Cindy Creem Running Push Polls – Must be Getting Nervous About Rudnick Campaign

Cynthia Creem

There is some buzz over on Greg Reibman’s Wicked Local Blog that Sen. Cynthia Creem is running some push polling in her district.

According to people who have received the calls, the polling company is American Directions Group. They are mainly a campaign consulting group and not a proper polling company.

One commenter, Julia Malakie, reported on the push nature of the poll:

I got this poll this afternoon! I said, “I’m undecided” and the person said something like ‘Cindy Creem is the incumbent senator who’s been fighting for educations, etc etc… [no, they didn’t say et cetera] … Please remember to vote in September.’

This is definitely unusual for a State Senate race, especially so early. It shows some nervousness on the part of the Creem Campaign.

The Tab has been running its own unscientific web poll over the past few days. Both the Creem and Rudnick campaigns have encouraged their supporters to vote. The results are about even: 51% Creem, 49% Rudnick.

The comments below that poll are pretty telling about what the issues in the campaign seem to be.

Creem supporters cite:

  • Leadership on many issues
  • Being knowledgeable
  • Practical and Analytical

Critics of Creem cite:

  • Conflicts of interest with her law firm
  • Being a ‘part time’ legislator
  • Having been in office too long
  • Her lack of leadership on Judiciary committee issues like the probation department scandal

Rudnick Supporters cite:

  • He is a serious and knowledgeable candidate
  • A true progressive
  • Untainted by a culture of corruption on Beacon Hill

Critics of Rudnick cite:

  • Lack of experience

Rudnick has been trying to make an issue of Creem having taken contributions from lobbyists but that so far doesn’t seem to have gained much traction. The issue of Creem being a part time legislator, and that she was complicit in voting for the probation department ‘reforms’ that cause the patronage scandal seem to be getting more attention from voters.

24 Comments

  • John Walker
    July 13, 2010 - 11:38 pm | Permalink

    This is ridiculous. I got that call. It’s not a push poll at all. I know something about these things and it’s not even a poll–they’re only asking one question. It sounds like a simple voter ID call and then if you tell them you’re undecided (as I did) they read you two lines about some of the good things Creem has done in office. There’s absolutely no negativity, which is the hallmark of a “push poll.” Seems to me that the Tab is desperately grasping at straws to find something politically controversial to cover here in the summer dog days, but this is really much ado about nothing. The naive little rag probably doesn’t even know what a voter ID project is. And of course all incumbents are reaching out to constituents in this anti-incumbent year as they should be, so what’s the big deal? Oh and as for that Tab online poll, those things are easily rigged, and the Tab’s is unbelievably phony. All you have to do is delete your computer’s cookies and you can vote a million times!

    • July 13, 2010 - 11:45 pm | Permalink

      Good to know. So how many times did you vote for Creem?

      Just kidding.

      Thanks for giving us more info on the poll and what it’s for.

  • John Walker
    July 13, 2010 - 7:38 pm | Permalink

    This is ridiculous. I got that call. It’s not a push poll at all. I know something about these things and it’s not even a poll–they’re only asking one question. It sounds like a simple voter ID call and then if you tell them you’re undecided (as I did) they read you two lines about some of the good things Creem has done in office. There’s absolutely no negativity, which is the hallmark of a “push poll.” Seems to me that the Tab is desperately grasping at straws to find something politically controversial to cover here in the summer dog days, but this is really much ado about nothing. The naive little rag probably doesn’t even know what a voter ID project is. And of course all incumbents are reaching out to constituents in this anti-incumbent year as they should be, so what’s the big deal? Oh and as for that Tab online poll, those things are easily rigged, and the Tab’s is unbelievably phony. All you have to do is delete your computer’s cookies and you can vote a million times!

    • July 13, 2010 - 7:45 pm | Permalink

      Good to know. So how many times did you vote for Creem?

      Just kidding.

      Thanks for giving us more info on the poll and what it’s for.

