Dirty Tricks Watch
Email(No. 1 in what will be a series)….
The John Edwards-supporting blogger "DesMoinesDem," writing at the liberal website MyDD.com WRITES that a woman identifying herself as an employee "Central Research" called this morning with some pointed questions.
The questions seemed to imply messages being tested to use against Edwards and Hillary Clinton.
Which is the most important reason to oppose Clinton? Taking lobbyist money? That she would be a weak general election candidate? Or that she won’t bring the change the US needs?
What about Edwards? That he’s too liberal to win a general election? That he chose to continue his campaign instead of staying home with his wife who has cancer?
DesMoinesDem refused to answer that question and asked who was paying for the survey. No information beyond "Central Research" was forthcoming.
Another Edwards supporter – DoriDC – writes on the Edwards blog (HERE) that she received the same questions from "Central Research."
Both pseudonymous Edwards supporters say they suspect the Obama campaign.
But the Obama campaign denies that it has anything to do with Central Research or the questions being asked.
"No, and we think that line of questioning is abhorrent," says spokesman Bill Burton.
So…who’s behind the calls?
Is it message-testing or "push polls" — a slimy political technique to spread, rather than gather, information?
Iowa and New Hampshire readers — what are you hearing?
– jt
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
I’ve been reading thorough the threads: both bloggers support Edwards campaign. One blogger stated on his original post that this was not his experience with the Obama campaign but the lack of questions made him suspicious. The blogger at John Edwards official site blogged it was Obama’s campaign while admitting and updating that she had no proof of this at all.
If you’re going to repeat the allegations it would be helpful to confirm such calls have been happening. I googled Central Research and have found no such firm at all.
Posted by: Rhoda | November 13, 2007, 7:25 pm 7:25 pm
i agree, before accusations arise please check up on this.
it seems way too obvious to come from the obama campaign.
sounds like a hit job, and if it were only targeting edwards and clinton…
sounds like whoever is doing it wants it to sound like the obama campaign is doing it.
sounds way too professional and conniving, and of course dirty.
clinton campaign? (im sure youve covered yourself with “why me, im also getting hit”)
but thats a nice alibi..
Posted by: BERLINER | November 13, 2007, 8:29 pm 8:29 pm
I find it ourageous that you have the nerve to actually write this without any confirmation. You should remove this posting immediately.
Posted by: Jamie | November 13, 2007, 9:21 pm 9:21 pm
The swiftboating has begun! This is absolutely unbelievable–actually it isn’t–that media ethicacy has fallen so low that they would speculate about a candidate’s “guilt” without any evidence, based on the claims of two bloggers who are admitted Edwards loyalists.
Posted by: Dawn | November 13, 2007, 9:44 pm 9:44 pm
I’m for Edwards and I agree with the folks upthread that this is irresponsible reporting. ITs your job, Tapper, to try to find out who’s behind the calls, not to ask us to do it for you.
Posted by: Gus | November 13, 2007, 11:05 pm 11:05 pm
The Negative Message Testing Against Edwards and Clinton in Iowa: SomethingsFishy
Here are some points I want to make based on some initial brainstorming and researching Ive done on this story about John Edwards supporters receiving negative campaign polling calls. Journalists need to think and do some research before insinua…
Posted by: Think On These Things | November 14, 2007, 12:45 am 12:45 am
The Negative Message Testing Against Edwards and Clinton in Iowa: SomethingsFishy
Here are some points I want to make based on some initial brainstorming and researching Ive done on this story about John Edwards supporters receiving negative campaign polling calls. Journalists need to think and do some research before insinua…
Posted by: Think On These Things | November 14, 2007, 12:56 am 12:56 am
Good morning Jake Tapper(4-am)../I myself don’t go to that resource of infamous or psedo-or even dubious BLOGS..//I listen to the Evening News w/Charles Gibson..I personally have heard enough from Edwards and Obama as they “wiggle” their way towards the Whitehouse..or how much Hillary is a Presidential-”women”..I remember voting for Ron Reagan and H.W. Bush..I would recieve some information packet in the US Mail..Ron Reagan was asking about SPENDING and DEFENSE..H.W. Bush was asking more for money but adding alot about DEFENSE also..Ron Reagan believed in a STAR WARS Program…the issues that rise out of the political ashes were few..as compared to the FLAMING-initiatives of the democrats attempting//HUGE comparisons about their “fictional” DREAMS.
Posted by: Mark S. M. | November 14, 2007, 4:05 am 4:05 am
I agree that it’s irresponsible to post something like this without evidence on where it’s coming from. Why would this “Central Research” be calling an Edwards supporter to ask why they wouldn’t support Edwards? This sounds like Clinton all the way. More of those smear Obama tactics that we saw last January and February with the “Is he black enough” and other terribly racist questions.
Posted by: Steve | November 14, 2007, 8:16 am 8:16 am
Dawn – by saying swift boating, does that mean the truth is being told?
They are all Socialists, so whats the issue?
And to think Obama is above this then you are naive as he is or worse!
Posted by: spock | November 14, 2007, 11:00 am 11:00 am
I think it’s good that Jake is gathering this intell and posting it. The only way to get at the truth is to put it out there. He didn’t report it as fact.
Posted by: cordelia525 | November 14, 2007, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm
I don’t doubt for a minute that such calls—and many that are meaner—are being made. If ‘Central Research’ isn’t one of the other campaigns’ war-room, it could easily be one of hundreds of survey companies, which pay survey-takers minimum wage to make such calls. To hide who’s paying for the survey–even from the survey-takers– there is a script which must be adhered to by the survey-taker. The script almost always uses a generic name for the business, candidate, non-profit, or government agency paying for the survey. Jake has the best idea for finding out who may be responsible for this—maybe there’s a survey-taker who reads this blog–or a candidate’s volunteer who is troubled by push-polling. I’m sure Jake is asking his sources, too, but this type of ‘dirty work’–multiple meanings intended–is usually done by grunts, like you and me.
Posted by: SteveW | November 14, 2007, 9:12 pm 9:12 pm
Who was the woman that ask the “stop the b***h” question at the McCain rally? Could she have been a Hillary plant?
A thousand reporters on the job and we just have “McCain supporter” and “older woman” No name. No background. Why no info on this person?
Funny!
Posted by: charles akins | November 15, 2007, 11:27 am 11:27 am
“Central Research” is a name used by the Committee to Elect Rudolph Guiliani President of the United States.
Posted by: Polishque | November 21, 2007, 1:53 am 1:53 am