Commanding In A Crisis

CBS' Kathy Frankovic: Polls Show Foreign Policy Experience Doesn't Always Sway Elections

(CBS)  By Kathy Frankovic, CBS News director of surveys

---

Would the American public accept a woman as commander in chief in times of international crisis?

Challengers for the presidency always face hurdles in convincing voters that they understand foreign policy — a skill they can presumably learn only at the national level. It turns out that you sometimes actually need to be elected president before Americans tell pollsters they think you know how to do part of the job. Does a woman candidate have an even harder challenge?

In a July CBS News/New York Times poll, fewer than half the registered voters interviewed (42 percent) said they had confidence that Hillary Clinton could handle an international crisis. Fifty-two percent said they were "uneasy" about her approach. Men were more likely than women to say they'd be uneasy about Clinton in a crisis. They also were more likely to say that they did not think it was likely that Clinton could be an effective commander in chief.

Could gender be the issue? Not on the surface. As far back as October 1984, when Geraldine Ferraro became the first woman on a major party's ticket (she was Democrat Walter Mondale's vice presidential running mate), 71 percent of registered voters told CBS News and The New York Times that being commander in chief was not something only a man would be capable of doing. In 1994, when Bill Clinton (who had avoided military service during the Vietnam War) was President, 60 percent told NBC and the Wall Street Journal that serving in the military wasn't a requirement to becoming an effective commander in chief.

There are, however, polling examples of women candidates falling behind on the military and the international front. In April 1999, when the U.S. was engaged in military action in the former Yugoslavia, NBC News and the Wall Street Journal asked how much confidence the public would have about prospective presidential candidates serving as commander in chief. More than six in 10 said they had little or no confidence in then-candidate Sen. Elizabeth Dole's ability to do that, whereas only about four in 10 said that about two of her Republican opponents, George W. Bush and John McCain.

In 1984, Ferraro had a different problem. She was a three-term member of the House of Representatives, with limited foreign policy experience. The voters saw that. In September, after her nomination, only 38 percent of voters said they had confidence in Ferraro's ability to handle a crisis.

But Hillary Clinton's current numbers on handling crisis aren't much different from those that any non-president gets from the public. It may be more a matter that nothing convinces the public you can handle foreign crises except on-the-job training.

Here are some examples. Since the early 1980s, CBS News has been asking registered voters to tell us whether they had confidence in a candidate's ability to handle an international crisis, or whether they were uneasy about it — the same question that we asked last month about Hillary Clinton. Uniformly, the candidate who does better on the questions is the one who had had experience — as president or vice president — in the executive branch. For example, in September 1992, only 27 percent of registered voters said they had confidence in Bill Clinton's ability to handle an international crisis, whereas 62 percent expressed confidence in then-President George H.W. Bush. Nonetheless, Clinton easily defeated Bush in that election. (I should note that hardly any registered voters were confident that the independent candidate, Ross Perot, could handle an international crisis; 83 percent were uneasy about him in that circumstance.)

Four years later, 52 percent of voters said they were confident in President Clinton's ability to handle an international crisis — and that figure rose as high as 57 percent in the wake of his impeachment troubles, as the public rallied around the troubled president.

In November 2000, there were doubts about both Vice President Al Gore and Texas Gov. George W. Bush. But Gore, the sitting vice president, had the edge. Fifty-three percent of registered voters said they were confident in his ability to handle an international crisis (41 percent were uneasy). When it came to Bush, the balance tipped negative: 44 percent were confident, while 48 percent were uneasy. But in the 2004 election, Bush had a 10-point lead over Democratic candidate John Kerry in voter confidence on handling crisis.

Attitudes about the ability to handle a crisis were seen as a weakness even for Ronald Reagan in his first years in office — just before the invasion of Grenada. But that event brought his ratings up and by the 1984 election he led Mondale by more than 20 points on this question.

The foreign crisis consideration isn't always the determining issue in presidential elections. In 2008, with the war in Iraq and the continuing concerns about terrorism, it may be. But we won't know until next year whether Sen. Clinton's gender or a candidate's international experience (or lack of it) will make a difference in the election.

[drinuk]

Hillary is not fit to clean Thatchers shoes, a class apart. As for Hillary and Bill putting the country back on track ? The only track they will be on is a cart track.

The answer America is, Dr Ron Paul. Don't let this man be the Best President you NEVER had !

[hwy71so]

Hillary voted for entering Iraq, then when she saw public opinion waver, she changed her mind. Hillary isn't about leadership, Hillary is about self image.

I wouldn't vote for her if she was the only one on the ballot.


________________________
Speaking of a low IQ--
...--does anyone with an IQ above room temperature have confidence in Bush's abilities?

I include neocons as people with IQs below room temperature.

Posted by jmurrieta1 at 12:12 PM : Aug 01, 2007 .
_______________________

Why is it that the Republicans are trying to figure out ways to improve and/or govern the nation while the Democrats are trying to figure out ways to discredit the Republicans?
...
...
...

Don't tell me its broke; help me to FIX it. In otherwords, contribute or shut up.

[katg21]

Yeah, it's called a monarchy and Hillary is NO queen. Tell me this, has there ever been a woman in control of parliament? Because that is really who runs the government.
Posted by katg21 at 05:43 PM : Aug 02, 200

Since you don't know, yes, is the answer to my question; Hil is no Margaret Thatcher either.

[SIDNEYWILLIAMSMD]

Why are you so sure Hillary will be the head of the Ticket...may it will be Obama...then we will have bumper sticker "Blackman and Robin"

[SIDNEYWILLIAMSMD]

If Hillary was not good enough for Bill, what makes you think she is good enough for America?
Frankly I do not think she or Obama are trustworthy enough to babysit my pet Gerbil much less take responsibility for the safety of our Country.

