PART 1:

Late last month, Claire Josefine got a phone call from an anonymous pollster. The woman asked Josefine to rank a list of issues (education, the environment, jobs, etc.) from most to least important and then asked who she intends to vote for in the 1st Supervisorial District, where Josefine lives.

Recalling the phone conversation earlier this week, Josefine said she told the woman that she’ll be voting for Cheryl Seidner. Asked if she had a second choice Josefine said, “No,” and the woman, sounding enthused, responded, “OK, great! Can I tell Cheryl?” Josefine recalled.

“I thought that was weird,” Josefine said. The pollster also reportedly asked if Josefine would like a Seidner lawn sign, which also seemed odd because Josefine has been volunteering for the Seidner campaign and she’d heard nothing about phone polls. After hanging up with the pollster, Josefine called a campaign organizer who confirmed that, sure enough, nobody with the Seidner campaign was conducting any polling.

Over the next few weeks, the Seidner campaign received a number of calls from confused 1st District residents saying that they, too, had received polling calls. Former State Assemblymember Patty Berg — who lives in the 1st — was called twice, and the script, as recalled to the Journal, was nearly identical.

“He asked if I’d be willing to put up a yard sign,” Berg remembered. “I said, ‘I already have two.’ He asked if I’d be willing to assist her [Seidner]. I said, ‘I already am.'”

Just who is conducting the poll? Good question. (Thank you.) The other two candidates in the race — Rex Bohn and Annette de Modina — say they know nothing about it. Josefine said her caller I.D. registered a Eureka phone number under the name “Campaign Comm.” When the Journal called the number, a woman answered and said it was a private residence and an unlisted number. Worried we may have misdialed or written down the wrong number, we double-checked with our sources and called again. This time there was no answer. We’ve called six times since, on two different phones, and each time it just rings and rings.

Anyone else out there gotten one of these calls? Let us know.

PART 2:

The few internal campaign polls that have been released in the 2nd District U.S. Congressional race all have one thing in common: Jared Huffman is in the lead. Aside from that, they’re all over the place. Here are the results of a much-cited poll leaked by Huffman’s own campaign earlier this month:

Notice Stacey Lawson‘s position in second place. This poll was conducted by Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates, a California-based firm with offices in Oakland and Santa Monica. According to the Huffman campaign the methodology involved 500 telephone interviews with registered district voters “who are likely to cast ballots in the June 2012 primary election.” The interviews were conducted from March 23-29, and the results have an eyebrow-raising margin of error of +/- 4.9 percent.

Compare that with a poll released by Norman Solomon‘s campaign yesterday, showing the North Bay activist in second place. The poll, conducted by Lake Research Partners, found that nearly half (47 percent) of primary voters were still undecided. The rest of the results were as follows:

State Assemblymember Jared Huffman currently leads with 18%, followed by Solomon with 10% of the vote, then [Marin] County Supervisor Susan Adams (8%), and small businesswoman Stacey Lawson in fourth place (5%). The remaining candidates, including both Republicans, all receive 3% or less.

Like Huffman’s poll, the findings were based on 500 phone interviews with a random sample of likely 2012 primary election voters. These interviews were conducted April 17-19 and have a similar margin of error (+/- 4.4 percent). According to a press release, the poll’s methodology was meant to simulate the voting booth:

The candidates were read in the order they will appear on the ballot, along with their ballot labels and party preference. Respondents were given no information on any of the candidates before the ballot question was read.

Now let’s look at a poll released by Earth First! organizer and Humboldt County resident Andy Caffrey (click on it to view full-size):

Again, there’s Huffman up top (with 23 percent), but below that things get weird. For one thing, Caffrey’s poll places him in a close fourth place, with 8 percent support. Both of the other polls give him less than 3 percent. Straining credulity even further is where he puts mega-fundraising-contender Stacey Lawson: 1 percent — and nowhere in the last seven months has she surpassed 2 percent, according to Caffrey’s poll. He sent a press release along with the poll, which said in part:

There are only four people in this race now, Jared Huffman, Susan Adams, Norman Solomon, and Andy Caffrey. Lawson with her $800,000 campaign and her 1% is being crushed by my $10,000 Internet and grassroots organizing campaign which has produced 8% support for me.

