Commentary

Are Election Poll Projections Voter Interference?

Do you remember ever receiving a phone call from someone asking you to participate in a poll of who you would be voting for in an upcoming election? Do you recall the name of the company conducting the poll? Do you recall how long it took for the caller to hear a dial tone when you hung up?

Moving on — what would you consider voter interference? Let’s lay it out for you to decide.

Polls have the ability to shape voters’ perception of candidates and shape public opinion. The 2016 and 2020 presidential elections underestimated support among voters — coincidental or deliberate? Voter interference or legitimate poll results?

Are fake polls designed to target voters who are undecided or uninformed about political candidates? Distinguishing legitimate polls from fake polls makes democracy more resilient against manipulation. Isn’t manipulation considered voter interference? During the 2022 midterms, weak polls distorted polling averages and contributed to misleading perceptions of several races.

A reported CNN graphic showed a candidate for POTUS leading an opponent in 2024. The candidate serving in office was tasked with closing the border to illegal migrants — in numbers exceeding 18 million. The candidate admitted to not visiting the border but admitted never traveling to Europe either.

Subscribe to our mailing list

So, what were the major accomplishments for four years of the seated candidate while earning the title “word salad”? The candidate running as leader of our country had poll numbers exceeding the seated candidate even when his performance was classified as “elder abuse” and an embarrassment to America.

If you question whether unnamed poll takers participate in voter interference, listen for the sound of a dial tone when you are unwittingly pulled into an abyss of manipulation and are refusing to be used by unscrupulous politicians.

Your call — voter interference or dial tone?

Marianne Perez

Marianne Perez, Salem-News.com Investigative Reporter, is an Activist for Victims of OxyContin and Purdue Pharma throughout the United States and Canada. In July 2007, she testified against Purdue Pharma in Federal Court in Virginia at the sentencing of their three CEO's - Michael Friedman, Howard Udell and Paul Goldenheim - who pleaded guilty to charges of marketing OxyContin as less likely to be addictive or abused to physicians and patients. She also testified against Purdue Pharma at a Judiciary Hearing of the U.S. Senate in July 2007. Marianne works with government agencies and private attorneys in having a voice for her daughter Jill, who died in 2002 after being prescribed OxyContin, as well as the voice for scores of victims of OxyContin. She is currently working on a book that exposes Purdue Pharma for their continued criminal marketing of OxyContin. Marianne is a nurse, graduated in 1991 as president of her class, and also has a Paralegal certification. Marianne served on a Community Service Board for the Courier News, a Gannet newspaper in NJ, writing articles predominantly regarding AIDS patients and their emotional issues. She was awarded a Community Service Award in 1993 by the Hunterdon County, NJ HIV/AIDS Task Force in recognition of and appreciation for the donated time, energy and love in facilitating a Support Group for persons with HIV/AIDS.

Related Articles

Check Also
Close
Back to top button