The Numbers
A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer
Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer has won two Emmy awards for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq, and The Numbers blog was honored this year as winner of the 2008 Iowa Gallup Award for Excellent Journalism Using Polls.
ARCHIVES
SUBJECT INDEX
RECENT POSTS
- In Afghanistan Decision, Risks Abound
- Views on the Terror Trials
- Sarah Palin: Rogue for President?
- Chasing Feathers
- Tomorrow's Elections: An Obama Referendum?
- Schwarzenegger's Nastygram: One in 10 Billion?
- Executive Pay? Cut Away
- Pols, Polls and Pushback
- On Nuclear Iran, Diplomacy and Sanctions are Preferred to Hostilities
- Polling, Politics and Nobels
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Attack Blowback
October 12, 2008 6:02 PM
The McCain campaign’s more aggressive tone is prompting pushback from the public: Registered voters by a broad margin now believe John McCain is more focused on attacking his opponent than on addressing the issues in the 2008 presidential election.
Barack Obama, by contrast, is perceived even more widely as sticking to the issues, this new ABC News/Washington Post poll finds – a striking point of differentiation between the two. More differences will be reported in the full release of this ABC/Post poll on ABCNews.com at 12:01 a.m. and Good Morning America on Monday morning.
While McCain’s image as the more negative of the two is not new, it’s sharpened considerably, coinciding with his campaign’s more pointed criticisms of Obama in the last few weeks, including Sarah Palin's accusation that Obama’s been "palling around with terrorists."
Registered voters by a 24-point margin, 59-35 percent, now say McCain is more focused on attacking his opponent rather than addressing the issues. That’s grown from a roughly even 48-45 percent split on this question in late August.
There's far less criticism of the tone of Obama's campaign: Registered voters by 68-26 percent say he's mainly addressing the issues, not attacking his opponent, a slightly more positive rating than in August.
Candidate is mainly:
Addressing Attacking
the issues his opponent
Now:
McCain 35% 59
Obama 68 268/22:
McCain 45% 48
Obama 64 29
PARTISAN – It’s noteworthy that Republicans, despite their general antipathy toward Obama, don't broadly see him as running a negative campaign; they divide essentially evenly on the question, 44-46 percent. Democrats, by contrast, overwhelmingly say McCain's going negative, 80-16 percent.
The deciding factor, as ever in presidential politics, is independents. They see McCain as mainly attacking his opponent, by 61-33 percent, but Obama as mainly addressing the issues, by 68 -26 percent.
Obama is mainly:
Addressing Attacking
the issues his opponent
Democrats 87% 12
Independents 68 26
Republicans 46 44McCain is mainly:
Addressing Attacking
the issues his opponent
Democrats 16% 80
Independents 33 61
Republicans 62 32
GROUPS – Nearly 9 in 10 African-Americans say McCain’s been attacking Obama more than addressing the issues, but likely of greater concern to McCain’s campaign is that 54 percent of whites say so as well. So do a majority of men (57 percent), as well as six in 10 women and nearly two-thirds of moderates.
Among swing voter groups, beyond independents, 58 percent of white Catholics and 59 percent of married women alike say McCain’s been mainly attacking his opponent rather than addressing the issues. So do 56 percent of non-evangelical white Protestants and 57 percent of veterans, a natural affinity group for McCain.
Far fewer in any of these groups say Obama’s been mainly on the attack – a quarter of men and women alike, including married women; fewer than three in 10 whites, white Catholics and non-evangelical white Protestants; two in 10 moderates; and a quarter of veterans. Even among core McCain groups such as conservatives and evangelical white Protestants, more say Obama is mainly addressing the issues than attacking his opponent.
For McCain, finally, among the biggest changes is the result among onetime supporters of Hillary Clinton against Obama – the sought-after Clinton Democrats. In August 59 percent in this group said McCain was mainly attacking Obama, not addressing the issues. Today, 74 percent of Clinton Democrats say so.
Click here for a pdf with details. These results are from a detailed new ABC/Post poll on the election and the mood of the country; for full results check back online at 12:01 a.m., and tomorrow morning on Good Morning America.
October 12, 2008 in 2008 General Election | Permalink | User Comments (373)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is good news. If McCain won't listen to all the good people who have been trying to warn him that he (and particularly his disaster of a running mate) have gone too far, then maybe he will listen to the voters.
