The species is missing in our backbone and the matching service therefore returns a fuzzy match:
As you can see from the match type this is a fuzzy match with a name matching score of only 53 out of 100. But the classification does well and because there is no other close match we consider that fuzzy match to be likely (cause our backbone is unaware of C. politum). You can read here a little more about how we process data: http://www.gbif.org/infrastructure/processing
The good news is we are close to replace our backbone with a new version which actually does contain C. politum!
When this happens we will rematch your records and they will show under the correct name then.