Skip to content
Subscribe

Seeking Exposure, Third Party Candidates Begin Appearing in Presidential Polls

Published:

A recent poll shows that presumptive nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have record-high unfavorability ratings: 55 percent and 70 percent, respectively. Yet despite their unpopularity, the general electorate may not be exposed to third party candidates as an alternative.

This is largely a result of the rules governing who is included in the presidential debates. According to guidelines set by the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a candidate must poll at 15 percent to be invited to participate. (Note: The Independent Voter Project has filed an amicus brief in the case to open up the debates.)

The CPD claims that the 15 percent criterion is fair because it treats all candidates equally (no candidate is automatically invited simply for having won a party's nomination) and because, in the words of CPD Director Dorothy Ridings, "During the course of the campaign, the candidates are afforded many opportunities in a great variety of forums to advance their candidacies."

But recent polling shows that many voters are not aware of third party options. The results of a Huffington Post/YouGov poll published on June 1, for instance, showed that approximately two-thirds of respondents had not heard of Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson. Candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, have for months enjoyed billions of dollars of "free" media coverage.

Third party candidates find themselves in a kind of catch-22. Because they lack popular support, pollsters often decide not to include them in their surveys; yet this exclusion inhibits their ability to gain exposure and support, as their names are not mentioned when the media reports the findings of the latest poll.

In 2012, for example, approximately 90 percent of polls did not include Gary Johnson or Green Party nominee Jill Stein. As a result, reports on presidential polls tended not to refer to these candidates – sometimes even representing support for them as "other" – keeping their exposure and electoral performances minimal.

In May of this year, the trend seemed to continue. A senior editor for HuffPost Pollster, explaining why its site had not reported on the standing of Johnson in the polls, observed that of the 15 pollsters it tracked, only 3 had included him.

"The answer to why HuffPost Pollster isn’t including Johnson in our charts should be clear at this point," she claimed. "We can’t include him when pollsters aren’t polling on him."

In June, however, some polling organizations have started to be more inclusive.

On June 1, RealClearPolitics posted two polls measuring public opinion in Georgia. Both Quinnipiac and Public Policy Polling (PPP) included Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein as options (Stein is currently not the party's nominee: the Green Party will select its nominee in August).

Since then, this practice has continued, at both the state and national levels. On June 7, PPP released the results from a poll in Florida that included Clinton, Trump, Johnson, and Stein, and Quinnipiac published its results of a four-candidate survey in Connecticut. The next day, PPP published the results of a poll in Pennsylvania that also included all four candidates.

On June 12, SurveyUSA released a national four-way poll for The Guardian, and on June 16, Reuters/Ipsos followed suit. Also that day, PPP released the results of a four-candidate poll in Virginia.

As Michael Barone has observed in the Washington Examiner, the results have been fairly modest for Johnson and Stein. In three-way contests involving Clinton, Trump, and Johnson, Johnson has polled 8 percent on average, drawing equally from Clinton and Trump. When Stein has been included, Johnson's support has fallen to 5 percent, with Stein winning 3 percent.

Yet Barone also notes that the support for Johnson and Stein may represent something significant: "potential flight." Given the unpopularity of Clinton and Trump, many voters are considering alternatives, or may in the end decide not to vote at all.

In the meantime, Johnson and Stein can be expected to monitor closely the effects of increased exposure as a result of being included in presidential polling. Perhaps one of them – or both – may hit the 15 percent threshold and be invited to participate in the CPD debates, which begin in September.

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

Seeking Exposure, Third Party Candidates Begin Appearing in Presidential Polls

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