Poll: Character Trumps Policy for Voters

[RedEarth]

WASHINGTON (AP) - For all the policy blueprints churned out by presidential campaigns, there is this indisputable fact: People care less about issues than they do about a candidate's character.

A new Associated Press-Ipsos poll says 55 percent of those surveyed consider honesty, integrity and other values of character the most important qualities they look for in a presidential candidate.

Just one-third look first to candidates' stances on issues; even fewer focus foremost on leadership traits, experience or intelligence.

"Voters only look at policies as a lens into what type of person the candidate is," said Ken Mehlman, chairman of President Bush's 2004 re-election campaign. That campaign based its voter targeting and messaging strategies on the character-first theory.

The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,001 adults, conducted Monday through Wednesday, found honesty was by far the most popular single trait - volunteered by 41 percent of voters in open-ended questioning.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070310/D8NPIS381.html

[PDJane]

1. God help us...........eom.

[catnhatnh]

2. Hmmm...Honesty and integrity....

I wonder if this bodes worse for flip floppers (the Mitt and McCain show), total whackos like Brownback or serial adulterers (Balance of the GOP candidates)...??????

[babylonsister]

3. Pleeeze. Ken Mehlman? nt

[baldguy]

4. Remember, the "character" voters went for Bush in the last two elections.

[illinoisprogressive]

5. Policy is really an easy thing if you have some government experience.

But, how you rule and what you do with the power given to you is what is important to people. They feel if you are a good person and have good people to help with policy that is something that can be dealt with like any problem. But, if the person has a bad character, no matter how good the policy, people will be screwed.
The problem is how people are easily fooled. W came out as a dumb but, honest person. That was important to people at the time. They were fooled easily.
But, the press didn't help with their constant attacking of Gore. If the press had been unbiased as they should have, W would never have won.

[iamjoy]

6. That Makes No Sense

How can voters say they like character and integrity and then pick Guiliani? He's on his third wife and told his second wife he wanted a divorce via a press conference.

And Hillary Clinton? There is much to admire about her, but I don't see her as strong on the "character" and integrity front.

IF it were really about character and integrity, Sam Brownback would be leading the Republican pack (I despise many of his views, but have heard nothing that indicates he is not a man of principle) - if not SB, Mitt Romney. You could call it a flip flop on abortion, but he's already claiming it was a "Road to Damascus" moment, so there you go.

John Edwards or Barak Obama would be leading the Democratic pack. In the case of the former, his Road to Damascus moment was for the Iraq War. His apology was good, but maybe speaking of his IWR vote as such might not be a bad idea.

[doubleplusgood]

7. my brother voted for Bush because of "character"

After the 2004 election, I was talking on the phone with my older brother who lives in the Bitteroot valley in Montana. Knowing he voted for * (I'm the only liberal in my family), I just had to ask him, why? Ignoring the facts that Kerry was a decorated Vietnam combat veteran and Bush was a deserter, he said that, "Well, it came down to character" and that the Swiftboat ads had played a big part, though I think he would have voted the same way regardless. Then he went on, "Besides, that Teresa Heinz is a bitch...".

[yava]

8. Oh America

The problem right now for the US is Iraq and the reason is
that most folks in the USA dont care to know more about where
they came from. Want to talk about it?

[Betty]

9. what kind of character must you have

to start a premptive war under false pretenses? or gut the constitution, or allow torture, or hold people without a trial or charges for years...the list goes on and on. The policy REFLECTS the character. The problem with this country is that there are way too many stupid people voting. They can't get their heads out of their asses long enough to look at what the assholes that THEY voted for are actually doing.

[bemildred]

10. Policy is character, you are what you do. nt

[RogueBandit]

11. Slam your opponent tactic

That explains Swift Boating and other forms of lying to smear a candidates reputation. They don't want to prove their guy is honest, just that the other guy is much worse.

It is clear the the initial lie is the most important...efforts by the press to say, "We're sorry" don't help fix the damage done by the first lies.

Campaigns need to get better at immediately responding to the lies, much like Clinton's war rooms responded to issues. I don't think Clinton had to deal with the smear folks as much as those "Family Values" and "Contract with America" tactics, and he responded to most of those with things like "It's the economy stupid", but he did so immediately.

I could be wrong, but then I often am...and admitting that is just like a Democrat, isn't it? Not a good campaign tactic apparenlty so I actually disagree with the poll.

