Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Wednesday, February 23, 2005

The Newest Poll (For now anyways)

PollBefore you all pounce, I apologize for Yorty and I not posting the "newest poll" info last evening. Yes, LA Voice and Boi From Troy, beat us to the punch. I'm glad to see you all took it upon yourselves to comment all over the NY Times post last evening in our absence. We were tying one on down here in celebration of "the miracle on ice". Vodka is very good. Anyways, moving on -


KABC released their newest poll last evening. As many of you have already commented, the various camps are either
A) touting their success, or
B) Discrediting the hell out of the firm who ran it.

The results are:
Antonio Villaraigosa 36%
James Hahn 19%
Bernard Parks 15%
Bob Hertzberg 14%
Richard Alarcon 6%
Other/Undecided 10%

No matter how you dice it though, it appears Tony is in, Hahn is in deep sh*&%t, and Hertzberg is moving up.

The funniest part as Mack Reed points out is the posturing and sparring between the camps.

Villaraigosa blasts and posts away as if the poll is the holy grail of politics (Note that Hertzberg's camp even got a word in edge wise their as well). Hertzberg blasted discrediting the company and logic behind the poll, and Hahn is MIA. Nothing changes I guess...


Blogger J. Harriman said:

I will re-post here what I put up last night after -- since it is the definitive analysis of this poll.

The problem with the Survey USA poll (I just looked at the crosstabs) is that they do not weight the sample to the universe of likely voters, but to the Census. That means that they have over-polled Latinos by a fairly substantial margin (and conversely under-polled whites) If their numbers are reweighted to reflect an actual likely turnout, Antonio is still way ahead -- at about 32.5% to Hahn at 19.5. Hertzberg is in third at 17.5. Parks is 15.3%. Alarcon about 5.

Thus, the race between Hahn and Hertzberg is closer,meaning it is more likely that Bob and Jimmy start tearing at one anothers eyeballs pretty soon.

February 23, 2005 10:48 AM  

Anonymous Boi from Troy said:

Survey USA has actually been about as accurate as other polling firms--correctly detecting Schwarzenegger's surge in the recall long before other polling systems, as the most memorable example.

In races where there is one candidate whom people may support but might be afraid to admit it (Schwarzenegger, and perhaps, Villaraigosa?) the Robo-polls can be more accurate than human polls!

February 23, 2005 10:48 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Is there anything left to say on this subject? But once again, MEAT has proven himself to be a complete moron. Every expert - acknowledged expert, not the self-appointed type like MEAT, - has criticized the methodology of the Survey USA survey/poll.

February 23, 2005 10:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I still prefer the robber-poll on the left.

February 23, 2005 10:54 AM  

Anonymous LA Insider said:

SurveyUSA has been very wrong in LA primaries before. Just three weeks before the 2001 primary, SurveyUSA said that Hahn was beating Villaraigosa by 12. Villaraigosa ended up beating Hahn by 6.

SurveyUSA does not use a live person to administer their surveys. The questions are asked by a computer-generated digitally record voice. Responses are recorded via the keypad on the respondent’s phone. In the words of Michael Traugott, chair of the Communications Studies Department at the University of Michigan and an expert on political polling, one of the “limiting factors” in this kind of polling is that the polling firm, he said, “has no idea who is on the other end of the phone. It could be a kid or someone who doesn’t live at that address.”

SurveyUSA chooses who to call on the basis of their phone number, rather than by selecting from a list of actual voters. This kind of sampling, known as Random Digit Dial, relies on voters to tell the truth about whether they are likely to vote in the election in question. In high turnout elections, this is not much of a problem – the respondent really is likely to vote. But in low turnout elections like the one happening next month, non-voters are more inclined to lie and give the socially desirable response – “of course I plan to vote” – than admit that they never actually make it to the polls.