Posted by: El_Pajaro | Oct 12, 2008 6:32:31 PM
To me this is simple; if the election was a trail in a court of law the defendant would have to be found guilt ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ in order to convict. Well this isn’t a court of law; but it is a court of public opinion and I believe the same principles apply. If there is a ‘reasonable doubt’ about the candidates’ character then you can not elect them. And there is a reasonable doubt about Obama character; there are simply too many questions about his past and his associations that haven’t been answered.
The issue is we need to have a President with character; no matter what the issues are; if that have strong moral fiber, and unquestionable character; they will have the countries best interest at heart and will keep a steady hand on the tiller.
Posted by: NebraskaVoice | Oct 12, 2008 6:34:03 PM
It's plain to see, America is sick and tired of Karl Rove politics.
Posted by: Joe Reed | Oct 12, 2008 6:36:28 PM
This is good news. McCain won't listen to all the good people who have been trying to warn him that he (and his terrible running mate in particular) has gone too far, but maybe he will listen to the voters.
Posted by: El_Pajaro | Oct 12, 2008 6:37:54 PM
The media, including ABC, never looked deeply enough into Obama's associations and track record with radicals. Now that McCain's campaign are asking the questions that should have been asked months ago, McCain is being reported as negative. Your poll merely mirrors your coverage of the candidates.
Posted by: justahousewife | Oct 12, 2008 6:38:28 PM
Barack Obama is a United States Senator. To question his allegiance to the United States is LUDICROUS, PARTISAN and REPELLENT. Grow up you hate-mongers. It is the 21st Century.
Posted by: Jim | Oct 12, 2008 6:46:03 PM
McCains character is now an issue as his attacks and Palins pitbull like behavior are backfiring... America is awakening and rejecting the old ways that have failed and are ready for good. OBAMA/BIDIN 2008 LANDSLIDE
Posted by: earthisnotflat | Oct 12, 2008 6:47:56 PM
Barack's attacks are there, but they are much more insidious and subtle in nature. His labeling of John McCain as "erratic" & "out of touch" are simply Barack's cowardly code words for "old" and "alzheimers". Barack is no idiot, he knows how to play dirty but look clean. I simply do not like the way this man operates on any level. Add his lies about Ayers, Wright, & Rezco and you come up with a man who is simply not credible.
Posted by: PhillyPaul | Oct 12, 2008 6:48:20 PM
Barack Obama needs some good economic plans to do well in the next debate and if he fails to bring new ideas, he will be in a lot of trouble after.
Posted by: Kathy | Oct 12, 2008 6:49:15 PM
Now, now...it wasn't just their communist and terrorist things that drew Ayers and Obama together...
It was also about scamming money from the foundations and putting them into Ayer's and Obama's pockets. Follow the money.
A political whistle blower once told an eager reporter to “follow the money.” That turns out to be pretty good advice. In politics, money and relationships tend to go together. So let’s look at some of the political/financial relationships between Barack Obama and the Ayers family and see if Obama’s claim that he had no significant relationship with Ayers still sounds reasonable.
All told, boards on which Barack Obama sat delivered $1,087,556 to Bill Ayers’ Small Schools Workshop.By now everyone knows that Barack Obama and Bill Ayers worked together as part of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, distributing over $100 million dollars to Chicago schools. Obama was picked from relative obscurity by someone to help deliver the funds to eager applicants.
The first wave of grants was issued in 1996. Just 35 awards were made out of over 150 applicants that first year. Among them was $175K for the Small Schools Workshop, Bill Ayers’ think tank at the University of Chicago. Obama was literally helping to fund Ayers vision. But that’s just the beginning.
The Joyce Foundation was originally the financial nest egg of a widow whose family had made millions in the lumber industry. After her death, the money was taken over by philanthropists who increasingly dedicated their giving to liberal causes including gun control, environmentalism and school reforms.
Barack Obama served on the board of the Joyce Foundation from 1994-2002. A review of the foundations website shows some interesting connections both to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and Bill Ayers in particular:
1996
The Joyce Foundation gave $50K to a group called Leadership for Quality Education run by Bill Ayers’ brother John Ayers. According to this May 1998 issue of Catalyst magazine (a periodical focused on Chicago school refrom) Leadership for Quality Education is “a corporate group that administers the umbrella Small Schools Coalition.” The Small School Coalition website shows John and Bill Ayers are the lead members on the “Policy Committee.” In short, the Ayers brothers were parners in the Small Schools initiatives in Chicago. A donation to LQE, for all intents and purposes, was support for Bill Ayers vision for Chicago schools.
1997
Even as Obama worked with Ayers at CAC, the foundation gives $337,556 to the Small Schools workshop at the University of Chicago.