We contacted Caffrey to ask about the methodology of his poll. He responded via email that he hires a consulting firm in Illinois called Triumph Political, and that Triumph contracts out the actual polling to a third-party company.

“I do not know anything about that firm and have no contact with it,” Caffrey said. A brief Google search returned no results for an Illinois firm called Triumph Political. Yesterday morning we sent a follow-up email to Caffrey asking for more details. He has yet to respond.

A while back he did respond to the Journal‘s March 15 cover story on the Congressional race, taking to the Interwebs where he unleashed a potent mix of contortionist logic, suspect data and wishful thinking to argue (at great length) that “Andy Caffrey [is] running neck-and-neck with and beating millionaires in this race.”

Evidently our lack of respect for his powerhouse campaign hasn’t hurt his chances. Today on Facebook Caffrey boasted, “I’ve done the calculations: I only need $5,000 more to win the primary election!”

Where will he get that money? He hints at a source: “There’s a lot of pot money up here,” he says (WHAT?!), “and I’ve only received a couple hundred dollars of that.”

Oh, snap, growers. Andy Caffrey just called you out! Time to pony up.

Ryan Burns worked for the Journal from 2008 to 2013, covering a diverse mix of North Coast subjects,...

Join the Conversation

70 Comments

  1. Yep, got the same call last night. They said they were with the organization “Humboldt Research”, but caller ID said “Private Caller”. I answered the same questions you mentioned in the article. But the guy asking me questions seemed to share my opinion that there were too many Rex Bonn baseball signs up, which was odd. He also didn’t seem to know what district I lived in.

  2. Ryan, can you post the phone number, so we can all call it and ask some questions ourselves?

  3. I received the polling call too, and I told them I am voting for Cheryl Seidner. They asked me if I wanted a yard sign, and I said yes. I am still waiting for my yard sign, and now I know why.

  4. It’s Arkley’s Eureka coalition for jobs at work again

    Candidates are afraid to take contributions from him, so he finds alternative ways to “contribute”

  5. The Journal should offer a reward for information leading to the exposure of whatever individual or organization is behind these calls. After all, it has a fine history of extraordinary concern about political behavior that is less than 100% fully upright, devoting cover stories and investing its crack reporting team’s time.

    How much does Judy want to chip in?

  6. How about you just go on with your witch hunt on an anonymous blog Mitch?

    Oh that’s right, you are doing that, all the while implying that the Bohn campaign is somehow involved when R.B. himself said they arent involved.

  7. Nope,

    You’re going to have to show me where I imply (let alone suggest) that this is the doings of the Bohn campaign.

    Projecting much?

  8. I hereby offer $100 to person first providing infomation leading to the exposure of Heraldo…..$100 for Plain Jane also……

  9. Nope,

    I want you to look at yourself very closely. Now spread your arms and legs wide and get an estimate of how much space you take up.

    Good.

    Now, if someone not within that space does something, did you do it? No? Excellent.

    See?

    No, I didn’t think so.

  10. Mitch wtf dude. Question answered. The sleazy smear by attaching bohn’s name to the thread blog you associate with says it all

  11. I am the second gunman on the grassy knoll.

    There were two gunmen on the grassy knoll? With the gun from the warehouse, that makes three! Where is Arlen Specter when you need him?

  12. Mitch says: (on the anonymous blog he is now apparantly cohosting)

    April 27, 2012 at 9:38 am

    “It’s kind of funny-sad to watch all the people who are outraged by non-events launch into ridicule mode when the real dirty tricksters show up.”

    PRICELESS!!! So do you make yourself laugh and cry at the same time?

    Your obsession of how the eye, the mack press , the ncj and the t-s treated the Sundburg dui paints you in the very light you so abhor.