  • Janet Sterman
    July 14, 2010 - 12:53 am | Permalink

    Greg,
    You are shameless… as always. :-)

  • Janet Sterman
    July 13, 2010 - 8:53 pm | Permalink

    Greg,
    You are shameless… as always. :-)

  • J Richards
    July 14, 2010 - 12:58 am | Permalink

    What a joke. If you’re going to accuse someone of something, get your facts straight. As one commenter already said, push polls ask misleading and loaded questions to spread a negative story. They’re not positive like this one.

    As for Creem being nervous, what’s the reasoning behind that? That she’s doing her job and IDing voters? If she weren’t doing this you’d report that she was asleep at the wheel and taking the election for granted. This is not “unusual” for a State Senate race at all.

    You are also factually incorrect about the probation department. Creem was not in office when the vote you cite was enacted to change the department. She has been, however, a constant voice in pushing to correct that mistake- see the letter to the editor here:

    http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/opinions/letters/x621498660/Letters-to-the-Editor-Newton-voters-deserve-leadership

    Once you have a highly visible platform, you owe it to your readers to get your facts straight before making assertions.

    • July 14, 2010 - 1:11 am | Permalink

      Creem has come late to advocate for fixing the patronage problems at probation. Only under recent public pressure has she taken action. The budget amendment that she put through certainly is in the right direction – but it by no means fixes the problem. The chief justice still has no ability to take any money out of the probation budget for example – which pretty much guarantees that the probation abuses will continue.

      The changes in the law that caused the patronage problem have accumulated over the years. It wasn’t just a single change. The major change that strips judges of the ability to hire probation officers was passed in 2001, when Creem was already in office. I’m glad she opposed that change. Another major change happened in 2005 when judges were stripped of the power to transfer money between court departments. Where was Creem’s leadership on patronage then?

      In any case in this article I’m only addressing public perception by reading comments from various threads on the internet about Creem and Rudnick. I’m just giving a little bit of the flavor of what is being said about each candidate.

      I do think it will be worth writing an article in detail about Creem and the developments that lead to the probation department problems. I honestly don’t know vote by vote how she was on these issues. I have one article that does list a rough timeline of the laws that cause the problem.

      I appreciate the responsibility that I have to be accurate when you edit a web site like this. That is one reason why the comments are kept open to everyone. It keeps the blog honest.

      Thanks for giving us your point of view.

      • July 14, 2010 - 1:57 am | Permalink

        Hey folks. I am no doubt shameless. But just to be clear, this isn’t my blog. The comments above aren’t mine. I never called it a push poll, nor did the TAB. And we never claim that our blog polls are in any way scientific. (Though it seems to me campaigns would be better off spending their time calling voters, instead of sitting around clearing cookies a million times.)

        But other than that, it’s an interesting conversation, so carry on.

  • J Richards
    July 13, 2010 - 8:58 pm | Permalink

    What a joke. If you’re going to accuse someone of something, get your facts straight. As one commenter already said, push polls ask misleading and loaded questions to spread a negative story. They’re not positive like this one.

    As for Creem being nervous, what’s the reasoning behind that? That she’s doing her job and IDing voters? If she weren’t doing this you’d report that she was asleep at the wheel and taking the election for granted. This is not “unusual” for a State Senate race at all.

    You are also factually incorrect about the probation department. Creem was not in office when the vote you cite was enacted to change the department. She has been, however, a constant voice in pushing to correct that mistake- see the letter to the editor here:

    http://www.wickedlocal.com/newton/news/opinions/letters/x621498660/Letters-to-the-Editor-Newton-voters-deserve-leadership

    Once you have a highly visible platform, you owe it to your readers to get your facts straight before making assertions.

    • July 13, 2010 - 9:11 pm | Permalink

      Creem has come late to advocate for fixing the patronage problems at probation. Only under recent public pressure has she taken action. The budget amendment that she put through certainly is in the right direction – but it by no means fixes the problem. The chief justice still has no ability to take any money out of the probation budget for example – which pretty much guarantees that the probation abuses will continue.

      The changes in the law that caused the patronage problem have accumulated over the years. It wasn’t just a single change. The major change that strips judges of the ability to hire probation officers was passed in 2001, when Creem was already in office. I’m glad she opposed that change. Another major change happened in 2005 when judges were stripped of the power to transfer money between court departments. Where was Creem’s leadership on patronage then?

