Beware Bogus political survey aka hit piece from Lynda Hopkins (or her supporters)

[Connubial Warthog]

I received a call little while ago from a young woman in Philadelphia who asked me if I would take a survey. She was funny- couldn't even pronounce Sonoma or Mendocino county correctly. Just a hired hand who didn't know who was behind the "survey". At first it seemed like a general survey about Sonoma County politics and the direction the county is taking, but it quickly turned into a painfully obvious propaganda hit piece on the part of Linda Hopkins (or her supporters) to try to sway voters to vote for her in the upcoming run-off election. The one good thing about it was, I had previously thought Hopkins won! I had seen all of these "thank you Sonoma County" stickers on her signs and just assumed it was over. So thanks to Linda (or whoever was behind it) for letting me know Noreen still has a chance!

Obviously a lot of thought and effort had gone into this "survey" as it starts out seeming neutral but slowly leads the survey taker into buying into negative information (much of it entirely erroneous) about Noreen Evans. I wonder how many other west county folks were approached to take the survey. It's a complete waste of time - as it went along I found myself getting angry that someone running for office in West County would stoop to such dirty tactics in order to try to win votes. Shame on you Linda (or whoever was responsible) – do you really think we're that stupid? Jeezus....

[photolite]

Boy does this post ever sound like a hit piece, but ON Linda! You offer zero verifiable information that this "survey" you participated in emanated from Linda or her campaign. Everything here is vague. You provide no real insight into the questions asked that led you to your assumptions. Maybe Jonathan G. can provide some facts around this, if it's real at all. Otherwise it feels and sounds like rumor mongering.


I received a call little while ago from a young woman in Philadelphia who asked me if I would take a survey. She was funny- couldn't even pronounce Sonoma or Mendocino county correctly. Just a hired hand who didn't know who was behind the "survey". At first it seemed like a general survey about Sonoma County politics and the direction the county is taking, but it quickly turned into a painfully obvious propaganda hit piece on the part of Linda Hopkins to try to sway voters to vote for her in the upcoming run-off election.....

[Connubial Warthog]

Boy does this post ever sound like a hit piece, but ON Linda! ...

Anyone who took this survey would know it was biased. It was ridiculously, transparently and painfully obvious. As it went along, each question became more and more leading and less neutral. The survey taker was gradually funneled into answering questions in a manner that was designed to lead you to one conclusion. I'm not going to list the questions here. Hopefully you'll get the call and you can see for yourself. According to a friend of mine who's been involved with west county politics for decades, this kind of thing happens all the time. I guess I was naive. Believe me, this was not a neutral survey. Maybe Lynda had nothing to do with it? Maybe it was independently done? I don't know. Nonetheless, it was a propaganda piece, and it certainly wasn't put together by Noreen, unless she's trying to undermine her own campaign.

[sambacat]

Those "Thank you Sonoma County" stickers on Hopkins' signs after the primary were most likely intended to have just the effect they had on you. Although the election resulted in a virtual tie, Hopkins "winning" by 400 votes out of 32,000, the stickers made it seem as though she had won outright. It's an old tactic used by Paul Kelley, a former District Four Supervisor -- one of the worst environmental Supervisors in the county's history. Yes! Thank goodness you and others now realize Noreen has a great chance of winning in November!


... The one good thing about it was, I had previously thought Linda Hopkins won! I had seen all of these "thank you Sonoma County" stickers on her signs and just assumed it was over. So thanks to Linda and her cohorts for letting me know Noreen still has a chance! ....

[photolite]

I gotta say, your post is a bit hard to swallow.
First you title your post with "aka hit piece from Linda Hopkins" yet when you're challenged on that you state, " Maybe Lynda had nothing to do with it? Maybe it was independently done? I don't know."
So I'm confused. Do you or don't you know if this came from Linda or not? If you do not, change the message of your post title to reflect that which you can honestly state.
I find it disturbing that so many Evans supporters seem to play so freely with innuendo and unsupported declarations. You protest the propaganda quality of that survey with a propaganda posting of your own.
I believe Barry should edit the title of your post to something more honest and truthful. Or you could even do it yourself.