    If memory serves, Jack Durham, Kevin Hoover, and I believe Hank Sims all explained what happened with the dui coverage, and how it was covered the way it was.Time and time again…over and over again, it was explained.

    As you were listed as the most prolific commenter over at Heraldanonymous for the past year (prolific enough to apparently become part of the flying heraldo staff), it is apparant that you have lost all sight of any kind of impartiality – and you are the guy who wants to monitor our local elections?

    Very.Fucking.Scary.

  13. What Mitch never quite groks is – NO ONE ever said they wouldn’t print the story.

    What Hank said was – he wasn’t going to take some last minute bomb, and run with it without time to give the target time to adequately respond.

    If you remember he specifically said the bomb-thrower, who of course wanted to be anonymous, wanted him to “do his job.”

    His response to that was, “No, what he wanted was for me to do HIS.”

    If you have something to say – goddam it, stand up and say it. Stop this hiding and dark shadows shit.

    And btw – it begs credulity to think that anyone acting on Rex’s behalf in a stunt like this would call Patty Berg – twice, no less – this reeks of plain brown wrappers and anonymous emails and letters. Mitch, maybe you weren’t around for that, but people can fill you in. Maybe your buddy, sara.

    Wasn’t Kerrigan putting together some kind of polling company? Or did that fall flat?

    Then there was Julie Francis, the PUSH POLL queen, whatever happened to her?

  14. Rose,

    I look forward to your adding to my offer of $100 for information leading to the people attempting to sabotage the Seidner campaign.

    You’re objectively for decency in politics, right? Just like Hank Sims, Kevin Hoover, the entire staff of the sad-excuse-for-a-newspaper-thing and that McK Press guy who nobody told.

    Regardless of who gets caught?

  15. “If you have something to say – goddam it, stand up and say it. Stop this hiding and dark shadows shit.”

    I’ve said it. I think the press in this area is a complete disaster. Not owned, just lazy and incompetent.

    I’ve said it. I want to know who’s behind this latest bit of dirty politics. I’m willing to put $100 behind that wish.

    I wish I could offer 100 times as much, but I can’t. That’s mainly because of devoting too much time in my last four years to “Very. Fucking. Scary.” work aimed at reducing dirty tricks in politics.

    The fact that people can’t see that you can have political opinions and still be for fair elections is a reflection on them, not me.

  16. Rose,

    If you think my friend sara is involved, wouldn’t that be a good reason to add to the reward offer? Let the chips fall where they may.

    The explanations regarding the DUI coverage are fine. Only problem is, there was never any follow-up, was there? As I recall, many questions were left dangling.

    I understand. The local press is not crooked. For the most part, it just consists of people too dumb to really get the story, and too overwhelmed to do much beyond publishing press releases. “Who pooped at the bank” got national ridicule but locally people remain in denial about the state of our press as enablers.

    Meanwhile, the T-S chooses not to publicize the urgency ordinance hearing on the day it takes place, and constantly serves as a mouthpiece for the people smearing Occupy Eureka for the behavior of some mentally ill people over which OE has no control.

    You know, Rose, I genuinely believe we have the same ends in mind, despite being on the opposite ends of the political spectrum. I don’t think either of us are well served by an easily manipulated, uninterested, narcissistic and incapable press.

  17. Thanks, ashamed. Here’s a full comment from Rose at the blog you linked, calling Obama a trained seal and stating “this whole meme was in the can.” I’ll reevaluate my earlier comment that Rose and I share a belief in the same end values. Other comments to Rose’s post are worse than hers, but I can’t blame her for the people who comment at her blog.

    “It’s very troubling that mob-rule has forced this to this point. It’s particularly bizarre when you look at the dozens upon dozens of murders and atrocities this month in Chicago alone – and realize that there has never been any concern from this president, even when he was a senator.

    “This whole meme was in the can, ready be launched at the first opportunity – and the idea that they had a white guy shooting an unarmed black kid became that opportunity. So they launched it without knowing any of the facts – most notably that ‘Zimmerman’ was not a white guy. But it was too late to pull it back.

