Nuggets from the notebook while wondering how many political operatives will register their real names for the Sun Journal’s new online commenting policy … 

Ever read the comments at the bottom of a political story and had the feeling that some of the posts weren’t personal opinions but rather the words of someone with a professional stake in the politician or issue?

Well, you should probably trust your gut.

There’s mounting evidence that political agents employed to tilt public debate in favor of their candidate or issue have been using anonymous comments on news sites to amplify their message and attack opponents.

The clues are everywhere. Multiple comments, seemingly from multiple readers, repeatedly make the same point. Sometimes the language is brazenly lifted from a specific political organization.

Some of the comments might say things that a political organization never would publicly — veiled aspersions about an opponent’s personal life, for example. 

It makes sense that political groups would do this. Comment sections are popular with readers. Posting is free. The false multiplicity of like-minded opinion can be created as quickly as it takes to register various screen names.

And let’s face it, because opinion is sometimes easier to absorb than facts, comments might influence voter sentiment.   

For obvious reasons, it’s difficult to get operatives to admit that they’re infiltrating reader comments. Some will wink. Others will nod. There’s lots of spin, but no denial.

Many will claim they don’t do it but that the other side does.

That was Brent Littlefield’s response. Littlefield, who helped manage Gov.-elect Paul LePage’s campaign, acknowledged that some political organizations and campaigns — but not LePage’s — use volunteers or paid agents to post comments on news sites.

“We don’t do it, but I know they (Democratic organizations) do,” Littlefield said. “They’re still doing it now, trying to hurt (LePage). I know who most of them are.”

Democrats, of course, make the same claim.

Political consultant Dennis Bailey recently indicated that political outfits are making wide use of anonymous reader comments.

Bailey, in an apparent attempt to preempt a Sun Journal news story that revealed him as one of the anonymous co-authors of the Cutler Files attack site, penned a long blog post in which he wrote that “editors are kidding themselves if they believe that many of those anonymous reader’s comments aren’t the work of paid agents from political campaigns.”

Beginning Feb. 1, sunjournal.com will no longer allow anonymous comments. All comments will be accompanied by a real name verified by staff. 

Under those guidelines, it’ll be interesting to see how many folks who signed up during campaign season do so again.

 Scarcelli vs. Snowe?

Politico had an interesting piece last week speculating that former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Rosa Scarcelli could run against U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, in 2012.

Scarcelli told Politico that her run could depend on whether a Republican primary challenger forces Snowe to tack right.

“Olympia Snowe, in my mind, is a wonderful moderate senator,” Scarcelli said. “The issue we’ll have to face is: will she have a primary opponent and what will that mean? I think it is important we watch the votes, we watch the primary opponents.”

Snowe already has a challenger, Scott D’Amboise, a tea party candidate from Lisbon Falls. She could have another one if Andrew Ian Dodge, another tea party activist, throws his hat into the ring, as some suspect he will.

The Politico story didn’t mention potential negative impacts to Scarcelli’s political career following a Sun Journal story that named her husband, Thom Rhoads, as co-author of the Cutler Files site.

Mike Tipping, a liberal activist for the Maine People’s Alliance, considered those impacts on his Down East blog Tipping Point, writing, “If she (Scarcelli) does run again, she will now almost certainly face accusations of engaging dirty politics. Even if she denies involvement in the site, it will be hard for her to distance herself from the actions of her husband and top campaign strategist.”

LePage recall?

Dan Demeritt, Gov.-elect Paul LePage’s press secretary, raised some eyebrows last week when he claimed in a Portland Press Herald opinion column that the MPA was organizing a petition effort to recall the incoming governor.

Wrote Demeritt, “The state employees union is telling its members they are in for the fight of their lives, and word on the street is that the Maine People’s Alliance is already circulating a petition to remove Paul LePage from office. Luck favors the prepared, I suppose.”

The Maine People’s Alliance denied Demeritt’s accusation, adding that such an effort was not possible under Maine law. Tipping, the communications director for the MPA, said Demeritt’s claim had prompted a flurry of inquiries from journalists.

“The Maine People’s Alliance has taken several steps to respond to Governor-elect LePage’s stated priorities,” Tipping said in a statement. “A team of MPA door-to-door canvassers are currently talking with Mainers about LePage’s likely environmental policies and his plans to eliminate regulations on polluters. Also, MPA recently sent an email asking members to sign up for a rapid response text message list to receive alerts about action in Augusta. These certainly don’t amount to a recall petition, which isn’t even possible under Maine law.”

Asked to explain his comments, Demeritt provided a constituent e-mail claiming a woman had been approached at her home by an MPA activist who said the organization was circulating a petition to remove LePage from office. The constituent said a friend had also been approached.

Demeritt said he didn’t intend to characterize his claim as anything other than rumor. He said he was “delighted” to hear the organization wasn’t attempting to recall LePage.

smistler@sunjournal.com

Get daily political updates on the Political Pulse blog by visiting politicalpulse.sunjournal.com

Copy the Story Link