An additional $95K to John Ayers’ Leadership for Quality Education “To continue assisting the recruitment, startup, and operation of charter schools in Chicago.”
1998
Another $149K to Leadership for Quality Education “To assist in the recruitment, startup, and operation of charter schools in Chicago; to evaluate the need for a similar approach in the Chicago metropolitan region; and to assist charter school proponents in Cleveland (18 mos.)” [HT: RBO for this one.]
1999
Another $125K to John Ayers’ group Leadership for Quality Education, the stated purpose of which was “To organize, in cooperation with a network of grassroots and reform organizations, a citywide campaign to generate greater participation in Chicago’s local school council elections.”
An additional $160K grant to the University of Illinois College of Education “To continue providing technical assistance to a network of small schools in Chicago and to continue advocacy and policy work promoting the expansion of the small schools concept within the Chicago Public School system” The link provided goes to the Small Schools Workshop website indicating this money was granted to Bill Ayers’ group.
2000
$365K to the Univ. of Illinois College of Education “To continue developing small schools…” Although it is not mentioned by name in the description, the link included with this grant goes directly to the Small Schools Workshop website. So once again, this money went to Bill Ayers.
John Ayers’ Leadership for Quality Education gets $187,100
2001
The Foundation gives $600K in grants to found the Chicago Public Education Fund. This is the successor to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Archives for their website are mysteriously unavailable, but both John Ayers and Barack Obama are listed as members of their leadership council.
2002
A $1.5 million, five year grant is given to the Chicago High School Redesign Initiative. The initiative is interested in turning 5 Chicago high schools into “small schools.” The planning grant for this initiative lists both Bill Ayers book and his Small Schools website in its appendices. Coincidentally, Bill Ayers co-edited a book with Patricia Ford, executive director of the Chicago High School Redesign Initiative (the book was published in 1996 and it’s not clear she held that position at the time. She may have taken it on later)
John Ayers’ Leadership for Quality Education another $75K.
But that’s not all. Obama was also a board member of the Woods Fund from 1999 to 2002. Also serving on the Woods Fund board was Bill Ayers:
1999
A grant of $50K to the Leadership for Quality Education which is described as “a pooled fund to underwrite costs for community and faith-based institutions to conduct outreach for candidate recruitment for Local School Councils and to encourage voter turnout for the elections.” So in this case both Obama and Bill Ayers are directing money toward John Ayers.
2001
A $50K grant to the Small Schools Workshop, headed by you-know-who.
All told, boards on which Barack Obama sat delivered $1,087,556 to Bill Ayers’ Small Schools Workshop. These same boards granted another $731,100 to John Ayers’ Leadership for Quality Education group, which as I’ve noted already funded the Small Schools umbrella group he ran with Bill Ayers.
Additionally, there’s the $1.5 million to redesign five Chicago high schools along the lines Bill Ayers was promoting (He’s highlighted prominently in the grant writing appendices). All in all that’s a not insignificant contribution to the Ayers family and their causes, certainly enough to rebut claims by the NY Times that the two men merely “crossed paths.” Barack Obama, more than any other individual one could name, funded Bill Ayers’ goals in Chicago.
Of course one might argue that Barack Obama was only one member of both the Joyce Foundation and Woods Fund boards. But clearly, the giving paints a picture of a relationship between Obama and Ayers that goes way beyond “a guy from my neighborhood.” To put it another way, if Barack Obama didn’t know who Bill Ayers was during this period, he was an extremely irresponsible board member.
Finally, it’s worth noting that Bill Ayers the radical and Bill Ayers the reformer were one and the same in the late 90’s. In March of 2000 Catalyst Magazine devoted an entire issue to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. The end of their lead article quoted Bill Ayers on the results:
“I think it’s a mixed picture,” says Bill Ayers, an associate professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago who worked with Chapman and Anne Hallett to pull together the original grant-writing effort.
Ayers believes Annenberg “played a big role” in fostering smaller, more intimate, less anonymous learning environments. But he says that the goal of making teaching more of a profession “is a goal yet to be realized.”
“I don’t think that’s in very good shape in Chicago right now,” he says.
Still, Ayers believes the Annenberg Challenge was good for Chicago “in the sense that it provoked and deepened our conscientiousness about some very important issues that go to the heart of lasting school improvement.
“Did it work? … It’s like asking, ‘Did American democracy work?’ It’s a work in progress. Did it work? Not yet. Not for a lot of people.”
Posted by: chattyway | Oct 12, 2008 6:50:37 PM
An Obama presidency would be a disaster to this country. There is nothing ludicrous about questioning his allegiance to the United States. If you can't see all the obvious signs around him of a life spent surrounded by people who hate America, then you aren't paying attention.