In low turnout elections, RDD sampling introduces bias. Candidates with low name recognition are even less well known by non-voters than they are by likely voters. In other words, an RDD survey in a low turnout election will overstate the strength of a well-known candidate – like Antonio Villaraigosa, Jim Hahn or Bernard Parks

February 23, 2005 10:54 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Anyone who defines their own individual ANAL-ysis of a 3rd party poll as "definitive" is too full of themselves to be taken seriously by anyone not under 72-hour surveillance.

February 23, 2005 10:55 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'm sure the "Anal-yst" you reference, who has also posted blatantly racist stereotypes on this blog more than once, has been on a "72" on several occasions...

February 23, 2005 10:58 AM  

Blogger J. Harriman said:

I will respond to intelligent comments, not to crude character assassination.

Here's an intelligent comment:

"SurveyUSA has been very wrong in LA primaries before. Just three weeks before the 2001 primary, SurveyUSA said that Hahn was beating Villaraigosa by 12. Villaraigosa ended up beating Hahn by 6."

Intelligent, but it misses the point. Hahn could very well have been 12 points ahead of Villaraigosa 3-weeks out in 2001. My guess is that is just about when Villaraigosa began advertising. If I recall correctly Hahn started that race with a huge lead in the high 20s, and AV started in the mid-single digits.

February 23, 2005 11:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Harriman - You're going to make an ass of yourself if you keep using phrases like "I will respond to intelligent comments, not to crude character assassination. Here's an intelligent comment" when you follow it up with bull. Tony was already up on the air.

February 23, 2005 11:24 AM  

Anonymous boifromtroy said:

Mystery Pollster has a good analysis and interview with the Survey USA people that everyone should read before citing just one example:


February 23, 2005 11:33 AM  

Blogger J. Harriman said:

I made it clear that I didn't know exactly when AV began advertising in 2001. If he was on the air 3 weeks out, it hadn't been for very long. All I'm saying is that it is sophistical to claim that a poll is wrong because it shows a result 3 weeks from the election that is different than the actual vote.

February 23, 2005 11:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'm praying to the Virgin Mary, Allah, Buddah and so on that big Tony V. is the highest vote getter and becomes are Mayor. Yeahhhhh, Tony V.

February 23, 2005 11:37 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And I'm praying to "pope Tony" that he settle down and learn one job at a time. He's still in "remedial councilmember" stage, and if failing miserably at running 1/15th of the city.

February 23, 2005 1:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If you think any mayor runs the city you are foolish. It's really about the chief of staff and his/her assistants. Tony V., while he has his flaws, will accomplish that much. Don't hate. Join the coronation of Tony V.

February 23, 2005 1:11 PM  

Blogger SacramentoNighties said:

The responses I've found most interesting and telling are on Attention-Deficit Villaraigosa's own site and in their e-mail blast announcing this "coup," where the campaign staff is issuing big warnings to supporters not to get too excited, yet (i.e. don't stop giving, don't start the victory lap yet, don't forget to actually vote). The subtext is there, too. Don't forget that there's a lot not known about ADV®'s career that will come out in the general election and turn off a large portion of the population.

They know that any failure to reign in a belief (true or otherwise) that this is a slam dunk -- now, and even more critically in the runoff -- will be terminal. Being perceived as too far ahead this many weeks out has turned elections on their head.

Again, from the last thread on this -- ADV® is more or less were he was 4 years ago and a little better known in the city now (for good and bad), he was expected to be in a runoff from the day he announced, and his political views and history are, to 1 out of every 3-4 likely voters in the city, what garlic is to vampires. (And, please don't repeat that this new poll shows 30 percent of "conservatives" will vote him. Even SurveyUSA says it's sub-population and sub-demographic numbers shouldn't be quoted. The teeny-tiny sampling there are literally a few dozen likely voters in each group).

Wonder why the ADV® "triumphant background" ads don't mention the ACLU. Suppose someone will? Or, is that an "attack," too.

