The Political "Poison Pill"

Dennis Putnam dap at ILINKS.NET
Mon Oct 28 20:59:14 MST 1996

On Mon, 28 Oct 96 09:12:49 PST  , Kenneth E. Wyman wrote:

>                      The Political "Poison Pill"
>      Day 1, a political candidate is ahead in a poll by 20 points,
> the next day he's down to 9 points, the following day he leads by
> 18 points, etc.,etc.  The pollster gives the usual justification for
> the "wild swing" -- anomalies like that happen in the "art" of
> polling.
>      How did they conduct that poll?  Who was polled; what age;
> race; what geographical location; registered voter or most likely to
> vote; "if you're un-decided, why not tell us your leaning;" what kind
> of "weighting" for subjective evaluation of historical voter
> variations?
>      Given such variables, any "pollster" at a given moment can
> whatever conclusion fits their political "bent" and the
> result is seized upon and paid for with gratitude of the "favored."
>      Then you have the infamous "push poll" which asks a voter,
> "with the record of candidate "A" being against "mom and apple
> how are you going to vote?"  The un-informed voter is shocked
> into voting for the opponent of "A." -- The voting block of Florida's
> senior citizens  was so "moved" by push polling in its race for
> governor.
>      A plethora of polls daily assaults the public's concept of
> political events telling them their favorite candidate is far ahead
> or behind,  Politically essential volunteers decrease in number for
> perceived "loser." Needed citizen funding is dissipated.  As
> reach the last day, the poll perceived loser who may have a
chance to
> win sees needed voter support discouraged by poll induced
"what's the
> use" attitude.
>      The overbearing weight of those polls, in essence, "poison" the
> political process.  They essentially dis-enfranchise the will of the
> citizen to vote with a built in inference that it is "waste of time"
> in voting against a foregone outcome.
--------- End quoted message ----------

Although what you say is true and holding the press accountable for
their bias while claiming objective journalism is certainly legitimate, =
it is
not an excuse. This is still a partly free country and it is up to every =

citizen to seek out the truth and vote their conscience.
Unfortunately, there are a great many that have become lazy and/or
have opted out of the process. Many like Will and Richard (say what
ever happened to him anyway?), simply refuse to hear and
understand the truth. The reasons for this are a different argument,
about which I have my own ideas, and we can discuss that at
another time if you wish.
Dennis Putnam
Loganville, Ga.

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list