Poll: It’s Time to Normalize Relations With Cuba

None

A bike-taxi and a vintage American car are seen in front of a building decorated with a large Cuban flag, on December 31, 2013, in Havana. A new regulation released by Cuban President Raul Castro will allow Cubans or foreign residents to freely buy new or used cars in government-run stores as of January 3, 2014; after 50 years of automobile sales regulations. 
National Journal
Charlie Cook
Feb. 24, 2014, 5 p.m.

Every once in a while, a polit­ic­al ca­nard is ex­posed — something that once may have been gen­er­ally ac­cep­ted and per­haps true, but has re­mained a part of the con­ven­tion­al wis­dom.

Such is the case with the view that any kind of nor­mal­iz­a­tion of re­la­tions with Cuba is a polit­ic­al third rail; that is to say, if you touch it, you die (or get de­feated). In the Cold War era, par­tic­u­larly in the 1960s, nor­mal­iz­a­tion of re­la­tions with Cuba was a non­starter, and in fact, it was dan­ger­ous for most politi­cians to sup­port.

But that day has long since passed. In all but pos­sibly a hand­ful of con­gres­sion­al dis­tricts in Flor­ida and New Jer­sey — if even there — this is a noth­ing-bur­ger is­sue. Few voters would have any prob­lem with it. Like the mis­sile silos in North Dakota, our policy to­ward Cuba is a Cold War rel­ic that has long since passed its time.

A new bi­par­tis­an na­tion­al sur­vey points to strong and broad-based sup­port for a ma­jor change in U.S. policy to­ward Cuba, even among Re­pub­lic­ans.

In­deed, Re­pub­lic­an mem­bers rep­res­ent­ing farm states have a par­tic­u­lar in­cent­ive to sup­port le­gis­la­tion that would cre­ate a new mar­ket for U.S. goods, par­tic­u­larly corn and grain, just 90 miles off the coast of Flor­ida.

Com­mis­sioned by the At­lantic Coun­cil, a highly re­spec­ted for­eign policy think tank, and its Ad­rienne Arsht Lat­in Amer­ica Cen­ter, the poll was con­duc­ted Jan. 7-22, in Eng­lish and Span­ish, among 1,024 adults na­tion­wide. The sur­vey also in­cluded an over-sample of 617 Flor­idi­ans, so that their at­ti­tudes could be giv­en par­tic­u­lar fo­cus, and had a mar­gin of er­ror of plus or minus 3.1 per­cent­age points na­tion­ally and 4.0 points for the Flor­ida group. The sur­vey was con­duc­ted jointly by Re­pub­lic­an poll­ster Glen Bol­ger of Pub­lic Opin­ion Strategies and Demo­crat­ic poll­ster Paul Maslin of Fairb­ank, Maslin, Maul­lin, Metz, & As­so­ci­ates. Both are among the best poll­sters in the coun­try.

Na­tion­ally, 56 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans sup­port either nor­mal­iz­ing re­la­tions or en­ga­ging more dir­ectly with Cuba; just 35 per­cent are op­posed. Sup­port for a policy change is also re­flec­ted in the num­bers of people who feel most in­tensely about the is­sue, with 30 per­cent of the over­all sample strongly fa­vor­ing such a change and 26 per­cent some­what in fa­vor, while 22 per­cent strongly op­pose and an­oth­er 13 per­cent some­what op­pose this. Nine per­cent have no opin­ion. Among Demo­crats and in­de­pend­ents, 60 per­cent fa­vor chan­ging re­la­tions; 31 per­cent of Demo­crats and 30 per­cent of in­de­pend­ents are op­posed. Even among Re­pub­lic­ans, 52 per­cent fa­vor a change in policy, with 41 per­cent in op­pos­i­tion.

In Flor­ida, the state with the most Cuban-Amer­ic­ans and the one geo­graph­ic­ally closest and most likely to fol­low and be af­fected by U.S.-Cuba re­la­tions, 63 per­cent fa­vor a change — 7 points more than the na­tion­al sup­port level. Only 30 per­cent op­pose a change, 5 points few­er than the na­tion­al op­pos­i­tion. So much for the idea that a pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate fa­vor­ing nor­mal­iz­a­tion would lose any chance of car­ry­ing Flor­ida.

Among His­pan­ics na­tion­wide, 62 per­cent sup­port a change in policy, while 30 per­cent op­pose it. These num­bers are al­most identic­al to the Flor­ida at­ti­tudes.