.... Believe me, this was not a neutral survey. Maybe Lynda had nothing to do with it? Maybe it was independently done? I don't know. Nonetheless, it was a propaganda piece, and it certainly wasn't put together by Noreen, unless she's trying to undermine her own campaign.

[Connubial Warthog]

.... Do you or don't you know if this came from Linda or not? ...
First of all, how could I know for sure it came from the Hopkins campaign? As I clearly stated in my original post, the person conducting the survey would've divulge who funded it. As I said in my edited post, It's quite possible the "survey" was independently mounted by a supporter. I have changed my title and the content to reflect that. But I stand by the content of my post. Someone who is supporting her campaign is responsible, regardless of whether her own campaign is directly involved.

[photolite]

How about this for the title of a new thread:

Beware, Noreen Evans (or her supporters) ADMITS she might be SPREADING LIES about opponent

Recent statements on social media accusing Evans' opponent of dirty tricks have been confirmed by the Evans campaign as being untrue. Although the allegations were completely unverifiable and Evans (or her supporters) refused to provide any of the supposedly objectionable survey questions for examination, she states that she still stands by the content of the posts.


As I said in my edited post, It's quite possible the "survey" was independently mounted.....

[Connubial Warthog]

How about this for the title of a new thread:...

How about this: "Rabid Hopkins supporter resorts to smarmy mud-slinging tactics after being unable to face the fact that either Hopkins or one of her supporters stoops to dirty tricks."

Dude, if you think things like this don't happen, you are living in a very sheltered world. I don't have the time to list the questions: it was a 15 minute interview! There is no doubt in my mind that it was anything but an unbiased survey. I hope they call you so you can have a first hand experience, I really do. Until then, deny all you want; I know what I heard. I suspect we'll be hearing more about this so called "survey". Evans' people are now aware of it. I don't want to spar with you-I really don't. I know it was a politically motivated survey designed to disparage Evans. Who is behind it? It must be Evans! Obviously she doesn't want to win and is sabotaging her own campaign. That's the only thing that makes sense, right?

And by all means, get in the last word as you are no doubt compelled to do. I rarely post here or even go on Wacco , but am aware there are people who have nothing better to do than target posters on this BB. So, fire away-I won't be coming back to this thread. I would however be interested to hear if anyone else has been called to take this "survey" and their thoughts. Otherwise, I'm out of here. By all means s, Flame away into the void, Mr Lite!

[photolite]

As name calling is so much en vogue this political cycle, good job bringing that National tone to the local level. I'm sure your parents are very proud of you.

Dude, as you're clearly very hip, the irony of you bemoaning dirty tricks while repeatedly implying Hopkins to be behind this survey while providing not a shred of evidence, surely can't be lost on you.
Noreen's supporters have insisted that her S.E.I.U. PAC is unaffiliated with her campaign. So saying, should there arise some questionable survey or other tactic that is anti Hopkins, must we then conclude that Noreen MUST be behind it because it could not have come from Linda?
I don't believe either candidate wants to set such a tone.


....I know it was a politically motivated survey designed to disparage Evans. Who is behind it? It must be Evans! Obviously she doesn't want to win and is sabotaging her own campaign. That's the only thing that makes sense, right?....

[Barry]

...I hope they call you so you can have a first hand experience, I really do....
Has anyone else been contacted by this "survey"? :waccosun:

[jbox]

I gotta say, your post is a bit hard to swallow....

I agree. Whether you like Lynda Hopkins or not she has consistently taken the high road and has not run a negative campaign against her opponent, preferring to focus on issues and solutions. Noreen, on the other hand, has gone after Lynda with smear and innuendo from the start and shows no signs of letting up. This "survey" doesn't pass the smell test of coming from Hopkins.

[podfish]

why does the phrase 'pearl clutching' (https://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/01/pearl_clutching_how_the_phrase_became_a_feminist_blog_clich_.html)come to mind regarding this thread?

[photolite]

You could swap the names of the opponents throughout this thread and I would still hold the same, essential position. Except that I'd have to que up behind 19 outraged people to get it said.


I agree. Whether you like Lynda Hopkins or not she has consistently taken the high road and has not run a negative campaign against her opponent, preferring to focus on issues and solutions. Noreen, on the other hand, has gone after Lynda with smear and innuendo from the start and shows no signs of letting up. This "survey" doesn't pass the smell test of coming from Hopkins.

