Weather | Beachcam
Login | Contact Us | Staff | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Electronic Edition | Subscribe to the paper

HomeNewsNational

Poll shows voters are concerned over candidates' faults

Most presidential contenders have deficits, it says

Plenty of skeletons are rattling in the political closets of the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates this year.

A survey of 1,010 adults conducted by Scripps Howard News Service and Ohio University finds that many Americans voice concerns about candidates who have used cocaine, been married three times, have uncommon religious beliefs, have little government experience or are just plain too old.

The survey finds that almost every major candidate has a significant fault or political deficit that he or she must overcome.

"This is a very different field of candidates, a more wounded field than usual. That's going to make for a very interesting race," said Morgan Felchner, editor of Campaigns and Elections magazine.

One of the biggest obstacles facing Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is his age. He would be 72 when taking office. The survey found that 56 percent believe that most Americans will not accept such an elderly chief executive.

"That's kind of surprising," said historian Paul Boller Jr., who, at 90, has just published his latest history of the denizens of the White House titled "Presidential Diversions: Presidents at Play from George Washington to George W. Bush." "After all, people are living much longer these days. The public has got to get adjusted to this."

Adults in the survey were equally troubled over prospects of a president who tried cocaine, something that Sen. Barack Obama has admitted. Only 34 percent said they think most Americans would accept this, while 58 percent said it would not be acceptable.

The highest negative trait of all goes to candidates who have little government experience, a charge frequently leveled against Obama and former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards. Fifty-nine percent said they believe that most people would find lack of experience unacceptable.

Some candidates suffer from multiple challenges. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who is the Republican front-runner in all national polls, has been married three times and would not abolish abortion rights, both unusual for a candidate seeking conservative voters. Less than half the adults in the survey thought that either would be acceptable to most people.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, the junior senator from New York, must overcome the political consequences of being the first competitive female presidential candidate in history and one who voted to authorize military actions in Iraq. Just slightly more than half thought that either being a woman or a former supporter of the war would be acceptable to most Americans.

"I honestly doubt that Americans are ready for a black president or a woman," Boller said.

The survey found that only 55 percent thought that a black president would be acceptable to most Americans.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney must persuade the Republican electorate, including many of the estimated 100 million evangelical Protestants, not to take offense at his Mormon faith. The poll found that 45 percent believe that a Mormon president would be unacceptable to most people.

The survey found that some personal traits do not seem to matter much. Most people believe that it's acceptable for a white presidential candidate to have adopted a black child (good news for McCain, who in 1991 adopted a dark-skinned orphan from Bangladesh) or to smoke tobacco (good news for Obama, although he's trying to quit.) The poll found that people are more accepting of candidates who tried marijuana when very young (also good news for Obama and, perhaps, other candidates.)

Few voice concern over a candidate who is very wealthy, which is good news for at least eight candidates who are millionaires, or who have lived the past 20 years in Washington, D.C.

Discussions

Posted by GuideDog on May 29, 2007 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

One might be able to make a case for some of the criteria above, but I find it odd that the headline's term "candidates' faults" is applied to such things as McCain's age, Romney's religion and Clinton's gender. It seems to me that the fault may lie in the electorate that considers these three things as negatives.

I guess the current electorate would have had such reservations about electing Ronald Reagan (age) or John Kennedy (religion) for those same reasons. Perhaps voters today have learned little from their nation's own history.

The most puzzling thing to me is that a woman candidate would suffer support based on her gender when over half of the nation's population and its registered voters are women.

Shame on us!

Posted by nannyfo1 on May 29, 2007 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hillary being a woman is far from her largest issue. Women don't respect her because of how she allowed Bill to treat her. Even larger than that is her struggle to remain liberal enough to appeal to her base for the primary while posturing herself as a moderate for the general election. It is an uphill battle.

Posted by GuideDog on May 29, 2007 at 6:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Nannyfo1,

My comments were directed towards the poll's findings as included in the article above which did not contain the opinion which you put forward. I was commenting on the perception that age, religion and gender are still regarded as negatives by some.

Do you believe it is just historical coincidence that no woman has ever been nominated for the Presidency by either of the major parties?

Posted by nannyfo1 on May 31, 2007 at 1:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No Guidedog, I don't believe it's coincidence. The only people that get to campaign effectively for president are those that are backed by large financial contributors. The contributors give the money with the expectation that if their candidate wins they will have some influence in decision making. So they put their money with the candidate that they align with idealogically and that has the best chance to win. Apparently people with money haven't found a female candidate, in the past, that they felt had a reasonable chance to win.



Discuss this article
(Requires free registration.)

Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.

Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.

We do not allow the following:

  • Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
  • Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
  • Threats, whether obvious or veiled.

We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.

Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Username:

Password:
(Forgotten your password?)

Your Turn:

Loading videos... If you don't see them shortly, you may need to download the Flash Player.