In a July 23 press release entitled ‘Florida Libertarian Accuses Scott Rasmussen of GOP Bias, Electioneering’, Libertarian Senatorial candidate Alex Snitker says Scott Rasmussen is intentionally “stacking the deck for Marco Rubio and the GOP”.
Citing recent Rasmussen polls “that show Rubio with a lead over Crist, despite recent results from Public Policy Polling (PPP), Ipsos/Reuters, Quinnipiac, and other major pollsters showing Crist with a five to nine point lead”, Snitker accused Scott Rasmussen of “intentionally skewing the poll so to create the most favorable outcome for Marco Rubio”.
Even after a very vocal outcry from Snitker's campaign supporters, the latest Rasmussen poll also fails to mention Snitker by name, though an ‘other candidate’ category was added to the list, garnering support from 3% of respondents. The change was made, according to Campaign volunteer coordinator Bev Baker, after Rasmussen received an estimated “several hundred” calls and emails over the course of a few days. “We asked Alex’s supporters to contact Rasmussen, and they responded in droves,” said Baker.
Also according to the release, “Debra Falk of Rasmussen Reports said that they heard Snitker’s volunteers “loud and clear,” and added, “In fact, we could have heard them from Mars.””
The press release calls attention to a phenomenon being referred to as the “Snitker Paradox”, a theory going around “in the blogosphere” which poses the idea “that pollsters hold the power to determine the perceived viability of third party candidates.” This perception is then carried into other areas of campaigning and debate: “If the pollsters don’t include their names in the poll, they have no opportunity to enter the debates, which usually have an entrance fee of 5-15% in a major poll. If the candidates are excluded from the debates, they are unable to increase their standing in the polls due to their usually limited advertising budgets.” And because advertising budgets are limited, third party candidates’ names are not included in major polls and ‘other candidate’ becomes synonymous with ‘also ran’ in a poll-driven two-horse race, regardless of the candidate's qualifications or merits in the minds of his supporters.
Searches of Google, Yahoo and Bing provide a unanimous first mention of this phenomenon appearing in a recent Libertarian Party of Florida newsletter penned by Editor Adrian Wyllie. In his July 11 missive entitled ‘Pollsters Create Paradox for Third Party Candidates’, he laments:
“In what has become the benchmark for candidate viability, major pollsters, such as Zogby, Quinnipiac, and Rasmussen, are the gatekeepers for third party and independent political office seekers. If a candidate is excluded from the polls, they are excluded from the debates, the candidate forums, and from media coverage as a whole.” He goes on:
“While most Republican/Democrat political duopoly candidates have a “golden ticket” to be included in polls without question, third party candidates are often left standing in the porridge line asking, “Please, sir, may I have some more?” And:
“The Florida U.S. Senate race has become a perfect example of this paradox.”
An independent poll conducted last May gave Snitker 12% on a list that included Crist, Rubio, Meek and Snitker, placing him third amongst this group. That should have been sufficient to include him on the recent Rasmussen poll by their own standards; however, according to Debra Falk “We research their campaigns, coverage in local media, etc. and make a determination about inclusion from there. Who and what we poll about comes down to our own judgment.”
The Snitker campaign is well supported, as any Martian (and Rasmussen pollster) can attest. His coverage in local media (print and radio) has been a little spotty but mostly steady and unusually (for a Libertarian) cordial. His campaign is as solid and professionally presented as either Crist's or Rubio's, on their best days. What's not to like besides his status as the only politically untainted candidate in this whole sordid affair?
Is there anyone out there who still believes that the mainstream media and pollsters are not in active support of the establishment and its candidates in some crooked game of musical oligarchs?
Comments