Monday, September 11, 2006

C.H.E.C.K.'s Bogus NASCAR Poll

CHECK, the group heading up opposition to the proposed NASCAR track, has released the results of its so-called poll. It shows that 57 percent of the 500 respondents contacted stated they oppose the track.

But as they say, the devil is in the details. The results are obviously bogus, and the poll results have little or no credibility. When you look at the questions respondents were asked, and the way they were phrased, it is a no-brainer to see they were designed to elicit the exact response the poll got. Frankly, I am surprised that the number was as low as 57 percent, given the bias of the questions - which I think bodes well for proponents of the track.

This is the same poll as you may recall, that CHECK originally denied was being conducted when a number of residents contacted authorities thinking it was some kind of scam.

Many of the questions revolved around the subject of Public Financing - the issue the systematic misinformation machine run by opponents have seized on as the way to turn residents who don't understand the proposal, against it. Once again, there is NO Public Financing involved in the proposal. Read the Berk Report for yourself, and see. Personally, I too am opposed to public financing - I just see any in the proposal.

Also, something else I find quite interesting is that a full 44 percent of the respondents were from the 23rd Legislative District - Bainbridge Island and North Kitsap - NOT the 26th District, where the track will actually be located.

The poll was conducted by someone named Allison Peters - a name I am not familiar with and no one I have talked to about this has ever heard of either. I did hear something on KIRO News this morning saying that she has done work for the Democratic Party. Gee, what a shocker that was! As I recall, the local Democratic Party - which is controlled with an iron fist by the local environmentalist elitists - has made no bones about its hard core opposition to the track. Does she live in McCormick Woods as well?

For anyone to give the CHECK poll any credibility says they are either uninformed or incapable of thinking for themselves. The results of the poll being conducted for Kitsap County by highly regarded pollster Stuart Elway will be out momentarily. You may recall that Elway does a lot of polling for politicians - of both parties - and is considered the best and most accurate in the state.

I believe the timing of the release of the results of the CHECK poll was intentional - with the goal of confusing residents. All I can say is don't buy into their BS. Wait for the results of the Elway poll - they will have actual credibility and be a MUCH more accurate read on the feelings of the citizens.


  1. Martin C9:54 AM

    Consider the source. I was one of the people called for this - and this was "Push Polling" at its worse. The questions didn't give you any room for explanation and were all "Do you still beat your wife" kind of questions about public financing. The results shouldn't be taken seriously.

  2. P.T. Wimmer12:39 PM

    So now that the survey was evenly split what do we do now? A lot of intresting, yet not suprising information came out of this. Will the commissioners vote for or against or let the county as a whole vote on it. I hope that we all get a chance to vote on it and not have it taken away like those just east of us will not have a voice in the Alaskan Way changes. Let your elected leaders know how you feel.

  3. One Hit Wonder3:14 PM

    I think it's very interesting that the majority of the respondents came from Commissioner Chris Endresen's district - NOT Jan Angel's, where the track will actually be located. The majority of resident's in that district are Democrats, and the party has come out against the track, so the results could be somewhat weighted to one side - but perhaps not. In the name of accuracy and fairness, I would have preferred to see an even split between all three commissioner districts.

    As for voting on this, I have to agree with Chris Endresen who told the Conservation Voters earlier this year that she didn't believe we should be making land use decisions by referendum. Voting on this would open a door we DON'T want to go through. Before you know it, we'd be voting on every land use application someone opposed. Imagine if we held a referendum on the Critical Areas Ordinance - it would have gone down in flames and Patty Lent might still be a candidate for commissioner.