[nancypreb]

My good friend who lives here in town was just telling me this very evening about a survey call she had just received. Sounds like the exact same one. While it was specific to our Supervisor race, she too felt it started out broad and general, but quickly turned to be geared towards the Hopkins campaign. The person would ask a broad question and then ask, "who would you vote for- Hopkins or Evans?" Then a follow up with the same tag line, "Who would you vote for- Hopkins or Evans." Finally my friend had to say, "Look! Just because she grows carrots, I'm not going to vote for Hopkins!!! I grow carrots too- doesn't mean I should run for office!!!" Sounds to me like it might have been the same "independent" survey. She too was quite irritated.


Has anyone else been contacted by this "survey"?

[KWinter]

This is called, I believe, "push polling" – it presents as a survey or poll, but it's there to mold your opinion, not to discover it. Usually starts out innocuously, seems balanced, then segues into what you describe (very accurately). It's a very common phenomenon in campaign season, whether for candidates, initiatives, or issues.


Anyone who took this survey would know it was biased. It was ridiculously, transparently and painfully obvious. As it went along, each question became more and more leading and less neutral. The survey taker was gradually funneled into answering questions in a manner that was designed to lead you to one conclusion.

[Shepherd]

So now we have at least 2 people who had the experience of a questionable "independent" survey.


My good friend who lives here in town was just telling me this very evening about a survey call she had just received. ....

[photolite]

This is interesting. Both reporters, so far, seem to feel that it's structured to sway towards Hopkins. It would be great if we could get a transcript, or recording, of this thing. It also sounds inept, as both people seem to think its intent was pretty transparent and report being annoyed by it. I'm not suggesting it, but it is possible that transparency is deliberate.
Based on these 2 reports, on its surface it seems logical to assume it emanates from the Hopkins camp. Yet politics being politics, the obvious isn't necessarily what's really going down.
I hope we learn more of this.


My good friend who lives here in town was just telling me this very evening about a survey call she had just received. ....

[podfish]

...Yet politics being politics, the obvious isn't necessarily what's really going down.
I hope we learn more of this.I don't. One of the luxuries in living in a politically homogeneous area is that we're relatively free of political ad blitzes. Try visiting a purple state sometime. This is a light trickle we're experiencing here; some people are getting firehosed.

[scamperwillow]

I agree. Whether you like Lynda Hopkins or not she has consistently taken the high road and has not run a negative campaign against her opponent, preferring to focus on issues and solutions. Noreen, on the other hand, has gone after Lynda with smear and innuendo from the start and shows no signs of letting up. This "survey" doesn't pass the smell test of coming from Hopkins.

I would really love to see even one example of this so-called "smear and innuendo" that Noreen is constantly accused of. If you mean stating the facts about who is giving money to whom, I don't call that smear, I call that essential facts that the voters should know about. This is a clear tactic of the other campaign to make her seem like a victim.

[scamperwillow]

...Based on these 2 reports, on its surface it seems logical to assume it emanates from the Hopkins camp. Yet politics being politics, the obvious isn't necessarily what's really going down....

Oh you can be sure it came from Hopkins camp. Not her personally but her republican consultant/lobbyist who pulls this kind of stuff all the time. It can't be from an independent expenditure campaign because none have filed yet which is required by law. Of course, maybe.......

[jbox]

I would really love to see even one example of this so-called "smear and innuendo" that Noreen is constantly accused of. If you mean stating the facts about who is giving money to whom, I don't call that smear, I call that essential facts that the voters should know about. This is a clear tactic of the other campaign to make her seem like a victim.

The mailers sent out by the SEIU and Noreen's own mailers imply Lynda is bought and paid for by big business, wineries, real estate interests, and so on. Noreen has accepted money too, now and especially in the past as a state senator. That is just the nature of politics, in order to get elected, money talks. In the times I have spoken with Hopkins she is more interested in dealing with creative solutions to issues we all face, not helping her donors. However, a rising tide lifts all boats so it works out for the business interests and ordinary residents if we can deal effectively with local issues. Again, Noreen is engaging in negative campaigning against her opponent along with touting her environmental credentials, and her favoritism to her major backer, the public employee unions.