[UrbScotty]

12. Another reason Wes better run (nt)

[rcdean]

13. Toughness and "character" are easily portrayed by an actor.

Bush, like Reagan, is an actor. He swaggers and struts. He speaks in simple homilies. He follows his script well even though he mispronunciates a lot of it.

Contrast that with Howard Dean, a man of true character, integrity, intelligence and ability, who didn't understand that an image of self restraint is vital to the idea of character and toughness. Leaders must be controlled and never engage in the wild enthusiasms of their faithful.

The same rule applies to overweight candidates. People conclude that if they can't control their own weight, how can they control a nation and events? (Which is why I would make a lousy candidate!)

The overly passionate can't win. But neither can a passionless man, like Kerry; one who betrays the kind of easy gentility that says "when the going gets tough, I'm going to retire to my study." The lackadaisical, un challenging image he displayed during his campaign was completely at odds with his claim to heroic character. What a true tragedy his candidacy was.

We are fortunate right now to have a bevy of candidates who convey excellent character. The right will have to do some real pretzel bends to embrace any of their current motley crew.

[MGKrebs]

19. That's a good post!

I might also add:

I think when people talk about "character" in this context, often they really mean "judgement". The majority of people only pay minimal attention to politics, and they recognize that they don't know the specifics of a lot of issues, therefore, they have to try to determine who seems to most think like themselves. They make this determination through statements, hair style, demeanor, and things like that.

Someone else mentioned Guliani: His divorces will both the right wing, but most Americans can easily imagine a difficult marriage or a loser of a spouse. I think more than half of US adults have been divorced.

[w4rma]

14. Yup. This is why primaries are important. Policy *does* matter to primary voters. (nt)

[electricmonk]

15. Bukowski nailed it

"A whole goddamn nation of assholes driving automobiles, eating, having babies, doing everything in the worst possible way, like voting for the presidential candidate who reminded them most of themselves."
Charles Bukowski- Ham on Rye

[Odin2005]

16. It's shit like thins that makes me loos faith in democracy.

Democracy requires a populace that gives a damn about the workings of the government. If the populace doesn't give a damn a government will degenerate into oligarchy fall to a demagogic dictator.

[jakem]

18. yeah. i sure hope that doesnt happen

:sarcasm:

[sofa king]

17. I have a message for some of those folks.

[Greyhound]

23. I love this .gif

It would be my sig line if Dennis didn't need it right now.:thumbsup:

[ruggerson]

20. Many of us here have been saying this for years

only to have people scream at us.

Progressives have to understand how to start winning the White House consistently.

And it starts with picking a candidate that "flyover" country can relate to in a very personal way.

(btw, I'm not happy with this, but I'm willing to face the reality of it.)

[OHdem10]

21. This is what Republicans

particularly in South and some Western states have been "taught"
had preached to them . It goes something like this . We live
in a Republic not a Democracy. (This carries with it the
implication that theSenator or Representative will vote his
own "consscience"--he is not obligated to vote as the citizens
wish.) Under these circumstances, there are no committments
regarding policiy laws or anything else. Therefore, there
is no need in fact it is undesired to discuss policy.


They were told Bush would bring HONOR ANDINTEGRtY back to the
WH. They took the Ministers and Republican Party's word
They vouched for him. Honor and Integrity covers the gamut
on honesty. Need I say more???

Look at the Media--they drank that KOOLAID also. Yes, they
finally have awakened---It took them a long time.

I wish to know what kind of policies they wish to implement.
This tells me more about them and their character than
any plug from campaigns media or what ever.

[zara]

22. Plato and Nietzsche: Voters are stupid.

FWIW

[dusmcj]

24. neocon tards have won ?

The most recent progenitors of the notion that the content of policy matters much less than the vigor with which it's advocated. Or put another way, if you fart in church, you might as well do it as loud as you can.

Thank God our precious bodily fluids haven't been corrupted and we're still turgid.

Fuckin retardates...

Oh yeah, this ordering of life priorities is euphemised as "character" by the Connected and Under Control.

Fuckin retardates...

[sakabatou]

25. That's sad

[gratefultobelib]

26. "What good fortune for governments that the people don't think." Hitler

[lakercub]

27. Let's see

Our dem pols are certainly of a better moral fiber than the repubs...and our policy is better too. SWEET!

On the serious side, I hate these polls. Character is totally subjective and one cannot divorce their policy from their character. But I do bemoan this "he is a good man" crap, when what we need is not necessarily the best man, but the best man for the job.

[dkofos]

28. I wish people would get a clue

Not that I believe the poll