Political Punch

"Central Research" is a name used by the Committee to Elect Rudolph Guiliani President of the United States.

If you're going to repeat the allegations it would be helpful to confirm such calls have been happening. I googled Central Research and have found no such firm at all.

Posted by: Rhoda | Nov 13, 2007 7:25:04 PM
=======================================
=======================================
Its good to have suspicions(generally)if one considers the Asassination of JFK in Dallas, TX/you have a proper amount of evidence that Communist Russia was spying there..of course the killing of then Lee Harvey Oswald leaves everything Darker-than-normal../I have "surfed" the internet in a adult way(I perceive)my actions from this point about having the Internet to use..along the way I have suspected mostly crimminal intent(when something)pops up..its not like I figure the communist are attempting some intelligence on the Computer-level..but that one-thing-must-lead too-another in the crimminal mind(because)that's the way they live(life)...its the meddleing that I seems to "feel" in the Un-supervised(world)..stealing a person's ID can start at any POINT-in the conversation...playing puzzle games seems the larger part of ID-theft.

Who was the woman that ask the "stop the b***h" question at the McCain rally? Could she have been a Hillary plant?

A thousand reporters on the job and we just have "McCain supporter" and "older woman" No name. No background. Why no info on this person?

Funny!

I don't doubt for a minute that such calls---and many that are meaner---are being made. If 'Central Research' isn't one of the other campaigns' war-room, it could easily be one of hundreds of survey companies, which pay survey-takers minimum wage to make such calls. To hide who's paying for the survey--even from the survey-takers-- there is a script which must be adhered to by the survey-taker. The script almost always uses a generic name for the business, candidate, non-profit, or government agency paying for the survey. Jake has the best idea for finding out who may be responsible for this---maybe there's a survey-taker who reads this blog--or a candidate's volunteer who is troubled by push-polling. I'm sure Jake is asking his sources, too, but this type of 'dirty work'--multiple meanings intended--is usually done by grunts, like you and me.

I think it's good that Jake is gathering this intell and posting it. The only way to get at the truth is to put it out there. He didn't report it as fact.

Dawn - by saying swift boating, does that mean the truth is being told?

They are all Socialists, so whats the issue?

And to think Obama is above this then you are naive as he is or worse!

I agree that it's irresponsible to post something like this without evidence on where it's coming from. Why would this "Central Research" be calling an Edwards supporter to ask why they wouldn't support Edwards? This sounds like Clinton all the way. More of those smear Obama tactics that we saw last January and February with the "Is he black enough" and other terribly racist questions.

Good morning Jake Tapper(4-am)../I myself don't go to that resource of infamous or psedo-or even dubious BLOGS..//I listen to the Evening News w/Charles Gibson..I personally have heard enough from Edwards and Obama as they "wiggle" their way towards the Whitehouse..or how much Hillary is a Presidential-"women"..I remember voting for Ron Reagan and H.W. Bush..I would recieve some information packet in the US Mail..Ron Reagan was asking about SPENDING and DEFENSE..H.W. Bush was asking more for money but adding alot about DEFENSE also..Ron Reagan believed in a STAR WARS Program...the issues that rise out of the political ashes were few..as compared to the FLAMING-initiatives of the democrats attempting//HUGE comparisons about their "fictional" DREAMS.

I'm for Edwards and I agree with the folks upthread that this is irresponsible reporting. ITs your job, Tapper, to try to find out who's behind the calls, not to ask us to do it for you.

The swiftboating has begun! This is absolutely unbelievable--actually it isn't--that media ethicacy has fallen so low that they would speculate about a candidate's "guilt" without any evidence, based on the claims of two bloggers who are admitted Edwards loyalists.

I find it ourageous that you have the nerve to actually write this without any confirmation. You should remove this posting immediately.

i agree, before accusations arise please check up on this.

it seems way too obvious to come from the obama campaign.

sounds like a hit job, and if it were only targeting edwards and clinton...

sounds like whoever is doing it wants it to sound like the obama campaign is doing it.

sounds way too professional and conniving, and of course dirty.

clinton campaign? (im sure youve covered yourself with "why me, im also getting hit")

but thats a nice alibi..

I've been reading thorough the threads: both bloggers support Edwards campaign. One blogger stated on his original post that this was not his experience with the Obama campaign but the lack of questions made him suspicious. The blogger at John Edwards official site blogged it was Obama's campaign while admitting and updating that she had no proof of this at all.

If you're going to repeat the allegations it would be helpful to confirm such calls have been happening. I googled Central Research and have found no such firm at all.