This life-long Democrat will never vote for someone so dangerous to our freedoms, economy and national security.
Posted by: Bern2008 | Oct 12, 2008 6:51:14 PM
The only attack ads in OH I've seen have come from the McCain side. Obama's ads are usually centered around correcting the McCain ads misrepresntation of his policies. We've grown weary of them. And then to see their rallies and the hateful rhetoric. I'm looking forward to the debate. McCain needs to be put in his place for allowing his hateful message to go on as long as it did. If you take the time to read what they have to say, listen to their intrviews and watch the debates, I don't know how anyone could say they don't know where they stand.I know I've seen and heard enough.
Posted by: Bea | Oct 12, 2008 6:52:12 PM
Please give me a break. I am tired of the biased press coverage by the media. At the latest rally, Mc Cain defended Obama to that supporter and not one of the media houses gave mention of that. I'm sick of the idea that Obama can do no wrong, I'm waiting for them to say he can walk on water. Just give me the facts and let me make my own decisions, don't make the decision for me.
Posted by: cheryll | Oct 12, 2008 6:52:37 PM
OBAMA , WORKED WITH ,AYERS, IN 1995. AYERS ADVSED,OBAMA, ON ILLEGALS ACTIVITIES IN POLITIC POLICY. OBAMA HAS TAKING ADVICE FROM FORMER EXECUTIVES OF FREDDIE-FANNIE M.. FAILING TO SEE THAT THEY WERE HEADING FOR A MELTDOWN, DID NOT PROPOSED ANY RECUE PLAN TO THE NATION
Posted by: ENE M DIAZ | Oct 12, 2008 6:52:41 PM
My wife and I have already sent in our absentee ballots for the next President
of the United State, Barrack Obama.
Finally light at the end of 8 long, dark years of greed and stupidity.
Posted by: YOMAMA | Oct 12, 2008 6:52:41 PM
But here's the problem. Voters likely regard the "attacks" as something that Republicans "do". It's part of their Rovian nature, expected...like a scorpion stinging the frog who gave it the ride across the river.
It's in his nature...so not inherently "bad".
Also it's somewhat expected that someone behind will play dirty in order to catch up...once again it's viewed as typical...if not acceptable.In fact many may equate it to "fighting spirit".
Posted by: cinnamonape | Oct 12, 2008 6:53:23 PM
Just what exactley is Obama's position on the issues?
He blasts McCain's stance. Blasts Bush's. Blasted Hillary's.
All without saying his.
Claiming to be Messiah and the Chosen One isn't good enough with me. Being able to part water with his hands isn't good enough either.
Signed, a rural democrat.
Posted by: Krissy | Oct 12, 2008 6:56:42 PM
I always liked McCain, who was very funny on The Daily Show and Saturday Night Live, but he's lost control of his campaign and his supporters, and if he's done that, he'll lose control of his Presidency.
I see few downsides to Obama. He went to Harvard, he's served as a legislator for more than 10 years (and Illinois, by itself, is far larger than many countries) and he's tried to keep a tone of dignity and optimism. I wish John McCain nothing but the best, but a vote for the Presidency must be made with an eye to the future.
Posted by: rob | Oct 12, 2008 6:58:11 PM
There has not been any criticism about Mr Obama that has a basis in truth. For example, Mr Ayers: Mr Obama sat with him on a CHARITY board that was funded by Reagan's ambassador. There were republicans on that board to. Mr Ayers has won citizen of the year in Chicago.
I guess there will always be some who say "dont trust anything from Chicago". See how silly that sounds?
And lets not forget the other side. Palin has just been determined to have violated a law. Yet she sits there and says I did nothing ethically wrong.
I would be worried about that sort of LIE if I were a supporter of the GOP.
Posted by: any123 | Oct 12, 2008 6:59:06 PM
Keep up the good work, McCain- you're doing a great job- the polls show it and that folksy woman you picked as your VP- great choice- really shows off those "maverick" skills of yours. Whatever you and your campaign are doing- please don't stop.
Those of us on the other team, are truly grateful that our country is not only getting to know you (and Governor Palin) as you really are- but also truly beginning to comprehend what a disaster a McCain administration would be to our country and to our planet. You think the country's not smart enough to see throught your pathetic, outdated and frankly, insulting tactics? You'd be wrong, Senator
McCain.
Obama-Biden 08.
Posted by: kmamiami | Oct 12, 2008 6:59:21 PM
Post a comment
