Send this page to a friend -- Email the Editor

BY FLORENCE GILKESON: Senior Writer

Peggy Crutchfield says her campaign for state House of Representatives has incumbent Co-Speaker of the House Richard Morgan “running scared.”

In a statement released this week, she said Morgan “has introduced gutter politics into this race to keep his faltering political ambitions alive.”

Crutchfield has announced her candidacy for the Republican nomination for the District 52 seat in the state House. Morgan is expected to seek re-election.

Her campaign released the results of a poll conducted in March among 400 Moore County registered voters, showing that 33 percent of those polled would vote for Morgan in the primary election. The poll also shows that 43 percent would not vote for Morgan and 25 percent were unsure.

The response from the Morgan camp focused on the fact that the Crutchfield campaign had released the poll results to the public.

Paul Shumaker, Morgan’s political consultant, called it “a highly unusual move for any campaign to do anything like this.” He said it appears to indicate that Crutchfield intends to conduct a negative campaign.

“There’s nothing in this survey that gives me great concern,” Shumaker said in a telephone interview.

Morgan was tied up in a series of legislative meetings this week and referred questions to Shumaker, a professional campaign strategist. Morgan is one of Shumaker’s clients through Capital Communications.

Shumaker said the question about prospective re-election voting intentions is a standard question for the typical political poll and said a response of 25 to 30 percent in favor of the incumbent is regarded as a good thing. He said this type of poll is usually used to help the candidate develop strategy in future campaigning, which is why he is perplexed that Crutchfield campaign released the findings to the public.

The poll for Crutchfield’s campaign was conducted in March in N.C. House District 52, which encompasses most of Moore County.

“Richard Morgan knows this race is slipping away from him,” Crutchfield said. “He’s seen the same poll numbers we have. Richard claims to be unbeatable. But he’s running radio ads every hour on the hour. He has cluttered the landscape with huge billboards up all over beautiful Moore County. And now he has his buddies writing mean-spirited letters about me to the editor of the local newspaper.”

‘Running Scared’

“It is amazing that the allegedly invincible speaker of the House is resorting to these kind of desperate tactics this early. I believe we have him running scared.”

Crutchfield, a former president of the United Way of Moore County and former director of Keep Moore County Beautiful, said she is trying to keep her campaign tactics low key. She said she has a number of speaking engagements lined up across the county in coming weeks and that several area fund-raising events are also in the works.

“It is too early for this kind of aggressive media blitz tactics my opponent has resorted to,” Crutchfield said. “We are traveling to every community in Moore County meeting face to face with people desperately seeking new, responsible representation in Raleigh.

“People want to hear serious ideas from their representatives. Voters are telling me that they want a representative that they can know and respect, not a representative that resorts to playing ugly political games. I hope Richard Morgan will follow my lead and make this campaign a positive discussion on ideas to help Moore County.”

The poll, released with Crutchfield’s statement this week, contains the results of answers to about 35 questions, most relating to the participants’ voting intentions. Among the questions are queries about Morgan’s actions in the legislature, especially since his election to the House co-speaker last year.

But Shumaker said the questions in the Crutchfield poll are typical of questions used “when a candidate is struggling to establish credibility.” He said it is rare for a candidate to make these results public this early in the campaign.

‘Telegraphed Playbook’

Shumaker said it was helpful that Crutchfield “has telegraphed what their playbook is.”

He did question the accuracy of one question in the survey. Shumaker said the statement that Morgan voted “to reduce the state child tax credit for North Carolina families during a recession” was untrue.

“She obviously did not understand the issue,” Shumaker said.

For people who understand poll strategy, Shumaker said the Crutchfield poll is “actually very good” for the Morgan camp. He added that he has been making a living at conducting similar polls for a number of years.

Shumaker said that the general public rarely understands the purpose behind taking such polls.

“Polls are nothing but a snapshot in time, subject to change at any time. They form a foundation to build upon,” he said. “Polls are often misinterpreted.

Shumaker said he was encouraged that the Crutchfield campaign is offering this opportunity to share the game plan.

“It’s obvious that Peggy Crutchfield plans to run a negative campaign,” he said. “She needs to do more comprehensive re-search.”

Asked their opinion of Richard Morgan, 159, or 40 percent of those responding to the survey, reported a favorable opinion; 104, or 26 percent, an unfavorable opinion; 106, or 26 percent, no opinion; and 31, or 8 percent, unaware of the situation.

Although 43 percent responded that they would not vote for Morgan, regardless of his opponent, on another question, 157, or 39 percent, said they would vote for Morgan if the primary election “were held today.” Eighty people, or 20 percent, said they would vote for Crutchfield, and 162, or 41 percent, said they were not sure.

Opinion of Morgan

Participants were asked their opinion of Morgan’s service as a legislator and were given additional information about Crutchfield, after which they were asked their reaction based on this information. Answers varied.

Then the poll turned to the sensitive question of voting for the Republican nominee for speaker of the House. Of the 400 polled, 229, or 57 percent, said they would be more inclined to vote for Crutchfield if they knew she would vote for the GOP nominee. But 125, or 31 percent, said it would make no difference, 15 percent said they would be less inclined to vote for her, and 31 were not sure.

This question took aim at Morgan’s strategy last year when he did not support the legislator nominated by the Republican caucus and held off until he garnered sufficient votes for himself. Because the House membership was split down the middle, the result was the election of two speakers, one from each party.

At this point, the poll switches to questions related to their reaction to the previous several questions.

With additional information about Crutchfield provided and questions raised about Morgan, survey participants were then asked again who they would vote for if the primary were held today. This time, 168, or 42 percent, said they would vote for Crutchfield, 151, or 38 percent, said they were unsure, and 80, or 20 percent, said they would vote for Morgan. One refused to answer.

Results of the poll show that survey participants included 340 registered Republicans and 60 persons registered as unaffiliated. Of the total, 174 are 65 or older, 100 between 55 and 64, with 64 falling into the 45-54 age category, 41 in the 35-44 category, 18 in the 18-34 range.

Those being polled were asked the importance of religion in their lives, and 168, or 42 percent, said it was “extremely” important and 167, almost 42 percent again, called it “very” important. Fifty, or 13 percent, said religion is “somewhat” important, with eight indicating that it was “not at all” important, three indicating they were “not sure,” and four refusing to answer.

Other questions covered such subjects as major issues facing the state and voting preferences for Republican candidates for governor. On the gubernatorial preference, 155 said they are unsure, 97 prefer George W. Little of Southern Pines, 67 for Richard Vinroot, 56 for Bill Cobey, 21 for Patrick Ballantine, and four refusals.