The old story: LBJ in an early and nasty election is said to have suggested circulating a story about his opponent’s un-natural affection for farm animals. An aid said no one would believe it. LBJ replied he knew no one would believe it but that all they needed was to have him out there denying it.
Big time Brian Dubie champion Haley Barbour and his Republican Governors Association seized on results from a quite meaningless Seven Days survey.
A total of 30 people responded to the survey but the RGA perked up at the fact that Shumlin “won” the Ethically Challenged category .Only 12 people voted for Shumlin but the RGA wrapped it up into a press release.
Seven Days readily admits the shallowness of the poll ….
the likelihood that "winners" of our dubious categories could have easily been victims of lawmakers ganging up to smear an opponent. As a front-runner for the gubernatorial nomination, Shumlin certainly has a big target on his back.
Seven Days Blurt column chides the RGA for using unreliable ammo and suggests they find something with more meat on its bones for an attack. But then almost wistfully Blurt ponders this what if
…But what if survey respondents answered the survey questions honestly? It still wouldn't be conclusive, but it would make you go hmmmm…
Maybe at best there might be no denying the survey shows 12 people don’t like Peter Shumlin
As big a target as Shumlin has on his back, if only twelve people out of the thirty spoke ill of him, he’s doing pretty darn well!
And I thought it was pretty irresponsible. It’s one thing to post “biggest flirt” or “hottest Representative”, but openly negative stuff like “most ethically challenged” based on such a tiny sample of people who may have some serious axe to grind is pretty low.
And they look down their noses at our standards?