February 23, 2005 1:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Don't Hate"

Sorry, I will always reserve to right to "hate" being used by any politician for purely political gains, especially when there's no upside for the faithful but "warm fuzzies." I will always "hate" being lied to; I'll "hate" watching nothing get done for almost two years in CD14; I'll "hate" being sold a 8-year-supply of snake oil - which is criminal in and of itself - but then to have the supply run out after only 2 when there's no real medicine to replace it; I "hate" hero-worshipping superficials who just want to hold hands and "bring consensus" until progress grinds to a halt.

Continue to join the "coronation" as you see fit. This emperor has plenty of clothes -- but they're all empty suits.

If you believe critical analysis of the fact that a city councilmember lied to get into office, and hasn't told the truth yet about doing nothing since is "hate" -- then I guess I "hate" you, too! Hating fraud and criminal neglect is a "good" thing.

February 23, 2005 1:39 PM  

Blogger SacramentoNighties said:

Anonymous, if you think ADV® will do any better at hiring a mayoral staff (not that he'll ever get the chance), than he has at bringing skilled, hard-working public servants to the CD14 staff offices - from Central CA, then you haven't been paying attention here. The regular CD14 staff line is: "call 311 and ask them which city department can get that done for you*."

(*overheard several times at a community meeting this month...)

Maybe when ADV® is mayor (kidding, of course), his Chief of Staff and department heads can convince the county to install a "511" number, so they'll have someone to refer residents citywide to in the same manner.

February 23, 2005 1:46 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Heard at a breakfast meeting that the ADV staff has been shouting at constituents for not listening and doing what they say. Constituents were threatened for not wanting to participate in clean up. When seniors call they are rudely dismissed. Assholes! I can hardly wait til that four eyed fool named Paul Hernandez, that rude, disrespectful, threatening B---h Lisa Sarno, Jimmy, and that little arrogant uppty fool Doria Garcia and Andreana all get canned for being without a doubt the worst field staff amongst all council districts.

February 23, 2005 2:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey, they'll probably all get promoted to deputy mayors. . . then the Westside can "enjoy" them, too! Ha!

February 23, 2005 2:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Interesting that KABC didn't even mention this poll in their evening news broadcast last night, just a few hours after the numbers broke. I suppose they'd rather make the candidates pay to air their campaign commercials (at least 3 did during that 30 minutes), than give them free airtime. The station has to pay for the poll somehow.

February 23, 2005 4:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's still not on the station's news website. How serious are they taking any of this??

February 23, 2005 4:12 PM  

Blogger Anon-in-the-know said:

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

February 23, 2005 5:18 PM  

Blogger Anon-in-the-know said:

KABC-TV Poll debunked?

Boi from Troy this afternoon posted yet another poll just released -- also a small sampling -- from Probolsky that shows a span of ONLY SIX POINTS among the THREE leading mayoral candidates; says this still a close 3-way race among H, V, & H, especially given it's similar 5-6 percent margin of error.

Check it out:


February 23, 2005 7:11 PM  

Blogger dgarzila said:

I just got polled.

they said auto dial poll.

I felt like somone was polling on behalf of one of the candidates. I wonder if polls are used as a way of campainging , does anyone know.

They really really wanted to know who I was going to vote for.

I gave hahn a 10 , hertberg a 8 , villaraigosa a 1 , and parks a 10. and Alarcon a 5. I am a moderate.

They asked about the vignali issue, guess what to me it doesn't matter anymore. The Enron issue is another thing altogether.

I could have lied my butt off on this poll. HOw can these things be accurate? And I wonder if it was Hahns campaing calling to get this poll. They told me they don't know who was polling.

But thye sure did have a lot of dirt on hertzberg when theybwere askng questions. I guess because I rated him a 8.

if this is an omen , it looks like Hahn may start going after huggy bear.

or it may just be a coincidence. Because I gave hertzberg an 8 the dirt sure did come out about him. They didn't ask about any dirt on Hahn.

