CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 16, 2009 04:26 PM UTC

Penry Doesn't Like This Fracking Poll

  • 52 Comments
  • by: Duke Cox

(All about “public opinion,” except when they’re not – promoted by Colorado Pols)

A new poll mentioned in a Grand Junction Daily Sentinel story (by Gary Harmon) this morning  has Senator Penry and the folks over at COGA in a tizzy.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/c…

Shortly after Kathy Hall presented her now famous “Fracking fluid is as safe as Coca Cola” speech to the Garfield County Commissioners, this just released poll has Nate Strauch and the rest of the industry faithful scrambling to find a meaningful reply.

The poll of 504 registered voters conducted by Harstad Strategic Research of Boulder showed 67 percent of respondents favoring the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act and 22 percent opposing it, pollster Chris Keating said in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday.  

As one would expect, Mr. Strauch had this carefully worded disclaimer about how meaningless the poll is, mostly because the company that did the poll is from Boulder (Well, of course, Nate):

A push-poll conducted nearly two months ago by a fringe, Boulder-based firm that telephoned 500 of the district’s 360,000 registered voters can hardly be called an accurate representation of attitudes toward the safe and essential process of hydraulic fracturing,” Colorado Oil and Gas Association spokesman Nate Strauch said.

But the best response was from my favorite industry water carrier, State Senator Josh Penry, who gets my vote for issuing the most irrelevant comment I can recall seeing in a long time.

I’ll bet 95 percent of voters also wish unemployment wasn’t at a 65-year high, Penry said.

On the other hand, long suffering residents of Garfield county are delighted to have a clear statement of the public desire for increased protection from the nasty crap the O&G boys have been pumping into the ground.

Lisa Bracken, a member of the Western Colorado Congress, said the poll highlighted the need for federal involvement.

“The energy industry desperately needs federal oversight because the state is not interested, Bracken said

There was no mention of a response from the Fracking Queen, Kathy hall, but I think it is a safe bet that her panties are in a significant wad this morning. Stay tuned.

Tweet
Share

Comments

52 thoughts on “Penry Doesn’t Like This Fracking Poll”

  2. I’ll bet 95 percent of voters also wish unemployment wasn’t at a 65-year high, Penry said.

    So, if I’m reading his statement right, he’s basically saying, “If wishes were fishes…” and “fuck you very much.”

    Nice to know he has such excellent listening skills and is so in touch with his constituents.

  3. flacks is  an “…accurate representation of attitudes toward the safe and essential process of hydraulic fracturing,…”???

    This is exactly the kind of thing where majority rules may not make any sense.  Is the fluid harmful? Under what circumstances?   If residents and employees were showing up in  local ER’s from having consumed CocaCola, Id expect that the formula would be required to be made public.

    If the formula is so safe, why not tell us what it is?

    2. This is an accusation, by COGA mouthpiece Nate Strauch, leveled against WORC and Harstad.

      But is it true?

      Here are the questions and responses to the survey, as posted on the WORC website. Links to more info can be found here.

      This two question survey doesn’t seem like a push-poll to me, but perhaps someone better trained to evaluate the methods of opinion polling could take a look?

        1. First they ask about the Clean Water Act and then they ask about the fracing bill.

          See – it ties the two together. Perhaps if they had asked about whether we want the cheapest possible oil & gas production and therefore the cheapest energy to support out national security, transportation and other energy needs and then asked about fracing.

          Or if they first asked about more jobs and spending in the gas patch, then the fracing.  Or maybe they could have asked about preference for Coke or Pepsi and then asked about fracing.

          The way they did it implies that fracing has something to do with ground water potential contamination.

              1. so feel free to redefine the meaning of push poll.  You’re still wrong.

                Disagreeing with how a question is framed in a poll doesn’t make it a push poll.  Unless you are a member of the non-reality based community.

            2. on the oil and gas industry in Colorado if those very regulations dashed the hopes of a promising good looking bright young man hailing from Mesa County, a born leader, from being the finest Governor our state has ever seen, and ever will see ?

              I think not.

          3. If you read the poll, the pollers were instructed that the questions can be asked in any order.  And the order should be alternated every call.

            It seems in your second and third paragraphs, you are trying to make the same false equivalence between jobs and regulation that your co-shills are making.

            There is one and only one factor that is affecting jobs in the gas patch–the price of natural gas.

            Please quit trying to assume that the rest of us are stupid.  We’re not.

            And as far as fraccing affecting ground water quality, there seems to be some evidence for that.

            http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin…

                    1. I was over caffeinated and I get really po’d when someone asks a question- and when some a-hole (s) don’t liek the answer they call it a push poll.

