The Candidates
Continued good news from Rasmussen regarding these critical issues:
When it comes to the economy, 47% of voters trust John McCain more than Barack Obama. Obama is trusted more by 41%. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey also found that, when it comes to the War in Iraq, McCain is trusted more by 49% of voters. Obama is preferred by 37%. McCain has an even larger edge—53% to 31%–on the broader topic of National Security. These results are little changed from a month ago.
Obama enjoys a 43% to 39% advantage when it comes to government ethics and reducing corruption. McCain has a 44% to 38% advantage on taxes.
It is interesting to note that while McCain has the edge over Obama on these issues, Democrats are trusted more than Republicans on a generic basis. This ability of McCain to outperform the party label helps explain why he is competitive with the Democrats in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking poll.
When it comes to the economy, men trust McCain more by a 55% to 33% margin. Among women, Obama has a seven-point edge. Obama has the advantage among voters under 30 while McCain is preferred by their elders. Investors prefer McCain while non-Investors are evenly divided. Union Members prefer Obama 46% to 40%. Government Workers are evenly divided while Entrepreneurs and Private Sector Employees are more likely to trust McCain.
McCain is trusted more by 25% of Democrats. Sixty-four percent (64%) of Democrats trust the likely nominee of their Party.
Recent surveys have found that most voters believe the economic stimulus package has had little impact, most believe that tax hikes are bad for the economy, and 65% oppose an increase in the capital gains tax. The Rasmussen Consumer Index has found consumer and investor confidence at record low levels.
As for the War in Iraq, McCain is trusted more by 85% of Republicans, 22% of Democrats, and 49% of those not affiliated with either major party.
Tracking polls have shown that roughly 6-out-of-ten Americans want troops home from Iraq within a year. However, only about one-in-four want the troops brought home immediately. The gap between those numbers is filled by Americans who both parties have a chance to persuade during Election 2008. A recent survey found that 52% of voters believe it is more important to get U.S. troops out of Iraq than it is to win the War. Expectations are that a McCain Presidency would more likely lead to victory in Iraq while Obama is more likely to get the troops home.
The broader topic of National Security is one of the few issues where Republicans are competitive on a generic basis with Democrats. However, following seven years of the Bush Administration, the GOP advantage on this issue has declined.
On taxes, Republicans are preferred over Democrats, 46% to 42%. McCain is trusted over Clinton 45% to 36% and by a 41% to 38% margin over Obama.
When it comes to government ethics and reducing corruption, both candidates are trusted more by roughly seven-out-of-ten within their own party. Obama has a statistically insignificant two-point edge among unaffiliated voters. What is perhaps more significant is that 28% of unaffiliated voters trust neither candidate on this topic.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:33 am
This election will be about the economy.
Unfortunately McCain admitted he had no idea about the economy! Another reason he needs the Mittmobile. Esp in Michigan.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:34 am
The website fivethirtyeight.com ranks Rasmussen as one of the most accurate polls. I didn’t think they were that accurate, but I guess they are. If McCain is trusted more on the war and the economy, I don’t see how he can lose. It is interesting because generic Republicans are not trusted more than Democrats on the war or the economy. McCain is more conservative than most Republicans on the war. On the economy, he is basically like your average Republican, but he may be seen as less corporatist.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:41 am
McCain’s advantage is Obama is not an economics person. He is more interested in high-minded issues like the environment, reducing the partisan tone in Washington, reforming the system. Things like wages and jobs and taxes are not Obama’s interest.
May 30th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Heath,
If this poll had revealed that McCain was not as trusted on the economy, would that also have been proof that he needs Mitt?
And how on earth is Mitt the answer in a sagging economy? An investment banker republican in a suit? Really?
May 30th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
If I understand the numbers correctly McCain is benefitting from the continued democratic nomination process because McCain has more than 20% more GOP support than Obama has democratic support. That is an interesting snapshot, but not realistic going forward.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
eric,
The best person to make the free market case on the economy to an electorate mostly illiterate on the subject is somebody who really knows and understands the free market economy. Mitt can explain the damage done to average people by government intrusion into the economy, the problem with having corporate tax rates that make us uncompetitive, the ramifications on jobs and personal income, and the value of spending constraints in a country that is deeply in debt. So, the answer to your first question is yes. And the answer to your second question is yes, really.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Memnon, Obama is the inevitable nominee, if he was going to go way ahead of McCain, he would have by now.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
#5. . . You’re right. These polls aren’t all that reliable at this stage because on the Dem side there is still too much emotion among Clinton supporters who are angry at Obama. It’s a situation much like what happened soon after Romney dropped out, and many supporters expressed (in anger and disappointment) that they might vote for Obama and never for McCain. Newer, more recent polling suggests McCain’s GOP support, even among the base, and especially among Romney folk, has come home to McCain and will not be voting for Obama. The same thing will eventually occur among Democrats, with Obama gathering up most of Hillary’s backers by the time the general campaign begins. It’s encouraging to see Dems in disarray, but let’s not bet the farm on it.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
#7: I disagree. Hillary Democrats are still pissed and the healing doesn’t begin until she withdraws.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Clarence,
Clinton is still out there selling her candidacy (and so are Carville and others all over CNN). Liberal blogs friendly to her cause are still pushing her nomination. If it were over, would cable be television a rules committee meeting?