      In any case in this article I’m only addressing public perception by reading comments from various threads on the internet about Creem and Rudnick. I’m just giving a little bit of the flavor of what is being said about each candidate.

      I do think it will be worth writing an article in detail about Creem and the developments that lead to the probation department problems. I honestly don’t know vote by vote how she was on these issues. I have one article that does list a rough timeline of the laws that cause the problem.

      I appreciate the responsibility that I have to be accurate when you edit a web site like this. That is one reason why the comments are kept open to everyone. It keeps the blog honest.

      Thanks for giving us your point of view.

      • July 13, 2010 - 9:57 pm | Permalink

        Hey folks. I am no doubt shameless. But just to be clear, this isn’t my blog. The comments above aren’t mine. I never called it a push poll, nor did the TAB. And we never claim that our blog polls are in any way scientific. (Though it seems to me campaigns would be better off spending their time calling voters, instead of sitting around clearing cookies a million times.)

        But other than that, it’s an interesting conversation, so carry on.

  • John Walker
    July 14, 2010 - 2:33 am | Permalink

    Mr. Reibman, you confuse me. It was on your blog that the discussion initially began concerning the phone calls being made by the Creem campaign to voters, as stated in the first line of this thread, right? Now you’re saying that campaigns shouldn’t spend time participating in your phony online polls but should instead be calling the voters? Isn’t that what your blog called out Creem’s campaign for doing in the first place?

    • July 14, 2010 - 2:44 am | Permalink

      You are confused John. Yes, The TAB Blog reported that someone was phone polling. Blog participants — and then this blog — took it from there. Go back and read it.

      http://tiny.cc/vm73j

      And yep, I’m suggesting that there have to be better ways for dedicated campaign workers to be spending their time than repeatedly voting over and over again in blog poll.

  • John Walker
    July 13, 2010 - 10:33 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Reibman, you confuse me. It was on your blog that the discussion initially began concerning the phone calls being made by the Creem campaign to voters, as stated in the first line of this thread, right? Now you’re saying that campaigns shouldn’t spend time participating in your phony online polls but should instead be calling the voters? Isn’t that what your blog called out Creem’s campaign for doing in the first place?

    • July 13, 2010 - 10:44 pm | Permalink

      You are confused John. Yes, The TAB Blog reported that someone was phone polling. Blog participants — and then this blog — took it from there. Go back and read it.

      http://tiny.cc/vm73j

      And yep, I’m suggesting that there have to be better ways for dedicated campaign workers to be spending their time than repeatedly voting over and over again in blog poll.

  • Holly
    July 15, 2010 - 1:02 am | Permalink

    Greg Reibman is inaccurate. He should read his own news organization’s blog to get the facts right.

    The TAB’s website has a “headline” for this entire blog topic. The headline isn’t generated by the bloggers. It’s the headline that first mentions the in accurate idea of “Cindy Creem Running Push Polls.” But Reibman says, “Hey folks. I am no doubt shameless. But just to be clear, this isn’t my blog. The comments above aren’t mine. I never called it a push poll, nor did the TAB.”

    If the TAB staff doesn’t write the headlines on its own blogs, who does?

    Thanks to John Walker for being accurate. I also got a call for “the poll,” which was just a standard voter ID call. Well-run campaigns identify their voters and then use the data for subsequent campaign activities, such as ‘get-out-the-vote’ calls and mailings close to and on election day. This doesn’t mean the campaign is ‘nervous’. It just means it’s being run intelligently and according to best, standard practice.

    So, the headline should read something like, “Cindy Creem’s campaign shows knowledge of how to get things done that comes from experience and professionalism.” In fact, this is how Creem functions as a legislator. She has the knowledge that comes from experience. She knows how to get things done — and uses it. As our Mayor said last week when he endorsed Cindy, she has served Newton well and has been helpful to him in getting resources we need from the State.

    • July 15, 2010 - 1:13 am | Permalink

      Where do you see a headline on wicked local about Creem running push polls?