    “And Obama performed like the trained seal he is, uttered his oh-so-eloquent prose, and poured gas on the racist flame – without knowing the facts, the circumstances, before the investigation was complete, before any charges were filed, before a trial was held, before any evidence was presented, and before a jury had a chance to render a verdict. It is so incredibly irresponsible – but it served his purposes.

    “Then – the “New” Black Panthers issues the Dead or Alive Bounty, and not only did he say nothing to calm the flames, but his RACIST mg Attorney General did nothing, except go out and praise the professional race-baiters, and further inflame the populace.

    “But – the good thing is – they are fully exposed on this one. Because they launched it with a flawed case as their base, they are exposed – they were going to do this to a white guy.

    “Fly in the ointment – the guy is not white.”

    (End quote from Rose Welsh.)

  18. Who helps Rose translate her idiotic musings from the original 1930’s Austrain German dialect?
    THAT could be the basis of a terrific NCJ article.

  19. @ A ,7:38am: put your name on your question and i’ll answer you. And next time spell my name right.

  20. I’m detecting the efforts of another wannabe kingmaker with less than upright methods. If Seidner has integrity, she will distance denounce such practices.

  21. If Seidner has integrity? Are you suggesting that she’s having her own campaign sabotaged, Thirdeye?

  22. Too bad the press didn’t cover Sundberg’s DUI better, or better yet, uncover the fact that he had “Teen Challenge” workers putting up political signs. I saw them with my own eyes… roving around McKinleyville. Completely illegal. Using a nonprofit for political campaigning. The tribes get grant funds and nobody — NOBODY – knows how they spend the money. I found it ironic that Cheryl was praying for violent crime victims when members (younger) of her own extended family do drugs, beat people up, and rob them. That’s why so many are in jail. Let us pray.

  23. @Ryan Burns

    I am implying no such things. We have both the Bohn and Seidner campaigns stating that they are not associated with the caller. We do not know who the caller is, of what their motivation is. We do know that whoever is behind this thing is stupid, since they called Patty Berg twice. We have no reason not to take the Seidner and Bohn campaigns at their word.

    What is sleazy is the effort of some Seidner supporters to call this thing sabotage by the Bohn campaign. Whether or not that is regarded as acceptable by Seidner will be very telling.

  24. Ryan Burns,

    I know you’re no fool. Hopefully, commenters like Thirdeye are making things clear for you. Beyond disgusting.

  25. Yes Mitch only you and certain members of the local Democratic Central Committee get to question the values of others………..

  26. Thirdeye/Anonymous, blaming the victim is SO retrograde.

    Really, who could possibly have the money to pay for this? (Friends of) the guy with $100K who has been running for four years? Or the reservation indian who just got into the race?

    Really.

  27. My my, the wannabe kingmaker who gets upset when local media don’t throw mud for him is displeased this morning! How DARE anyone suggest that trying to sell an unsubstantiated theory in the blogosphere to throw mud at a local candidate is sleazy!

    @gagging

    How much money is required for some local idiot to make phone calls?

  28. I’ve done a bit of reading over the weekend, trying to figure out where Rose’s attitude comes from. It’s been revealing — mainly, it suggests to me why our country is breaking apart. People have empathy for “their side” and show none for “the others.” The failure exists on both “sides.”

    Zimmerman is clearly not the one dimensional racist that some would like to see. He grew up with black people around him, and went into business partnership with someone described as African American. The “gated community” of the news descriptions is 50% white, 20% hispanic, 20% black. The community had had a rash of crimes, including two young black men breaking into the house of a neighbor of Zimmerman’s, while she called 911 from upstairs, terrified. They ran through Zimmerman’s yard while escaping.

    But, for heaven’s sake, a 17 year old armed only with Skittles got shot and killed walking home to his father’s house, 70 yards away. Walking while black. If that doesn’t call for national soul-searching, I don’t know what might.

