Topic: Presidential Campaign 2008
Barrwatch -- Zogby has Barr at 6% again ... and a majority wants the Libertarian candidate included in the presidential debates.by George Dance
(Libertarian)
Sunday, August 17, 2008
On August 15, polling firm Zogby International gave the results of the first Zogby Interactive survey of the month, conducted online between August 12 and 14. (1)
Asked "If the election for President of the United States were held today and the candidates are Democrat Barack Obama, Republican John McCain, Libertarian Bob Barr, and independent Ralph Nader, for whom would you vote?", the replies were:
Barack Obama - 43%
John McCain - 40%
Bob Barr - 6%
Ralph Nader - 2%
In reply to another question, a clear majority (55%) said they want to see Bob Barr included in this fall's presidential debates. 46% want Ralph Nader included.
3,339 likely voters were polled nationwide. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 1.7 percentage points.
Obama is down one point from the July Interactive (2), while McCain is up two. Nader is marginally up from "less than 2%" last time, and Barr's percentage is unchanged.
Barr's earlier 6% attracted some controversy in Libertarian circles, as no other national survey has shown him polling that high. No less an eminence than Nolan Chart publisher Walt Thiessen recently told us: "The truth is that Barr is nowhere near 6%. He did hit 6% nationally in one poll in June [sic], but now he is polling in the 1-2% range in national polls ... or at least, in those polls that are willing to include his name in the polling. By election day, if we use history as our guide, he likely won't even be at 0.3%." (3)
Thiessen cites no poll data, but doesn't need to: plenty of examples are available. Given that all pollsters involved are trying to produce accurate polls, is there some explanation that resolves the discrepancy other than the one-in-20 chance of error?
Thiessen's words suggest one possible answer. Some of the polls reporting lower numbers for Barr may not be asking candidates' names. Third-party candidates receive a notable boost when their names are mentioned. That could account for some of the discrepancy. Not all of it, though, since other polls that mentioned Barr's name have also reported less than half his Zogby gain; which means one has to look for other explanations as well.
Earlier this year, when Ron Paul was receiving similar 1-2% results in national polls but winning countless online polls, several hypotheses were advanced to explain that discrepancy. One was that conventional polling methods now underestimate some voting groups. One key group is young voters, who increasingly do not rent landlines, relying on cellphones and internet instead. If Barr polls higher among that demographic, that could account for some more of the discrepancy.
There is one piece of evidence suggesting that is the case. Buried in the fine print under the debate question, Zogby tells us that "The younger the respondent, the more likely they were to say that Barr should be included."
60% of men, and 52% of women, want Barr in the debate. So do 61% of single voters, and 54% of married voters.
50% of Republicans and 52% of Democrats want him in, with 41% of Republicans and 39% of Democrats opposed. Support for Barr's inclusion was highest of all (69%) among independents.
Independents also strongly supported Nader's inclusion, with 59% in favor.
Commented pollster John Zogby: "This election will be won in the political middle, and independent voters are the major prize up for grabs. It looks like independents want a full debate this fall to get a wider range of views and voices out onto the table."
However, that does not look likely to happen at this time. The Zogby report adds that:
Neither Barr nor Nader are currently qualified to participate, according to rules set out by the Commission on Presidential Debates, a private non-profit corporation that has organized debates in the last several presidential election cycles. The CPD requires that to be included in their debates, candidates must appear on enough state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning a majority of Electoral College votes, and must be winning at least 15% support in national public opinion polls before the debates.
As the Fredericksburg Freelance-Star recently editorialized during Barr's campaign swing through Virginia, that's a "Catch-22: Most voters are not thinking about Mr. Barr, in part because he has no national arena in which to declaim; but the perfect such arena is denied him because most voters are not thinking about him." (4)
The same holds for Mr. Nader.
Reporting on the Zogby story and the CPD rule, Nick Gillespie of Reason proposed a better way:
Here's a different rule to consider: Any candidate whose polling covers the spread between the two leaders should be allowed to bore Americans to death on national TV just as much as the major-party candidates. (5)
Barr is actually an accomplished debater, who in May debated at the world's premier forum, Oxford University. (6) However, barring a sudden upset, it looks as if the burghers of Oxford, Mississippi (where the first presidential debate takes place Sept. 27) , as well as the majority of American voters , will be barred from seeing him in action.
(6) "Bob to Debate at Oxford University," Barr Blog, bobbarr2008.com, May 7, 2008. http://blog.bobbarr2008.com/2008/05/07/bob-to-debate-at-oxford-university/
-
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 16 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of George Dance only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. George Dance is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Barr needs money if he is to maintain those numbers. For those who support a Libertarian candidate, for those who would like to open up the political system, for those rebels, for those who believe our civil liberties are being eroded and don't like the idea of the government listening to your phone calls every time you make a call to another country, please donate at www.bobbarr2008.com
Posted By: George Phillies
Date: 2008-08-17 19:24:56
At least one pollster has found a way to poll people without landlines.
George
who in his Libertarian Congressional campaign got into all the debates that his opponents held, and who according to media coverage won debates where the media made an estimate of the winner.
You will note in my campaign my position was that if I were nominated I would look forward to debating my opponents, should the opportunity rise, that I had already won tripartisan debates at the Federal level, and that based on experience I did not expect miracles to ensue as a consequence. 'Getting into the debates' based on experience is a mirage, not a miracle solution.
Mr. Phillies: I wasn't implying that Barr should get into the debates based on his experience. Nor do I think that many of this majority know a thing about Barr's debate experience; even with the June and July media buzz, I'd estimate his name recognition at well under 50%. Rather, I see it as a demand for more options; had you won the nomination, I'd expect them to be demanding your inclusion.
Now that we're communicating, do you have any comment on the contradictory Aug. 9 reports about your campaign: the Worcester Telegram & Gazette one that says you plan to support Bob Barr, and the Boston Tea Party release that says you plan to actively campaign against him?
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
