Political Poll

I just received a call from a polling firm that was kind of interesting. The poll seemed to be underwritten by opponents of my current state senator, Danielle Conrad, and I thought the questions were telling.

For one thing, the questions were all black and white. To fix Nebraska's budget gap, you had to choose only one option. You couldn't, for example, choose a combination of cutting non-essential programs and raising some taxes. No, it was all very simplistic.

You could claim to be a "fiscal conservative," a "social conservative," both, or neither. Moderates and liberals were apparently lumped together. Of course, I have a problem with all questions like this. In a rational world, many of my positions would be very conservative. (How is supporting fundamental principles of the U.S. Constitution not "conservative"? How is conservation not "conservative"? How is caution about changing the atmosphere of our planet, unless we know for certain it won't cause problems, not "conservative"?)

Although I disagree with Democrats about many things, I disagree with Republicans about everything. I guess that makes me a flaming liberal these days. Well, that's a subject for another post.

The poll asked for my religious affiliation, and there was no way to choose "none." I guess you're just assumed to have a religion, at least here in Nebraska.

As I say, the poll seemed to be undertaken by opponents of my current state senator. Although Nebraska's Unicameral is officially non-partisan, unofficially it's anything but. Danielle Conrad is a Democrat, and her opponent, Chad Wright is a Republican. (Most likely, I suppose either he or the Republican Party paid for this poll.)

I thought it was weird, because the poll looked at what might be effective negatives against Sen. Conrad (notably, her drunk driving convictions), but not interested at all in positive feelings about her opponent. Basically, they didn't care what I thought about Wright, although they did ask who I'd vote for if the election were held today. But it seemed clearly to be setting up the usual negative campaigning we almost always see these days (and no "almost" about it when it comes to Republicans).

As it turned out, I already knew about her DUI convictions, and I thought that Conrad handled the situation poorly (certainly in a political sense). On the other hand, I've heard her speak in the Unicameral, and I thought she did a great job - knowledgeable, clear, and thoughtful. But I know that relatively few of her constituents will have heard that sort of thing, and they'll all hear about her trouble with alcohol. Well, the poll didn't want to hear about any positive feelings for her, anyway.

OK, this is politics, but does it have to be this way?