Must be a Flaw in the Polling

Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Peruvian pollster Sergio Bendixen wrote a piece in The Huffington Post entitled, "The Significance of the Diaz-Balarts' 'Un-Endorsement' of Charlie Crist," in which he discusses -- more precisely, criticizes -- the merits of a recent decision by U.S. Congressmen Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart not to support any candidate for the U.S. Senate.

Frankly, the endorsement issue is not of any interest to us. However, we were intrigued by two tangential observations made by Bendixen in his post.

First, he states that,

"There is little doubt that Lincoln Diaz-Balart is currently the most respected and credible politician among Cuban exiles and that his brother Mario is not far behind in popularity."

A very assertive statement indeed.

But then, proceeds to claim that,

"[T]he hard-line Cuba policy for which the Diaz-Balarts are famous for no longer has the backing of Cuban Americans; nearly three-fifths of them -- 59% -- now support allowing all Americans to travel freely to Cuba according to a poll conducted by my firm in October."

So, here's Bendixen's theory:

Lincoln Diaz-Balart is undoubtedly the most "respected and credible politician amongst Cuban exiles" -- the very same community that (according to Bendixen's polling) opposes Diaz-Balart's views on Cuba policy.

Huh? Why would Cuban exiles support, respect and elect a Member of Congress that they do not agree with? Moreover, how would Diaz-Balart be the most popular politician amongst Cuban exiles?

Does Bendixen believe we're masochists, or somehow ignorant? That's not only absurd, but an insult to Cuban exiles.

There must either be a flaw in his assertion, or alternatively, in his polling.

Judging by the results of last November's Congressional elections -- it's surely the latter.