Was Ben Affleck really snubbed?

No matter what happens in this year's Oscar race, this will be one of those years that we look back on and analyze 10 years from now. The big story so far has been the overwhelming support for Ben Affleck and Argo following Affleck's "snub" for Best Director. With Affleck now adding the DGA prize to its LONG list of awards, I'm starting to wonder if his "snub" really means much in the bigger picture.
First of all, we naturally tend to group Best Picture and Best Director without realizing that they are nominated by completely different groups! Every category apart from Best Picture is only voted on by members within their branch (directors nominate directors, actors nominate actors etc.). When it comes time for the awards themselves, the voting for all the categories opens up to all the members. So when it comes down to it, we can't really say "they obviously didn't like Argo that much, since it didn't even get nominated for Best Director". The simple fact of the matter is, it was the directors that snubbed Affleck, not the Academy as a whole. Looking at the lineup, can you really blame them?
To become a member of the Academy's directing branch, I am certain you have to be a fairly talented, knowledgeable director. Considering the high quality of films and the range of unique auteur work on display, Affleck doesn't really cut it does he? Benh Zeitlin's film is wholly original and shows a clear director's vision, while Amour is displaying Michael Haneke's trademark "cold stare" approach. Ang Lee's Life of Pi is an obvious directing triumph and David O. Russell's Silver Linings Playbook is very much representative of his type of off-kilter ensemble films. Spielberg's direction isn't necessarily showing his unique style, but Lincoln had so many other kinds going for it (biggest Box Office, Lincoln's legacy etc.) that it was a no-brainer.
Compare these films to Argo and you realize it really isn't a "director's" film. Even during its big release back in October I pointed out in my review that the film works so well because of the screenplay rather than the direction. I am sure the director's branch felt the same way. They probably liked the film too(as evidenced by it winning the DGA!), but they didn't feel the need to praise the directing. Just last year we had a good example of the high-mindedness of the directing branch. We all know Tree of Life was nowhere near being in the Top 5 for Best Picture (that Best Cinematography loss revealed a lot), but it wound up with a Best Director nod. Add in all the other branches and you would certainly get a different Best Director lineup. The measly 6% that nominate Best Director surely doesn't represent the general taste of the Academy.
Now, stats and history indicate a rarity of Picture-Director splits, which should give hope to films like Lincoln and Silver Linings Playbook, but therein lies our other conundrum. With Argo winning EVERY Best Picture and Best Director so far, how do we even know which film is nipping at its heels? With that in mind, I think it's going to be hard to gather troops around a single film to take down Argo for Best Picture. Come Oscar night, I feel confident (at the moment) to say that Argo will join Wings, Grand Hotel and Driving Miss Daisy as the only films to win Best Picture without a Best Director nomination.