I wish I could say I find it surprising that more people do not understand that Gabbard makes a valid point when she states that the polling used to eliminate her from the next debate. Her statement is completely truthful and valid.
The DNC dictates a specified list of polls which allow a candidate to qualify for debates. These polls are conducted by means which favor neoliberal/neoconservative voters. First, they are advertised in ways that attract a very specific audience, such as on specific corporate “news” outlets. Outgoing polls are conducted using means which gain responses from very few younger or less affluent voters.
One such tactic is conducting polling via land line. Other than businesses, who has a land line any more? The answer is old, wealthy, white people. I am 57 and have not had a land line for at least 16 years, other than my internet connection. I have a VOIP line but it is not used. Part of a package deal.
Of course, there is the wording in a poll. Anyone who has ever taken any kind of poll knows the wording used determines the response. “Would you prefer taking poison or being drawn and quartered?”
Polls are frequently “weighted”, meaning some methods of response have greater value than other methods. Which can lead to a desired response counting as 10 votes in favor, while less desired responses count as 1 vote.
Placement in a poll play a role as well. Names near the top tend to get more favorable responses, those near the bottom get the fewest favorable responses. This is negated if the poll places all candidates in alphabetical order.
Some polls use specific names more often than other names, leading to an obvious, easily identified bias. However, most people are subject to being influenced and will automatically lean toward the names mentioned most often and in the bias which the poll presents.
In 2016, I examined polling which showed certain candidates having a low popularity, while their attendance at rallies indicated a very high popularity. What I found was that many of the polls completely eliminated that candidate’s name. I took a cursory look at some of the polling stating a low favorability for Tulsi Gabbard and found that some of those polls did not include her name at all or far less often than other names.
You can absolutely expect that polls conducted by capitalist entities will show low response rates for candidates who oppose capitalist policies. Entities which favor war will have low positive responses for candidates who favor diplomacy. Entities that run continuous negative stories on a candidate will have very negative responses regarding that candidate.
Just because Tulsi Gabbard is not in the debate does not mean she has dropped out of the race. I personally hope she does not. If anything, the bias against her has solidified my support for her further. I wish she would reconsider running third party if she does not get the nomination. Then she would absolutely get my vote. She will in the primary, any way.