Ratfucking is not polling
By 
This is admittedly confirming what is already obvious, but Rasmussen should not be treated as any kind of actual polling outfit:
A major polling organization is reportedly giving Donald Trump’s campaign previews of its results before the public sees them.
On Thursday, American Muckrakers posted about emails it received detailing how the conservative-leaning Rasmussen Reports, which claims to be nonpartisan, shared polling results with Trump advisers and campaign officials like Dan Scavino, Susie Wiles, and John McLaughlin. The advisers, Rasmussen, and the nonprofit organizations that pay it for polling are violating tax and election laws, according to American Muckrakers.
One of the emails details close collaboration between the Trump campaign, Rasmussen, and the Heartland Institute, which calls itself a national free-market public policy think tank. However, it’s also a 501(c)3 nonprofit and is not allowed to engage in political activity benefiting a political candidate.
Rasmussen has long been criticized for its polling, which focuses on “likely voters,” and for skewing toward older Americans and providing favorable results to conservatives. During the Trump administration, its website became overtly supportive of the right wing, with many of its polls sponsored by conservative personalities and causes. On social media, Rasmussen appeared to legitimize many conspiracy theories on the right, such as election fraud and vaccine denialism.
Earlier this year, the polling aggregator 538 dropped Rasmussen Reports from its averages and forecasts, saying that the firm couldn’t meet 538’s standards for objectivity and methodology. This drew a major backlash from right-wing media, especially after Rasmussen published a letter from 538 asking the polling firm questions about its procedures and biases.
538 in both past and present iterations is hardly beyond criticism — I largely agree with the criticisms that the model it was using for much of the year was pretty clearly putting too much weight on incumbency and economic fundamentals given the strong trend of political calcification — but not including Rasmussen in the polling aggregate seems like a no-brainer.