Look­ing at spe­cif­ic policy op­tions, 62 per­cent na­tion­ally sup­port al­low­ing more Amer­ic­an com­pan­ies to do busi­ness in Cuba, while just 36 per­cent op­pose it. Look­ing at in­tens­ity, 35 per­cent strongly sup­port that op­tion; 24 per­cent strongly op­pose it. Among Flor­idi­ans, the over­all num­bers are 63 per­cent in sup­port, 32 per­cent op­pos­ing (with 40 per­cent strongly sup­port­ing a change, and 21 per­cent strongly op­pos­ing). Among Lati­nos na­tion­ally, 65 per­cent sup­port, and 32 per­cent op­pose (40 per­cent strongly sup­port; 20 per­cent strongly op­pose).

An­oth­er policy op­tion would be to re­move re­stric­tions on U.S. cit­izens spend­ing dol­lars in Cuba. Sixty-one per­cent sup­port such a policy change, while 35 per­cent op­pose it (35 per­cent strongly sup­port; 22 per­cent strongly op­pose). At­ti­tudes among Flor­idi­ans were quite sim­il­ar, with 63 per­cent in sup­port and 32 per­cent in op­pos­i­tion (40 per­cent strongly sup­port; 19 per­cent strongly op­pose). Lati­nos’ mar­gin of sup­port was even high­er, with 67 per­cent sup­port­ing and 29 per­cent op­pos­ing (38 per­cent strongly sup­port; 18 per­cent strongly op­pose).

An­oth­er ques­tion in the poll con­cerned re­mov­ing all re­stric­tions on travel to Cuba by U.S. cit­izens, an idea which was sup­por­ted by 61 per­cent na­tion­ally, and op­posed by only 36 per­cent (35 per­cent strongly sup­port; 20 per­cent strongly op­pose). Sup­port for travel was even high­er among Cuba’s next-door neigh­bors in Flor­ida, where 67 per­cent sup­port the lift­ing of travel re­stric­tions, and just 29 per­cent op­pose (38 per­cent strongly sup­port; 18 per­cent strongly op­pose). Fi­nally, the num­bers were very sim­il­ar among His­pan­ics, of whom 66 per­cent sup­port the idea, and just 31 per­cent op­pose it (37 per­cent strongly sup­port; 16 per­cent strongly op­pose).

The only ques­tion that was at all a close call was wheth­er to al­low Cuba ac­cess to high-speed In­ter­net tele­com­mu­nic­a­tions sys­tems based in the U.S., a ques­tion that just 52 per­cent of re­spond­ents sup­por­ted, with 43 per­cent op­pos­ing the idea. Al­though, again, the Flor­ida num­bers were more sup­port­ive of the In­ter­net ques­tion: 64 per­cent voiced sup­port, with only 28 per­cent op­pos­ing the no­tion. Among His­pan­ics it was 55 per­cent sup­port, 33 per­cent op­pose.

It is hard to ar­gue that U.S. policy to­ward Cuba has been any­thing but spec­tac­u­larly un­suc­cess­ful. Either Fi­del or Raul Castro has been in power since Feb­ru­ary 1959; so much for our isol­a­tion of Cuba destabil­iz­ing the Castro re­gimes. Years ago, a former Ca­na­dian am­bas­sad­or to Cuba told me privately that then-Prime Min­is­ter Fi­del Castro would have prob­ably been gone long ago, or at least big changes would have taken place on the is­land, if the U.S. had nor­mal­ized re­la­tions. He ar­gued that, with an in­creas­ingly glob­al eco­nomy and com­mu­nic­a­tions ad­vances, the same forces that helped East­ern European coun­tries shed the yoke of Com­mun­ism prob­ably would have helped trans­form Cuba as well, had it not al­ways had the U.S. to scape­goat for all of its prob­lems.

Some of Amer­ica’s strongest al­lies and most im­port­ant trad­ing part­ners are coun­tries that we once fought against and with which we had le­git­im­ate griev­ances at one point or an­oth­er. Even­tu­ally, however, na­tions have to move on; it’s time for the tiny band of in­transigent Cuban-Amer­ic­an politi­cians who are car­ry­ing on this fu­tile cru­sade to throw in the tow­el and ac­cept the new real­ity, or for oth­ers to just ig­nore them and forge a more ra­tion­al policy.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
7 REPUBLICANS ON STAGE
Carly Fiorina Will Not Be Allowed to Debate on Saturday
1 days ago
THE LATEST

ABC News has announced the criteria for Saturday’s Republican debate, and that means Carly Fiorina won’t be a part of it. The network is demanding candidates have “a top-three finish in Iowa, a top-six standing in an average of recent New Hampshire polls or a top-six placement in national polls in order for candidates to qualify.” And there will be no “happy hour” undercard debate this time. “So that means no Fiorina vs. Jim Gilmore showdown earlier in the evening for the most ardent of campaign 2016 junkies.

Source:
×