was correct, and who was not, in predicting the CD8 election results.
The Cravaack poll has gotten the attention of Barone:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/gallups-astonishing-numbers-and-the-lake-superior-congressional-districts-104321583.html
Here is Mitch’s only prediction:
Even if Cravaack were to finish in November within twenty points against Oberstar – who has been winning races by 40-odd points in recent memory – it would have been a huge moral victory.
So what is your prediction, Dog Gone? Oberstar by at least 20?
Deegee via Skype:
So, [braaaaap!] I repaliate your critishism Bricky, and shuggesht you do more homework. [glug…glug…glug].
Deegee channels a highly intoxicated Eva Young:
not that I waszh really [hic!] relyverizing on them too heavily enway in Tea Party Hot,Tea Party Cold, Does it really matter? on Penigma. [Redicioulus!] [Rede my bleg!]
I hope DG realizes that I am Terry. I though “bilbo baggins” (or whatever) was really Angry Clown under a new nick so I dragged “Brick Savage” out of retirement.
“Brick Savage”. What a name! Tough. Manly. Uses Old Spice. Lots and lots of Old Spice. Barrels of the stuff. Not twee at all.
DG,
the findings of any other poll
What “other poll” exists for the 8th CD? Other than the one conducted every two years in November?
Since are so swoony over 538, here’s a question: Silver’s been calling the 8th district a “100% Dem” district. But he doesn’t reveal the data he uses to reach that conclusion.
Since you seem to be using him as your (only?) source, I gotta ask – do you know what data you’re referring to?
Oh, and DG? Two more things, real quick:
1) While POS works primarily for Republicans, that doesn’t necessarily invalidate its conclusions in and of itself. In internal polling, the premium is on accuracy; campaigns need to know where to allocated their resources. If it happens to be good news – as yesterdays’ poll was – so much the better, but it really is a utilitarian rather than advertising exercise. Companies that blow smoke up their clients’ skirts stop getting internal polling contracts.
2) Don’t like POS? Is Gallup good enough for you? Because while they don’t directly address the MN8, their results certainly fit with those of the POS poll.
Oberstar is calling it a push poll.
Looking at other measurements of voter preference than just polls– like contributions, letters to the editor, etc. — I think you are seriously underestimating Oberstar’s popularity in the 8th.
OTOH, you need to look at where the donations are coming from, and the average contribution.
Cravaack has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, in a district where no previous challenger has (if memory serves, and I’m pretty sure it does) broken into six digits. And it’s all local, to all intents and purposes. It’s happening in MN7, too; Lee Byberg has raised about 15 times as much money as the previous GOP endorsee; I believe he’s raised more than *all* of Peterson’s previous challengers combined, and Cravaack has done at least as well.
Letters to the editor are a ludicrous metric; if I were a teacher, I’d have you sit in the corner for suggesting they’re not. They are controlled entirely by the editorial staff. The former Letters Editor at the Strib once admitted on the air during an interview with Jason Lewis that they juggle the letters they print to their own purposes. This blog’s comment section is a more random, less-engineered slice of public opinion than any LTE page.
jpmn Says: “Cap and Trade which Oberstar DOES SUPPORT will kill the way of life up on the range. He also supports Federal control of every Lake, River, Pond, Stream, swamp, and puddle.”
THIS CANNOT BE EMPHASIZED ENOUGH!!!
Oberstar is calling it a push poll.
MNPublius – as close as there is to a DFL news release site – is calling it a “fake” poll.
Which means, essentially, that it’s very very real and scaring the piss out of the DFL.
Hi Brick / Terry!
There were two different ratings for POS at the link I provided – one for polls that had 10 or more polls for comparisons; and a longer and more inclusive one that did not have that requirement.
For other pollster ratings, I would suggest use the tag on the article ‘pollster ratings’ to take you to additional ratings.
I note that you don’t dispute or refute my criticism of the poll as being less reliable the greater the time between the poll and the elections, or that the smaller the sampling the less reliable it is as a predictor, or that partisan polls have been consistently less reliable than non-partisan polls, or that POS doesn’t have a particularly good track record, that I could find anyway, in their poll results correlating to election day outcomes.
Nor did you challenge that the data used for the ranking relied more on congressional polls and elections than other races for office.
Your criticism seems to devolve to you couldn’t find the other rankings previous to the one I linked.
And lastly, there is the issue of previously inaccurate predictions of GOP success that hasn’t been addressed.
Swiftee, can’t you come up with at least a more varied fantasy to project onto other. Your current one is old, and tired, and tedious…like you.
I just saw on the KSTP news that an ABC poll released last night show the tea party losing ground, and the republicans losing ground as well – though not as much.
DG,
Did you happen to read the link I provided above?
The different reputable polls are all over the place, recording big fluctuations in party ID, enthusiasm, and likely voter models. All of the reputable ones show a Republican surge somewhere between “impressive” and “cataclysmic”; Barone (no tea partier, he) says it could be more like 1946 than 1994.
Within that range, there are variations between polls, and even within specific polls. Rasmussen’s GOP ID number dropped (but wait! Aren’t they the Fox poll? Huh?), while SUSA’s is strong and Gallup’s is steady.
I strongly suggest you read the Barone link I provided.
I note that you don’t dispute or refute my criticism of the poll as being less reliable the greater the time between the poll and the elections, or that the smaller the sampling the less reliable it is as a predictor, or that partisan polls have been consistently less reliable than non-partisan polls, or that POS doesn’t have a particularly good track record, that I could find anyway, in their poll results correlating to election day outcomes.
I think that all of these things are true — in general — other than for POS track record as a predictor. I’m not sure that any pollster will admit to predicting the future. They use questions like “If the election were held today. . . This is why polls tend to be more accurate as election day nears. The poll could be 100% accurate on the day it is taken, yet still be off by a huge margin on election day. Using Silver’s ranking on a 21-day inclusion to election day to mark this POS poll as lower than the strib isn’t kosher. For all you know, if Silver had set his mark at six weeks from election day, POS would have been on top. The information you need to correlate this POS poll with the strib, newsweek, etc, is not in Silver’s story.
The reason Silver made two rankings of poll accuracy is because the second ranking with the small samples of polls/pollster is far less accurate. Sample size is too small.
What struck me about the POS poll was the small number of undecideds. This would fit into the “push poll” diagnosis. Maybe they were undecided when they picked up the phone, but they picked their candidate as the questions were asked.
FYI, my mother lives in Oberstar’s district. She has voted for him since his office helped out the family with an immigration matter in 2002. She says that she will not vote for him this year because of his vote on Obamacare. Mom likes her Medicare Advantage.