[jbox]

Oh you can be sure it came from Hopkins camp. Not her personally but her republican consultant/lobbyist who pulls this kind of stuff all the time. It can't be from an independent expenditure campaign because none have filed yet which is required by law. Of course, maybe.......

Got any evidence to back up your smear and innuendo?

[tommy]

It is a sign of the times that Noreen, who has always stood up for working class people, and the dwindling number of Union members... now seems to be criticized for being supported by unions! Any analysis of the demise of the middle class, indicates that a major cause is the loss of union jobs. Of course many of those jobs in manufacturing were shipped to China. This was good for the owners of those companies, but bad for employment and the long term health of the US economy. This is one of the more obvious failures of capitalism: in a race to the bottom, capital is supreme over people and jobs.

Locally, SEIU, which supports Noreen, and represents many Sonoma County employees, has been in the forefront for the fight for a graduated $15/hr minimum wage for all County employees and contractors, and improved health care benefits, passed last year. Truthfully, $15 is an unlivable wage. Of course many businesses and rich people oppose it, from what seems to be a greedy and uncharitable point of view. The minimum wage has been one of the bull works of the progressive regulation of the economy, along with unemployment insurance, and Social Security. Unions are not perfect, as with any human organization. Yet my heart goes out to Noreen for always supporting better wages for working class people.


The mailers sent out by the SEIU and Noreen's own mailers imply Lynda is bought and paid for by big business, wineries, real estate interests, and so on. Noreen has accepted money too,,,,

[scamperwillow]

Got any evidence to back up your smear and innuendo?

Well the poll itself is the evidence. Noreen would not back a poll that argued against her and if it was an outside expenditure group, they would have to report it and haven't . It will all come out when the next campaign finance statements come out - which is unfortunately too close to the election.

[scamperwillow]

Pointing out who is donating to a campaign is public and factual information - not smear. If you consider it smear then you must think that it is a bad thing Lynda has these backers. Noreen is proud of her endorsers and never tries to hide them as the Hopkins campaign does. Case in point, Hopkins' Republican consultant/lobbyist did not charge for his services so it would not show on her campaign reports. It showed up as a "loan" AFTER the primary. I and others are pointing these things out because we are very concerned about the future of our county and it being controlled by the rich and powerful.


...Noreen is engaging in negative campaigning against her opponent ...

[photolite]

To say, " the poll itself is the evidence", is both specious and lazy, as is saying, "Hopkins' Republican consultant/lobbyist did not charge for his services so it would not show on her campaign reports", unless you're the ultimate insider in Hopkin's campaign and understand all their decisions and have irrefutable proof regarding this poll.

Donald Trump, by his own admission, had contributed to Hillary's past campaigns. That in and of itself is no proof she was in his pocket.

Evans may loudly embrace her commitment to Organized Labor yet she shuns responding frankly to the fact that these obligations have had a direct and negative impact on the 98% of the general public that are non-union members. She and her union backers can shout "Crooked Lynda" til they're hoarse. It doesn't change the fact that of the two candidates, one has clearly demonstrated a willingness to throw the rest of us under the bus to serve her union backers, and it wasn't Lynda Hopkins. One has also shown a willingness to wade into the mud with arguments based purely on speculation, not the actual facts on the ground. Again, it isn't Lynda Hopkins.

It's a two horse race. As Noreen has abandoned the majority of the public to vote against their collective interests on pension reform, she has also consistently voted against certain business interests. Those business' contributions are not so much a vote supporting Lynda Hopkins as they are a vote against Evans, who seems to serve a narrower constituency and a jealous master. Evans' supporters are having a very difficult time wrapping their heads around these facts.


Well the poll itself is the evidence. ...

[podfish]

... It doesn't change the fact that of the two candidates, one has clearly demonstrated a willingness to throw the rest of us under the bus to serve her union backers... Noreen has abandoned the majority of the public to vote against their collective interests on pension reform...Daniel Moynihan* had a famous quote that applies here.

not that hyperbole isn't appropriate in a political debate.. but let's not pretend that it's anything else.

(* all these old Irish pols blend together... I originally had Tip O'Neal, not that it matters...)

[photolite]

...all these old Irish pols blend together... And it was Jimmy Malone who said, never "bring a knife to a gunfight"
Gotta love the Irish way with words.