I’m in NH and I just got called on this by a firm called PSA. It was clear it was a Hillary poll from most of the questions.
Hillary did x, y, and z great things, knowing that would be more favorable, somewhat more favorable…etc…
There was a section on the Times piece on Edwards that included a summary of the article then “does this make you more favorable, somewhat more favorable….”
I’m not and Edwards fan but I don’t like Democrats hitting each other below the belt this way using a story that is suspect to begin with.
They had 2 questions on the Sopranos video as well. Pollster seemed surprised I had no reaction at all to the video. :)
PSA, Smith reports, is the Denver call center for Hillary Clinton’s pollster, Mark Penn. The Times piece that the poll was pushing on is this one from last week. I had meant to post about it at the time, actually, and wondered if the story — about him using his poverty center’s funds for campaign purposes — would be enough to tank his candidacy.
To judge by the lack of pick-up the story’s gotten, maybe there’s not enough candidacy left to tank… then again, if Hillary cares enough to push poll on it, he’s not dead yet. Probably the best news his campaign’s gotten all week.
UPDATE: For the record, the Edwards folks responded to the article thusly:
Last week The New York Times ran a story suggesting that it was wrong for John to have spent the last three years raising awareness of poverty and advocating for solutions. As if there’s any way to draw attention to poverty without publicity! And to make matters worse, the reporter just refused to even talk with any of the people who benefited—like any of the 200 young people who got scholarships through the College for Everyone program, or the 700 students who went to New Orleans with John to help rebuild. So we really need your help to get our message out; please, give what you can today.
* Thanks, as usual, for the eagle-eyes, p_l.