    Meanwhile, just to get it out of my system, here are the President’s words about the shooting, which Rose complains came before the investigations were complete:

    “Obviously, this is a tragedy,” he said. “I can only imagine what these parents are going through, and when I think about this boy, I think about my own kids, and I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this, and that everybody pulls together — federal, state and local — to figure out exactly how this tragedy happened…”

    “I think all of us have to do some soul searching to figure out how does something like this happen,” said Obama. “And that means we examine the laws and the context for what happened, as well as the specifics of the incident.”

    And Rose’s description of the President’s words:

    “And Obama performed like the trained seal he is, uttered his oh-so-eloquent prose, and poured gas on the racist flame – without knowing the facts, the circumstances, before the investigation was complete, before any charges were filed, before a trial was held, before any evidence was presented, and before a jury had a chance to render a verdict. It is so incredibly irresponsible – but it served his purposes.”

    We are badly broken.

  29. Obviously since Zimmerman lived and worked with negros, he could not have been racist.

    I forgot that all racists live in the backwoods of Montana in “whites only” compounds.

  30. This is a minor detail, but let’s set the record straight when it comes to the T-S and how it informed folks of the Urgency Ordinance.

    There were a couple stories the week before the hearing on the ordinance. Then the paper had an article about the emergency ordinance in its Sunday edition, which is the largest circulation edition of the week. Plus, all these stories remained on the paper’s website. (There is no Monday edition. The paper could have repeated Sunday’s story in the Tuesday edition, but why waste the space repeating what people have already read?)

    So if you read the T-S, you would have known about the ordinance.

    There are plenty of reasons to beat up on the T-S, but this isn’t one of them.

    When I read these threads it becomes clear that a lot of the media critics don’t actually read the newspapers that they criticize.

  31. Jack,

    Jack,

    A newspaper that meets the following three criteria would print a front page story on the morning of a meeting at which the government was going to hold a public meeting threatening to impact first amendment rights:

    1) minimal competence;
    2) minimal support of the Constitution
    3) ability to publish on the morning in question

    Whether the “story” had gone into a Sunday edition is irrelevant.

    I realize that’s beyond you, and I feel sorry for you.

  32. And I quote:

    “Zimmerman is clearly not the one dimensional racist that some would like to see.”

    You modified that a bit, didn’t you.

    Stupidity is not limited to our area’s pretend “journalists,” it’s pretty much everywhere around us.

  33. That was me, addressed to Baldly and, when you get right down to it, a depressing percentage of Humboldt County.

  34. By running it on Tuesday, readers would have an opportunity to re-read what they read on Sunday. That would be helpful for people with really short-term memories.

    (My paper had the story on the front page, above the fold, on that Tuesday, in the newspaper racks,)

  35. Ashamed,

    Rose has an excellent point on that one, if her facts are correct. I have no way of knowing whether her facts are correct.

    Lots of wealthy people get away with murder in this country, and it’s hardly a new phenomenon, or one restricted to Republicans.

  36. By reading it on Tuesday, people would have been reminded as they were having breakfast and glancing at the sad-excuse-for-a-newspaper’s front page that there was a meeting the newspaper considered important happening in Eureka that morning.

    Not everyone makes notes on the stories in the Sunday paper, to plan out their Tuesday.

  37. Published on the day of his death?

    All I see is hatred directed toward a liberal champion. If Teddy’s political vision was shared by Rose, she would NEVER had blogged on his day of passing.

  38. Yes, pretty poor taste.

    If Ted Kennedy had ever really faced justice in the Kopechne incident, my own opinion would be that it was out of bounds on the day of his death.

    But, IIRC, there was never any real investigation, despite the screams from the people who hated him. Given that, I can understand why the wound was still raw for the people who hated him.

  39. Of all the days to announce the meeting, Sunday is the best. It has the highest readership.

    With Tuesday’s paper there are two problems:
    1. Lower readership
    2. Readers might not read the paper until later in the day, or that evening. So they wouldn’t know about the meeting until after it was over.

