January 24, 2004
LA Times poll shows Kerry has broad appeal.
A new LA Times
poll [reg req] of New Hampshire voters shows that Senator Kerry has developed a surprising (at least to me) appeal to a very broad cross-section of prospective voters.
Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry, demonstrating the broad appeal that powered his victory in Iowa, leads by double digits among likely voters in Tuesday's pivotal New Hampshire primary, a new Times poll has found.
Kerry's three main rivals — former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, retired Gen. Wesley K. Clark and Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina — are locked in a tight struggle for second place that could shape the race's next stage.
... In the poll, Kerry was backed by 32% of likely voters. He was followed by Dean (19%), Clark (17%), Edwards (14%) and Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut (6%). Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio attracted 1%, while the Rev. Al Sharpton less than 1%. Along with the 10% who were undecided, another 1% said they preferred someone else.
One factor hurting Dean is that bread-and-butter concerns are eclipsing his signature issue: opposition to the war in Iraq. More of those polled picked health care (36%) than Iraq (20%) as the issue they most wanted to hear the candidates discuss. The economy (22%) also edged Iraq as a priority.
Those citing both health care and the economy as their top concerns gave Kerry a solid edge over his rivals. More strikingly, the Massachusetts senator led Dean, 33% to 22%, among those who said the Iraq war was the principal issue determining their vote. Clark was backed by 18% for whom the war was their overriding concern.
... As in surveys of Iowa caucusgoers, Kerry demonstrated an extraordinary reach across the party in The Times Poll. Kerry led among men and women; Democrats and independents (who are allowed to vote in the primary); voters who earn less than $40,000 a year and those who earn more; liberals and moderates (he was tied with Edwards among the small share who considered themselves conservatives) and voters who lived in cities, suburbs and small towns.
Kerry dominated the field among voters without a college education — he was backed by 39% of them, compared with 16% for Clark and 13% for Dean. Kerry ran almost evenly with Dean among the college-educated voters, who have been the core of the former governor's constituency. Kerry was backed by 27% of college-educated poll respondents, compared with 25% for Dean and 19% for Clark.
One reason I'm surprised by this is the fact that US Senators do notoriously poor in presidential politics, the popular perception about this notwithstanding. During the 20th century for instance, only two, Harding and Kennedy, actually won. As opposed to something like a dozen former state governors, such as Dean. Four out of the last five presidents (Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush II) were former state governors who had never held a federal office. And this is why I still think Dean has the best chance of actually being elected. On the other hand, I think the endorsement of him by such a longtime federal insider as Al Gore has really hurt him. It certainly lowered my opinion of him. But I remain rather convinced that whoever the Democratic candidate is will win, and win easily. The hostility to Bush is just amazing and growing daily. Even among Republicans.
One thing I'm _not_ surprised about is that health care and the economy are higher priorities with most Americans than the wars. Those certainly are my priorities at this point in time. Not that I've heard anything that would indicate that Kerry has any concrete proposals to do about them. On the contrary.
And I'm not that surprised to hear that Kerry is doing well among those opposed to the war. While his record in Vietnam is often mentioned in the press, he was also one of the founders of Vets Against the War. Something that gives him a certain amount of credibility among the baby boomers, and others opposed to American imperialism in general. The combination of the two packs a powerful punch.