                      So I thought over the top crazy was the only way to go.

                      Hey- if the o&g frac masters added 10% orange juice, couldn’t they call their formula “juice drink”? problem solved.

  4. Duke’s Western Colorado Congree partner, Bill Grant, is going after Salazar.  

    No link on the GJ Sentinel yet, but the poll’s purpose is to get John Salazar on board with the DeGette Bill.

    This has boom a rang written all over it.  Grant hits Salazar from the Liberal left on the editorial page.  Salazar might just get a real opponent, a bad Dem year, a week upper ticket and an attack from his left.  

    You shave a couple points off Salazar and the seat is in play.    

        1. Ray ‘Never Heard of Him’ Scott and Martin ‘God-given Destiny’ Beeson

          “As Americans, we must re-summon our courage and stand anew for that central value – freedom. Freedom to pursue the destiny God has designed for each of us without fear of Congress confiscating and redistributing destiny’s bounty through the House Appropriations Committee.”

          http://martinbeeson.com/defaul…

          You know, I’ve seen this type of command and control economic policy before.  I have lived on the other side of freedom – in the People’s Republic of China.  I have also traveled extensively in Southeast Asia – Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam – where I have witnessed first-hand how government can destroy economies, impoverish people, and crush the human spirit.  Now, at breakneck speed, our own government is eroding the freedoms that we have grown up with, cherished all our lives, spilled blood for – and maybe even taken for granted.

    1. It is always possible to dismiss results one doesn’t like as biased due to who paid for it.

      But by what other means do we find out what our fellow citizens are thinking?

      The important thing is to look at the methods used and then determine how much stock one wants to put in the results.

      (I am retaining my innate skepticism as to whether or not to put much weight on this survey, especially since my opinion is similar to that expressed in the survey. I’d appreciate it if anyone trained in evaluating surveys looked into the questions asked … see my post above.)

      1. The relevant question here (from Ardy’s post):

        Hydraulic fracturing – also known as fracking – involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals into oil and gas wells in order to release the oil and gas that is trapped inside.

        Some members of Congress are considering a new federal law called the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act which would regulate fracking under the Safe Drinking Water Act, and it would require anyone using hydraulic fracking to disclose the chemicals they are using in the fracking process.

        Do you favor or oppose this new federal law called the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act? [If favor or oppose ask:] Is that strongly, or not so strongly?

        Push poll: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P…

        In a push poll, large numbers of respondents are contacted, and little or no effort is made to collect and analyze response data. Instead, the push poll is a form of telemarketing-based propaganda and rumor mongering, masquerading as a poll. Push polls may rely on innuendo or knowledge gleaned from opposition research on an opponent. They are generally viewed as a form of negative campaigning.

        http://www.cbsnews.com/stories…

        A push poll is political telemarketing masquerading as a poll. No one is really collecting information. No one will analyze the data. You can tell a push poll because it is very short, even too short. (It has to be very short to reach tens of thousands of potential voters, one by one). It will not include any demographic questions. The “interviewer” will sometimes ask to speak to a specific voter by name. And, of course, a push poll will contain negative information – sometimes truthful, sometimes not – about the opponent.

        http://www.pollster.com/blogs/…

        You want to spread the rumor or exploit the issue without leaving fingerprints. So you hire a telemarketer to make phone calls that pretend to be a political poll. You “ask” only a question or two aimed at spreading the rumor (example: “would you be more or less likely to support John McCain if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate child who was black?”). You want to make as many calls as quickly as possible, so you do not bother with the time consuming tasks performed by most real pollsters, such as asking a lot of questions or asking to speak to a specific or random individual within the household.

        Again, the proof is in the intent: If the sponsor intends to communicate a message to as many voters as possible rather than measure opinions or test messages among a sample of voters, it qualifies as a “push poll.”

        We can usually identify a true push poll by a few characteristics that serve as evidence of that intent. “Push pollsters” (and MP hates that term) aim to reach as many voters as possible, so they typically make tens or even hundreds of thousands of calls. Real surveys usually attempt to interview only a few hundred or perhaps a few thousand respondents (though not always).

        This poll used a reasonable sample size, asked a non-leading question, and obtained demographic information.  

        Whenever someone from COGA says anything, it should be treated with skepticism.  

        1. Thanks, CT, for your quick response (but this doesn’t let the rest of you off the hook to look into this survey and let us know whether you think the charge “push poll” is justified).

          As for skepticism, I think it’s a good and healthy tool for confronting all new information. It’s just unfortunate that people who should be called “deniers” or “ideologues” or just plain “gullible” have attempted to co-opt this word.