      I wrote the headline on this blog about Creem running a “push poll” based on some of the chatter on wicked local. I haven’t been called myself so its hard for me to characterize if its really a push poll or not. Some of you say yes some say no.

  • Holly
    July 14, 2010 - 9:02 pm | Permalink

    Greg Reibman is inaccurate. He should read his own news organization’s blog to get the facts right.

    The TAB’s website has a “headline” for this entire blog topic. The headline isn’t generated by the bloggers. It’s the headline that first mentions the in accurate idea of “Cindy Creem Running Push Polls.” But Reibman says, “Hey folks. I am no doubt shameless. But just to be clear, this isn’t my blog. The comments above aren’t mine. I never called it a push poll, nor did the TAB.”

    If the TAB staff doesn’t write the headlines on its own blogs, who does?

    Thanks to John Walker for being accurate. I also got a call for “the poll,” which was just a standard voter ID call. Well-run campaigns identify their voters and then use the data for subsequent campaign activities, such as ‘get-out-the-vote’ calls and mailings close to and on election day. This doesn’t mean the campaign is ‘nervous’. It just means it’s being run intelligently and according to best, standard practice.

    So, the headline should read something like, “Cindy Creem’s campaign shows knowledge of how to get things done that comes from experience and professionalism.” In fact, this is how Creem functions as a legislator. She has the knowledge that comes from experience. She knows how to get things done — and uses it. As our Mayor said last week when he endorsed Cindy, she has served Newton well and has been helpful to him in getting resources we need from the State.

    • July 14, 2010 - 9:13 pm | Permalink

      Where do you see a headline on wicked local about Creem running push polls?

      I wrote the headline on this blog about Creem running a “push poll” based on some of the chatter on wicked local. I haven’t been called myself so its hard for me to characterize if its really a push poll or not. Some of you say yes some say no.

  • TPR
    July 19, 2010 - 3:44 pm | Permalink

    My problem with Creem – conflict of interests and ethics (or a lack thereof).

    Here’s the definition of “conflict of interest”:

    “a situation in which a public official’s decisions are influenced by the official’s personal interests.”

    This describes exactly what Senator Creem is doing – she’s using her public position as chair of the judicial committee to kill alimony reform legistlation in order to enhance her personal business interests (a practicing divorce lawyer who reeps huge profits by the current vague and antiquated laws).

    Whether someone polls correctly or not is irrelevant. If someone is using their elected position to protect and enhance their own personal interests, it’s a disgrace.

  • TPR
    July 19, 2010 - 11:44 am | Permalink

    My problem with Creem – conflict of interests and ethics (or a lack thereof).

    Here’s the definition of “conflict of interest”:

    “a situation in which a public official’s decisions are influenced by the official’s personal interests.”

    This describes exactly what Senator Creem is doing – she’s using her public position as chair of the judicial committee to kill alimony reform legistlation in order to enhance her personal business interests (a practicing divorce lawyer who reeps huge profits by the current vague and antiquated laws).

    Whether someone polls correctly or not is irrelevant. If someone is using their elected position to protect and enhance their own personal interests, it’s a disgrace.

  • Mike
    July 19, 2010 - 4:39 pm | Permalink

    Senator Creem Free the Alimony Slaves NOW! You are the slave master Free the Alimony slave NOW!

    Sen. Creem: fighting against Fathers rights
    Sen. Creem: holding alimony reform legislation hostage over 70 co-sponsors!
    Sen. Creem: conflict of interest as a practicing divorce lawyer.
    Sen. Creem: worst attendance record part time senator.
    Sen. Creem: sexist discrimination.
    great job…… maybe you should look at these problems before election day.

  • Mike
    July 19, 2010 - 12:39 pm | Permalink

    Senator Creem Free the Alimony Slaves NOW! You are the slave master Free the Alimony slave NOW!

    Sen. Creem: fighting against Fathers rights
    Sen. Creem: holding alimony reform legislation hostage over 70 co-sponsors!
    Sen. Creem: conflict of interest as a practicing divorce lawyer.
    Sen. Creem: worst attendance record part time senator.
    Sen. Creem: sexist discrimination.
    great job…… maybe you should look at these problems before election day.

  • Leave a Reply

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

    You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>