    So Sunday is a much better choice. If you were part of a group that wanted to advertise about the ordinance, you would be well advised to spend your ad dollars on the Sunday edition.

    Of course, it wouldn’t hurt to have a reminder in Tuesday’s paper, even though the readership was notified of the meeting 48 hours earlier. But that’s a minor issue.

  40. The funny thing is that if the T-S had waited until Tuesday to print the article, it might have dodged this criticism. But then I’d be on the opposite side, asking why the T-S didn’t print the article in its flagship edition on Sunday – the edition that gets the highest readership. It’s also the edition that people have a chance to read before the actual meeting, so that they can make some last-minute adjustments to their schedules so they can attend, or call or email their supervisor. Tuesday is just too damn late. Oh well. What do I know?

  41. According to Norman’s push polls, this is how the numbers changed for us from Oct to April:

    Huffman 16% > 18%
    Roberts (R) 12% > 3% or Less
    Solomon 11% > 10%
    Adams 4% > 8%
    Lawson 4% > 5%
    Courtney 3% > 3% or Less
    Caffrey 2% > 3% or Less
    Renée 1% > 3% or Less

    Undecided 46% > 47%

    So Norman has lost 1% over the last six months and there are 1% more undecided now that six months ago according to his own polls! Norman calls this an indication of his likeliness to make the top two! Somehow he has to gain about 15% more in the next five weeks to make the top two, but his trend is to lose votes the more he campaigns and the more money he spends. A half a million dollars and he’s losing support!

    Now this is suspect polling!!

  42. What Mitch would have liked to have seen was not a meeting notice but a regurgitation of his own propaganda. That’s what the Herald is for, Mitch.

  43. The anonymous poster at 2:49 has it right, if you consider the First Amendment to the US Constitution my own propaganda.

    Any newspaper worth its ink would have “regurgitated” the First Amendment on the morning of that hearing, and spoken up loud and clear. Instead, the T-S filled its front page with some photo of a fake car accident, if I’m remembering correctly.

  44. That would have been helpful for the Times-Standard readers that were too stoned to remember what they read 48 hours before the Tuesday edition.

  45. Jack,

    I get that you don’t get it.

    Here’s a tip. Watch that thing that transmits images over a cable for a while. You’ll notice that sometimes the advertisements repeat.

    That’s not because the advertisers think their audience is stoned — it’s that the advertisers don’t have an inflated sense of their self-importance, and realize that they’re lucky if each impression of the ad gets paid attention to by one person in a hundred that see it.

    But carry on — your insights about Sunday readership are just awesome.

  46. That analogy doesn’t work here. An article about an urgency ordinance isn’t the same as an advertisement trying to get you to buy a specific brand of soap.

  47. No, Jack, you’re right. The former, which deals with a threat to First Amendment freedoms, ought to be critical to a functioning newspaper, while the latter is completely trivial.

    A functioning newspaper could skip the soap ad and repeat the information about the threat to First Amendment freedoms. And it could run an editorial on the front page, warning its readership about the threat, and explaining to them why it’s important. Or, if it’s the T-S, it could wait on the editorial until after the damage is done, taking the opportunity to whisper “tsk-tsk.”

  48. Stop the presses! You and I agree on something. If you’re going to editorialize against something like this, you should do so before the action. We agree on that. (Except I think the editorial should run on Sunday.)

    Holding the soap ad? No way. The T-S is probably limping along. It needs every penny it can get to stay alive. So the soap ad must run. If you stop running the soap ads, then you don’t exist. That means the three articles about the urgency ordinance which appeared in the week and half prior to the vote wouldn’t have appeared at all.

    (BTW, if you were selling soap, and you wanted people to buy it on Tuesday, you couldn’t do better than to have your soap ad above the fold on the front page of the Sunday edition. That’s the primo spot in the primo edition.)

  49. Why won’t anyone post the PHONE NUMBER that has showed up on a few caller ID’s?

  50. Wow! These spammers are the most annoying thing in the blog comments, and I’ve been called fat here by greasy middle aged men three times my size!

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *