Fox News Polls released a presidential general election poll on May 18. Scroll down to question 4. The results: Donald Trump 42%, Hillary Clinton 39%, Gary Johnson 10%, other 2%, won’t vote 5%, don’t know 3%.
4
On May 17, Public Policy Polling released this 4-candidate general election presidential poll for Arizona. Go to the second half of the poll and scroll down to Question 5 for the results: Donald Trump 40%, Hillary Clinton 38%, Gary Johnson 6%, Jill Stein 2%, not sure 13%.
Federal election law requires that debate sponsors, for candidates for federal office, must have objective criteria when they decide whom to invite. Generally debate sponsors rely on polls.
California’s U.S. Senate race on June 7, 2016, has 34 candidates on the ballot. Broadcast stations and newspapers have sponsored two U.S. Senate debates, on at the University of the Pacific in Stockton on April 25, and one at San Diego State University on May 10. Both debates invited only five particular candidates: Kamala Harris, Loretta Sanchez, Ron Unz, Duf Sundheim, and Tom Del Beccaro. The debate sponsors relied on a poll. However, that poll, the California Poll, only asked about those five particular candidates. Nothing was said to respondents about any of the other candidates.
But, since then, Political Data Incorporated has released a poll that lists all 34 candidates. The results are contained in an article by Paul Mitchell in the May 13, 2016 issue of Political Pulse. The poll was on-line. It is almost impossible to have a poll conducted by telephone that mentions as many as 34 candidates.
The results are shocking, because the top five candidates in the poll that mentioned all the candidates are not the same five candidates who were invited into the media debates. The results: Harris 24.4%; Sanchez 7.1%; Phil Wyman 3.2%; Greg Conlon 2.6%; Unz 2.1%; Sundheim 1.2%; Lightfoot 1.2%; Del Beccaro 1.1%; George Yang 1.0%; Massie Munroe .8%; Karen Roseberry .8%; Tom Palzer .7%; Pamela Elizondo .7%; Von Hougo .6%; Jerry Laws .6%; Herb Peters .4%; Don Krampe .4%; Mark Matthew Herd .4%; Emory Rodgers .3%; Steve Stokes .3%; Clive Gray .3%; Ling Ling Shi .3%; President Cristina Grappo .1%; Jarrell Williamson .1%; Mike Beitiks .1%; Tim Gildersleeve .1%; Jason Hanania .1%; Jason Kraus .1%; Paul Merritt .1%; Gar Myers .1%; John T. Parker .0%; Eleanor Garcia .0%; Don Grundmann .0%; Scott A. Vineberg .0%.
On May 11, the Commission on Presidential Debates filed this amicus curiae brief in Level the Playing Field v Federal Election Commission, 1:15cv-1397. This is one of the two pending cases over the rules for qualifying for the general election presidential debates.
The brief says that there are “scores” of presidential candidates every presidential election year. This is a phony point, because no one is challenging the CPD rule that says invited candidates must be on the ballot in enough states to theoretically win. in the entire history of the United States, there has never been a presidential election with more than seven candidates who had enough candidates for presidential elector to theoretically win. In 2012 there were only four such candidates.
The brief also that the purpose of the federal campaign laws is to prevent corruption or the appearance of corruption. The plaintiffs agree. The question, which the CPD completely ignores, is whether the large for-profit corporations who fund the Commission on Presidential Debates are currying favor with the two major party presidential candidates by their funding.
Patrick Gannon, editor of the Insider State Government News Service, which covers North Carolina, has this article about independent candidates who are trying to get on the ballot for legislature this year.
He does not mention congressional independents, but the petition requirements for Congress are even more severe. North Carolina is the only state that has never had an independent candidate on the November ballot for either house of Congress, nor for Governor.