Skip to content
Subscribe

Polling and Prejudice: The Third Party Presidential Vote

Published:
third-party-presidential-vote

Recent polls show a highly competitive race between the Democratic and Republican party candidates for president. However, it appears that when polling organizations present the public with a more accurate reflection of the presidential ballot this is simply not the case.

A Gallup poll published last Friday found that roughly 7% of registered voters support a third party candidate for president. Among survey organizations, it is standard practice to exclude all third party and Independent candidates from their presidential tracking polls. The highly unusual poll conducted by Gallup last month included the names of three third party candidates in addition to the Democratic and Republican party nominees for president: Jill Stein of the Green Party, Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party and Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.

Of these three candidates, Gary Johnson had the most support at 3%, Jill Stein was preferred by 1% of respondents, and Virgil Goode obtained less than .5% support. Another 2% volunteered the name of Texas Congressman and former Republican party presidential candidate Ron Paul, and 1% volunteered the names of other individuals. A full 5% stated that they would not vote.

Among the major party candidates, President Obama came out on top in the survey at 47%, demonstrating a substantive lead over Republican Mitt Romney, who was preferred by 40% of those polled.

The reasoning behind Gallup's decision to include Johnson, Stein and Goode's names in this particular poll is highly revealing. The “special presidential preference question” includes “the names of all candidates who will appear on the ballot in a large number of states.” In other words, the “special presidential preference question” more accurately reflects the actual ballot choices for the office of president than the usual presidential polling question which only includes the names of the Democratic and Republican party candidates.

An obvious question thus arises: if the “special presidential preference question” is more accurate than the standard presidential preference question, why isn't the special presidential preference question the standard?

One potential response might be that the third party vote is insignificant. No third party candidate in the present poll received more than 3% support. Moreover, the fact that there were more individuals who said they would not vote than there were who said they would support any third party alternative to the Democrat and the Republican underscores the shallowness of the support for these candidates.

Yet, taken together, more than 7% of likely voters in the Gallup poll stated that they would vote for someone other than Obama or Romney and another 5% stated they would not vote for any of the candidates named in the poll. That exceeds the margin of victory between the Democratic and Republican candidates in the last six presidential elections.

Indeed, according to Gallup's own data, the third party vote is highly significant. In Gallup's standard presidential tracking poll, Obama and Romney are in a dead heat, “tied at 46% of the vote among registered voters since Gallup began its tracking program in April.” However, when Gallup presents its survey respondents with a choice that provides a more accurate reflection of the presidential ballot, this is clearly not the case, as the present poll shows Obama with a 7% lead over Romney.

Given this state of affairs, is there any reason – other than political bias – as to why a polling organization would not wish to furnish a more accurate reflection of the ballot in its political preference surveys?

As a final note, though the Gallup report stated that Jill Stein will appear on the November ballot as the Green party's candidate for president, she has not yet been officially nominated by the party. The Greens will be holding their national convention later this week.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Polling and Prejudice: The Third Party Presidential Vote

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us