February 23, 2005 9:47 PM  

Blogger dgarzila said:

sorry I posted in the oother thread, with so many posts on the home page I guess I keep getting confused.

February 23, 2005 9:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey, a very good source tells me that the Mayor is polling right now and may hit tomorrow with new television commercials, dependent upon the tracking (another easy piece vs an attack piece on Hertzberg and perhaps Tony V. lumped together).

Rumor from good source also has it that this isn't the first of polls done by Hahn, but he hasn't released them because............his numbers are low and he wouldn't be able to claim they were inaccurate since his poll.

Last intelligence is that there is a rift in his camp between his two top campaign people as to strategy. One wants to hit hard and hit hard now and the other wants nothing to do with it because of last year and feels it will hurt more than help and it is overkill to get Hahn into the final battle....where they will have shot their wad.

They also don't know how to handle Hertzberg's proposal for clean campaign and are trying to say the Hertzberg campaign is negative....but that doesn't stick .

Interesting times ahead.

February 24, 2005 4:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I suppose that's Hertzberg's spin on it anyway

February 24, 2005 6:28 PM  

Blogger GINN14 said:

All you people who are blogging under anonimity need to step up, TERRY VALDEZ, ARMANDO HERMAN, MANNY HERNANDEZ, RICHARD ACOSTA. I live in cd14 and have seen numerous changes even when Nick left us with no money!! even you NIck need to step up! anyone who knows your MO know you are blogging as well!!

February 24, 2005 11:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So, since you hate anonymity, "Ginn14." we can only guess "Ginn14" is the name on your driver's license (first or last, little hypocrite?), and is the picture there a "?" - too?

February 25, 2005 9:36 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

GINN! Before you rant on, and say there was no money (another lie fed you by Tony's transplants), go back and read the transition memo from summer 2003 and see where most of those projects now stand. The only substantive "change" in the district in almost two years has been the name on those blue metal signs out in front of the council offices (the city did that) and the repeatedly updated "completion" dates for funded, approved CD projects that constituent groups worked to move ahead for years BAV, many of them didn't even NEED much city money to move ahead - just attention. If you really are from the district, you also do a huge disservice to your hard working neighbors when you say Tony V. has been responsible for any positive change. Activists have been going AROUND the CD staff more than through them, or else nothing would have moved forward. The council office has been on auto-pilot for at least the past year (before that, they simply claimed "we don't know HOW to move anything ahead, yet... give us time to learn our jobs"), while AV made plans to parachute out and become mayor.

Now, all his little starry eyed staff members are keeping busy doodling their hopeful "new" 3rd-floor titles on their current business cards, like some lovesick schoolgirl handwriting "Mrs. Tony Villar" on her Peechee folder instead of listening in class.

February 25, 2005 9:52 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I would love to see all the anonymous posters who bash Villaraigosa's Staff to go head-to-head with them out in public. War of the Worlds! Blood In Blood Out! The Rumble in the Jungle!

Look, I know that there are legitimate claims against his office (I have my own), but I have to admit that I have seen more people out there that are a few eggs short of a dozen complain than people who really care about the area and are not just blowing hot air.

So, are you anti-Tony V bloggers ready to come out and openly criticize the staff? I'm sure that you have done so in our own way or place, but with having YOU be the people here talking, I want to know WHO is doing the walking.

February 25, 2005 11:34 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

RIGHT... so we can swap very POOR consituent service for NONE at all. You have me (anyway) confused with some gullible ADV supporter that thinks he just wants to "build consensus" and have everyone get along. His staff's vindictiveness is legendary. Pass!

Look they're either on their way to the 3rd floor, or facing a recall, or lame duck in some form (because ADV is not sticking around here if he loses for mayor). The next joker in that office could not possibly be any worse in terms of selecting staff...

February 25, 2005 2:12 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I wonder if the pole would change much if Walter Moore were on it?

February 25, 2005 4:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

er. Poll

February 25, 2005 4:20 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home