            1. Do you favor or oppose this new federal law called the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act? [If favor or oppose ask:] Would you feel the same way if you knew the Fracturing Act fathered an illegitimate black child?

            2. Does this mean that COGA’s Nate Strauch lied?

              (Or is it libeled? Or slandered? Or swindled? Or caterwauled? I have trouble keeping all these technical terms straight.)

              I’m just shocked (shocked, I tell you) that a highly paid industry spokesman would resort to such demagoguery.

              But thanks Ralphie, CT, RG, and others for clearing up just what defines a push poll.

  7. when it’s on a technical/scientific issue.  Which is why appeals to emotion, values, morals, etc. get inserted in these kinds of science and enviro policy questions.  Do any voters without at least a masters in an earth science or engineering discipline have the tools to evaluate the C/B of hydraulic fracturing?  

    1. although this poll didn’t raise those issues…

      I don’t think Penry, Nate, or Hall have masters in Earth Science but they all seem pretty sure that we should just move along, folks, nothing to see here.  As companies buy off affected landowners, shut them up with a confidentiality agreement, and ship them off somewhere else.

      Why is this singular industry exempt from the law that every other industry discharging chemicals is required to abide by?  How would an earth science degree help me better understand the sweetheart deal that the GOP Congress handed off to the world’s richest industry?  

      2. Penry and Hall, who hold or held elected office in Western Colorado, seem to have forgotten how important water is here.

        Together with Strauch, they seem to think that people will sit still and do nothing when there’s a danger that their water is being poisoned.  They should know better.

        I’d be happy to debate this on scientific grounds with indipol, as I DO have a degree in geochemistry.  The trouble is, the oil and gas industry is not required to tell us what’s in their fracking fluids, so there’s no way to test for it.  There is, therefore, no technical debate to be had.

        As soon as we know what’s being pumped into the ground, maybe we can start debating the issue on its technical merits.

      4. I worked on defeating the CWA exemption for fracturing in the 2004 energy bill when I was a staffer.  Watched Don Nichols and Pete Domenici shove that and everything else that session up the collective asses of the D’s, and had Nichols shouting at me (way out of protocol, shouting at another senator’s staffer) during the final conference meeting on that bill.  It’s not like I’m in favor of hydraulic fracturing.  I think it’s sick that this should have a CWA exemption.  But the question we’re addressing here is not the technique, but the viability of using a push poll on a technical issue to get meaningful information out of the electorate.  What do polls like this tell you?  That if you scare people you can get them to tell you what you want them to say?  How does that help anything?

        1. You might think the question could be phrased differently, but that doesn’t make it a push-poll in the sense that that term usually applies.  You might say it’s a bad poll, or an incomplete question or whatever, but that doesn’t make it a ‘push-poll.’

          Also it is the SDWA from which the process is exempted, not CWA.

          Pete

    2. All government policies are (and should) consider social aspects of every issue.

      For example, should drinking water supplies be protected with government regulations?

      This is not a question that requires a degree in any science or engineering discipline in order to develop an answer.

      Then there is should any entire industry be exempted from government regulations designed to protect drinking water supplies?

      These are the questions and issues that all informed citizens should participate in.

      It’s not until it’s time to develop specific rules of practice that advanced degrees in specific disciplines become mandatory.

      Unfortunately, too many of the participants in the development of the specific rules come “armed” with advanced degrees such as MBA and JD, rather than MS and PhD.

      And then we get the industry PR campaigns based on fear and greed while the actual discipline experts get marginalized.

  8. So Nate Strauch (COGA) argues that a poll

    … that telephoned 500 of the district’s 360,000 registered voters can hardly be called an accurate representation …

    Nate Strauch is, of course, wrong. But then, despite all their crocodile tears, COGA is not much interested in scientific rigor and facts. No, they are much more interested in emotions and manipulating people.

    As noted in the methodology of the survey:

    The random sample of 504 has a worst-case 95% confidence interval of plus or minus 4.4% about any one reported percentage.

    Indeed, savvy (and educated) readers know this size of a survey pool is quite common and statistically supported, as even Gary Harmon observes in his blurb today about Jane Norton’s lead for US Senate.

    Rasmussen surveyed 500 likely voters on Tuesday. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 4.5 percentage points with a 95 percent level of confidence.

    So, ColoradoPolsters, be prepared to bring this quote of Nate Strauch’s up when COGA touts some “survey” showing that most Coloradans long for the day when frac fluid becomes an every day drink, not just for celebrations.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

151 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!