Now it's hard to imagine that a company named Zogby would be able to get very far in terms of getting people to take their polls seriously. You'd think they would have to spend most of their time proving that they're a legitimate organization. But, somehow they have managed to earn the respect of those who track the polls, and lately have managed to stir things up with some of their "findings".
Their latest poll attempted to pit each democratic front runner against each republican front runner in order to find out which candidate has the strongest chance of beating the republican nominee in the general election. They asked folks who they would vote for if given the choice of either Hillary or Giuliani, Hillary or Romney, Hillary or McCain...and so on. The "findings" of this poll were just released and Zogby claims that Hillary Clinton would lose to every one of the top five Republican presidential contenders while Barack Obama and John Edwards would defeat or tie every one of the Republicans. In other words, they're saying: "note to democrats: support either Obama or Edwards because Hillary doesn't have a chance in the general election."
Well, when we here at Vote for Hillary Online first heard about this, we were pretty disappointed with the American people's ability to make sound judgment calls and realize that a lot is at stake here in these bleak times. Then we realized that this was an online poll. You know, the same online polls that would lead you to believe that Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul actually have a chance? Hillary Clinton strategist Mark Penn was on MSNBC this morning and got straight to the point: "this is a meaningless poll." He's exactly right. As admitted by Zogby International, this was an interactive online poll (by the way, what's interactive mean, you can rig the results in real time?) and this is the first time they have attempted to use this medium for polling. You would think that they would do a few test runs first to ensure that this is in fact an accurate polling method. You can't exactly do a "random" poll online. The only people who respond to polls online are those who seek them out, and obviously the opponent's supporters are so afraid of Hillary's winning potential that they're trying to say she lost before the first vote is even counted.
Now, any respectful polling agency would have just brushed off this criticism, maybe issue an apology, and learn from their mistake. After all, who was watching MSNBC this morning? Nobody would have noticed, and they could fix their mistakes in private. Well it turns out that they got quite defensive over the constructive criticism offered by Mark Penn. Remember folks, always be suspicious of someone who gets defensive before you even have time to point the finger at them. Fritz Wenzel, Director of Communications over at Zogby International, issued this response:
Mark Penn: Buckling Under the Pressure of an Unfavorable Poll
All is fair in love and war, the centuries–old proverb states. Politics is not included, but given the way the game is played in modern–day America, maybe it should be. That’s the sense I had again this morning watching Mark Penn, the chief political strategist for Democrat Hillary Clinton, denigrate our latest Zogby Interactive survey simply because it showed his client in a bad light (Link to Latest Poll Number). Penn made the contention on the MSNBC morning news program hosted by Joe Scarborough (Link to Video)
Penn mischaracterized this latest online Zogby poll as our first interactive survey ever – a bizarre contention, since we have been developing and perfecting our Internet polling methodology for nearly a decade (Zogby Intreractive Methodology), and since Penn’s company has been quietly requesting the results of such polls from Zogby for years. We always comply as part of our pledge to give public Zogby polling results to any and every candidate and campaign that asks for them. What is interesting is that no other campaign has made as many requests for Zogby polling data over the years than Penn has made on behalf of Clinton.
Because Mark Penn is a quality pollster himself, we chalk up his contention that our poll is "meaningless" as a knee–jerk reaction by a campaign under pressure coming down the stretch. Several other polls – Zogby surveys and others – have shown her national lead and her leads in early–voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire have shrunk. This is not unusual. These presidential contests usually tighten as the primaries and caucuses approach.
Director of Communications
Does this sound like someone who is impartial and objective? Does this seem like someone who actually cares about the truth? Or does it seem more like someone who got in the position that he did at Zogby in order to promote his anti-Hillary agenda. I think it's pretty clear what's going on here, and his comments speak for itself.
Vote for Hillary Online is now calling for a massive boycott on Zogby, and we hope that you realize the importance of exposing these smear merchants for what they are. We hate to be negative here, but this is the state of politics we live in and pointing out the corrupt ways of the system is one step towards getting America back on the road to prosperity.