May 30th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Can anyone explain why people think McCain is stronger on the economy than someone else? Than anyone else?
I’m frankly baffled by polls like this that pick McCain’s name out of a group and say “He’s the guy I trust on the economy!”
Is it all name recognition, or is there something else at work here?
May 30th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
#9: I totally agree. Even though it’s essentially over, Obama hasn’t “officially” become the presumptive nominee. When Hillary withdraws, her supporters will be forced to accept reality and emotions will die down. There will be an Obama bump.
May 30th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
I also object to #4 (eric) referring to Romney as an investment banker. He was at a consulting firm that did, indeed, invest in firms, but also consulted with, advised, and even ran the companies they invested in. When I hear “investment banker” I think of someone who does IPO’s or M & A work, not of someone who runs companies.
Can I get an “amen?”
May 30th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
So you guys are saying that this poll is essentially a partisan response, with some Hillary Democrats saying they trust McCain more than Obama because they’re mad at Obama?
I can believe that.
Actually, I think it’s pretty sad that people don’t say “I don’t trust either one of these guys on the economy. One’s a former pilot and the other’s a lawyer! Why should either of these guys understand the economy?” The level of kudos/blame given to the POTUS for the economy is way, way too high, IMHO.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
#4 - anyone who doesn’t think that Mitt Romney doesn’t understand and desire how to fix our economy is showing their ignorance. If you want to belittle Mitt, find a mechanism that doesn’t make you look stupid.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
#15: I don’t disagree with that. In fact, for many years I’ve been yearning for a successful entrepreneur/CEO to run for President. I was initially a fan of Mitt Romney, very early on.
It makes it all that much more shameful he destroyed his own integrity the way he ran his campaign.
May 30th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
“#15: I don’t disagree with that. In fact, for many years I’ve been yearning for a successful entrepreneur/CEO to run for President. I was initially a fan of Mitt Romney, very early on.
It makes it all that much more shameful he destroyed his own integrity the way he ran his campaign.”
Can I just start calling you the MET Republican? Sounds like you’ve started an opera house with the highs and lows and fantasy you like to sing out.
I saw Mitt do some pandering, but no more IMHO than anyone else, with the exception of perhaps McCain and Thompson (who didn’t do much of anything until it was too late).
May 30th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Ogrepete 17:
The difference with Romney’s pandering is thus:
In any presidential primary, it’s expected that the candidates will run to the base of whatever party they’re in to varying degrees, and then will eventually turn back to the center for the general. It’s a mark of character to try to minimize this, in my opinion, but it’s part of the game.
What Romney did was run so far to the center as to be almost center-left in 2002 in Massachusetts, and then run completely to the right to be the “conservative” candidate for the 08 primaries. And then he’s expected to turn back to the center for the general election? It’s too much. That’s why he was labeled as a flip-flopper: not because he changed positions on a handful of issues in a nuanced way, but because he did a 180 on pretty much everything. And on top of it, we know that he’d have to change AGAIN if he got the nomination.
So while his pandering was excessive, what made it all the more noticeable was that it stood in stark contrast to positions he held just a few years ago. Romney could very well have won the nomination, but he tried to be everything to everybody, and you can’t do that from a stand-still.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Patrick,
Mitt’s “pandering” was about 5% real, 10% personal growth, and 85% a figment of your imagination. It was always a bum rap.
May 30th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Amen!! #19
May 30th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Figment of my imagination, huh?
Well, then I guess millions of Republican voters are also figments of my imagination.
May 30th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Could be! Maybe you should see a psychologist!
May 30th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
Patrick,
I totally disagree. I didn’t watch his Massachusetts run for Governor, so you have some knowledge I don’t have, but what I did see was (as is happening now) that the MSM came out and annointed McCain and attacked nearly everything Mitt said. The whole flip-flop thing was (and still is, obviously) blown way out of proportion.
May 30th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
No, it was not blown out of proportion. He went from being a socially moderate, to far-right social conservative (so far he didn’t know how to communicate those ideas without coming across like a parody). But that was just the beginning. He ran his campaign without integrity, unfairly smearing his opponents and their positions. Lying about timetables. Lying about his own ads in a debate. etc, etc, etc. And doing so much of all that that he hated himself and couldn’t help by come across as a total phony.
May 30th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
The same reason he smashed McCain in Michigan when McCain declared he would win Eric.
May 30th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
And yet he beat Rudy by about 300 times didn’t he Metro.
What does that say about Rudy and why no-one is even considering him as a potential VP.
May 31st, 2008 at 1:29 am
Heath, ever heard of an all-or-nothing strategy? Might want to Google it.
A lot of people are discussing Rudy as VP. Google would help you in that department, too.
May 31st, 2008 at 3:31 am
He’s about 30/1 on Betfair where real money is bet.
May 31st, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Today poll is out. Obama has a 46/53! Favorable/unFavorable rating.
June 1st, 2008 at 11:22 am
A word on the politics of Iraq this week.
McCain was solidly winning on Iraq by challenging Obama to go there, but then he made two mistakes. First he mistakenly claimed we were at pre-surge troop levels. And second, he refused to even admit he made a mistake. That opening was a gift to Obama to again claim McCain is like Bush in refusing to admit an obvious mistake and not being straight with the American people.