[katg21]

Queen Elizabeth I and other great female leaders in history provide ample evidence that females can lead and do so very effectively.
Posted by sesanders1 at 03:55 PM : Aug 02, 2007

Yeah, it's called a monarchy and Hillary is NO queen. Tell me this, has there ever been a woman in control of parliament? Because that is really who runs the government.

[katg21]

Hillary is intelligent and was First Lady for 8 years. While some first ladies may not learn much in that time, Hillary certainly did. She was head of the Health Care group putting together health care reform.
Posted by sjc_1 at 02:50 PM : Aug 02, 2007

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now that's reaching!!! Ha, ha, ha!!!

[katg21]

This is a big handicap in the world scene. Albright, and Rice, were simply ineffective shills for the party in power and carried no strength in their positions other than as lapdogs.
This is reality folks.
Posted by tibu987 at 02:23 PM : Aug 02, 2007

People can't stand watching a woman, Katie Couric, on the evening news; what make the Dems so sure people will accept one in the white house?

[xzavierbrown]

For those RIGHT WINGERS who throw about the phrase: Liberal Masses...it would be preferable to use the phrase: AWAKENED AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Of course though the phrase: "Arrogant, redneck nazi, corporate toadie scum" can still be freely used to assail any and all bush supporters.
Posted by johnpatrick9 at 02:17 PM : Aug 02, 2007
+ report abuse

*****

that is a liberal for ya..
they 'awoke' after they paid Micheal Moore the price of a movie ticket. And just like a child, they cant seem to smell thier own sh8t on thier own knees

Hillary is a capable, experienced, and very intelligent politician who can hold her own in any arena. The fact that she is a woman would not impair her status as a commander-in-chief in the least. Queen Elizabeth I and other great female leaders in history provide ample evidence that females can lead and do so very effectively.

[sjc_1]

Hillary is intelligent and was First Lady for 8 years. While some first ladies may not learn much in that time, Hillary certainly did. She was head of the Health Care group putting together health care reform.

She will have a good adviser with her. Bill Clinton balanced the budget and took on Serbia at a time others would not. He understands how things work in the world. This is a time when we need to get back to experience and capabilities, before it is too late. I believe Hillary and Bill will help this country get back on track.

[tibu987]

1. Many women will vote for Hillary for no other reason except that she is a woman and simply,that is not a good reason to vote for her.
2. Being the first lady does not automatically impart intelligence, responsibility, or any ability for running the worlds most important position.
3. Many of the world leaders do not respect women enough to seriously accept the actions of a woman president. This is a big handicap in the world scene. Albright, and Rice, were simply ineffective shills for the party in power and carried no strength in their positions other than as lapdogs.
This is reality folks.

[johnpatrick9]

For those RIGHT WINGERS who throw about the phrase: Liberal Masses...it would be preferable to use the phrase: AWAKENED AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Of course though the phrase: "Arrogant, redneck nazi, corporate toadie scum" can still be freely used to assail any and all bush supporters.

[johnpatrick9]

For those of you who unbelievingly voted for dufus bush and his cronies once or twice, frankly your opinions don't matter very much as you are part of the shame fostered upon our beautiful land by your willingness to vote for a corporate, prejudiced fascist group.
Proud to say that many of us will proudly boast in the years ahead: "Bush was an idiot and we never supported him and his gang of thugs. We fought for a free America against his attempt at a fascist takeover of our Republic. He was never our American President."

[johnpatrick9]

Any Democrat is going to be better than any Republican. The Republican Party has shown itself to be partisan, incompetent and serving the Rich and Connected ( as usual ). Besides if it is Hillary, well who is kidding who..that means Bill is Back and will have a "free hand" to guide this nation back into the good times we had under him..as the case maybe. He was one of our more funloving Presidents and I would rather have a *********** than a warmonger in the Whitehouse.
We were beloved and had a surplus and the PEOPLE more or less came first. Tired of this rule by a corrrupt Republican oligarchy of the criminally insane.

[tucano2]

The 4 voters in this family will NOT vote for Hillary, Obama, or any other knucklehead who supports AMNESTY for illegal aliens or the criminal employers of them.

[perception5]

What's the difference between the Socialist/Communist party of Hugo's and America's Democrat party?

Answer:

There is no difference. All the Democrats candidates for president, except for Biden, is attending a KOS conference in Chicago this week.

DailyKos, is a left-wing hate group like MoveOn. org.

Can't believe how far the Democrat party has moved to the "extreme left".

Now we all know what Ronald Reagan meant when he said:

"Well..........I didn't leave the Democrat party the Democrat party "LEFT" me.

CBS (Censoring Broadcasting Station) hasn't had ONE story of the Dems attending the "hate" convention by Kos this week.

We wonder why?

[xzavierbrown]

the american liberal masses deserve a disaster aka Hillary clinton or Obama..it would take a liberal politician to show these masses what it really means about weak and incompetent.

at least obama is assured to turn into a black bush....

[katg21]

usawarrior,

You'll be waiting forever for an answer to your last post. Dems don't really know what Hillary has or hasn't accomplished. There are a couple better qualified people running for the dem ticket but the media loves Hillary so the brainwashed fools do too.

[katg21]

Would someone tell me what it is that Hilary accomplished since she became a senator.
Posted by usawarrior at 09:27 AM : Aug 02, 2007

A book, living off the tax payers, voting our troops to go to war and then denying it and I'm sure you could throw in some corruption there too; you know, the usual.