CONGRESS

Poll Shows Tough Landscape for Incumbents

Matthew Cooper
July 24, 2012, 5:20 p.m.

A strong plur­al­ity of Amer­ic­ans are seek­ing mem­bers of Con­gress who are more will­ing to com­prom­ise, but that im­pulse, so far at least, has not re­doun­ded to the be­ne­fit of either Mitt Rom­ney or Pres­id­ent Obama, ac­cord­ing to the latest United Tech­no­lo­gies/Na­tion­al Journ­al Con­gres­sion­al Con­nec­tion Poll.

When asked wheth­er they would be more or less likely to vote for a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who “would make com­prom­ises with people he or she dis­agrees with,” a full 43 per­cent of re­spond­ents said they would be more likely to vote for that can­did­ate, while only 20 per­cent said they would be less likely. Some 34 per­cent said that it would make no dif­fer­ence.

By con­trast, back in May 2010, only 30 per­cent said that abil­ity to com­prom­ise would make a dif­fer­ence in how they de­cided to vote. That’s a 13-per­cent­age-point in­crease over the last two years.

When asked about the pres­id­en­tial race and reach­ing agree­ment with mem­bers of the oth­er party in Con­gress, Amer­ic­ans gave high­er marks to Obama. Forty-three per­cent said he would do a bet­ter job reach­ing agree­ment with the oth­er party, versus 33 per­cent for Rom­ney.  

Cleav­ages along ra­cial and party lines were gap­ing on this ques­tion. Non-His­pan­ic blacks were more than twice as likely as non-His­pan­ic whites to give a thumbs-up to Obama for be­ing best at find­ing agree­ment with the oth­er party. And a whop­ping 79 per­cent of Demo­crats saw Obama as bet­ter able to work across the aisle, while 73 per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans said the same for Rom­ney. In­de­pend­ents split just bey­ond the poll’s mar­gin of er­ror, with 36 per­cent of them say­ing Obama would do bet­ter versus 32 per­cent for Rom­ney.

The res­ults of the sur­vey don’t bode par­tic­u­larly well for in­cum­bents. Only 14 per­cent of re­spond­ents said that they would be more likely to vote for an “in­cum­bent run­ning for reelec­tion.” That’s the same level of anti-in­cum­bent sen­ti­ment as two years ago, when voters ended Demo­crat­ic con­trol of the House.

Un­like 2010, however, there’s slightly less in­terest in elect­ing polit­ic­al neo­phytes. Back then, 24 per­cent of voters said that they would be more likely to vote for a can­did­ate who “has nev­er held elect­ive of­fice.” That’s down to 19 per­cent in the latest sur­vey, with a ma­jor­ity””51 per­cent””say­ing pre­vi­ous of­fice­hold­ing ex­per­i­ence made no dif­fer­ence.

Does a new­found ap­pet­ite for can­did­ates who com­prom­ise be­ne­fit either Demo­crats or Re­pub­lic­ans in Con­gress who vow to help im­ple­ment their pres­id­en­tial nom­in­ee’s agenda? The an­swers are de­cidedly mixed. Those polled were asked if they would be more likely to sup­port a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who sup­por­ted Obama or Rom­ney “most of the time.” Just 28 per­cent of voters said they would be more in­clined to back a can­did­ate who would vote in sup­port of Obama. That’s down a tick from earli­er this year, when 30 per­cent of voters said that might make them more likely to vote for a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate.

Rom­ney came in even lower, with only 18 per­cent of those sur­veyed say­ing that if a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate vowed to back a hy­po­thet­ic­al Pres­id­ent Rom­ney’s po­s­i­tion most of the time, they would be in­clined to vote for such a can­did­ate. Lar­ger plur­al­it­ies said that it wouldn’t mat­ter.

The Con­gres­sion­al Con­nec­tion Poll, con­duc­ted by Prin­ceton Sur­vey Re­search As­so­ci­ates In­ter­na­tion­al, sur­veyed 1,001 adults by land­line and cell phone on Ju­ly 19-22. It has a mar­gin of er­ror of plus or minus 3.8 per­cent­age points. The poll is taken most weeks of the year when Con­gress is in ses­sion and is de­signed to give law­makers””as well as oth­er poli­cy­makers and the pub­lic””an in-depth look at where Amer­ic­ans stand on the most im­port­ant is­sues that are fa­cing Con­gress.

Dig­ging deep in­to the sur­vey res­ults re­veals a po­lar­ized elect­or­ate. On the ques­tion of wheth­er they’d be more likely to sup­port a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who backed Obama most of the time, only 3 per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans felt that way, while only 5 per­cent of Re­pub­lic­ans were more fa­vor­ably in­clined to­ward a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who prom­ised to side with Rom­ney on is­sues most of the time. Among a group that has proved prob­lem­at­ic for Demo­crats””white men without a col­lege edu­ca­tion””35 per­cent said that they would be less in­clined to back a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who sup­por­ted Obama. In­de­pend­ents were less likely to back a con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate who sup­por­ted Obama than one who car­ried the flag for Rom­ney.

When 80 per­cent of those polled say that the two parties have “been bick­er­ing and op­pos­ing one an­oth­er more than usu­al,” that’s a dif­fi­cult en­vir­on­ment for either party to run in, es­pe­cially when 52 per­cent say that “there have been good ideas” but fights between the parties have “blocked needed gov­ern­ment ac­tion.”

On the oth­er hand, the poll gives politi­cians breath­ing room to com­prom­ise””a par­tic­u­larly im­port­ant gift to mem­bers as the Au­gust re­cess ap­proaches and the lame-duck ses­sion of Con­gress looms.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
21 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
22 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
23 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×