The "Experience Gap" Question
This column was written by CBS News director of surveys Kathy Frankovic.
Back in December, I wrote about how different ways of asking a question can produce different answers, especially when it comes to tracking characteristics like experience and other "presidential" qualities. Voters may perceive one candidate as having more experience than the other when they are asked to compare two candidates - but may believe both candidates have "enough" experience to handle the job. Despite Al Gore's lead in experience overall during the 2000 election campaign, more than six in ten registered voters thought George W. Bush had enough.
The "experience gap" - and especially how it plays out in the foreign policy realm - has played a role in the scheduling of Barack Obama's current trip to Europe and the Middle East. How big an "experience gap" in foreign policy is there today? And does anybody care?
Here are some comparisons from polls that were conducted before the trip. All of them asked two identical questions about each candidate, so we really can see whether a candidate has passed one experience test - being "Commander-in-Chief" with the majority of voters:
On July 10-12, ABC News and the Washington Post asked whether the statement "He would be a good commander-in chief of the military" applied to John McCain and Obama. Seventy two percent said that the statement applied to McCain (25 percent said it didn't), and just 48 percent said the statement applied to Obama. The same percentage - 48 percent - said the statement did NOT apply to Obama.
In mid-June, the Gallup/USA Today Poll posed the question in a softer way: "Do you think John McCain/Barack Obama can or cannot handle the responsibilities of commander-in-chief of the military?" No surprise that 80 percent said McCain could, but a majority of 55 percent agreed Obama could as well, although 40 percent said he could not.
The CBS News/New York Times Poll, conducted July 7-14, asked a different question, and found that the "experience" problem Obama faces might not be so troublesome. The question was: "Regardless of how you intend to vote, how likely do you think it is that Barack Obama would be an effective commander-in-chief of the nation's military--would you say it is very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely, or not at all likely? As you might expect, only about half as many registered voters said they would be "very likely" to think Obama would be an effective commander-in-chief as to say McCain would be (24 percent versus 46 percent). But combining those who said "very likely" with those who said "somewhat likely" - admittedly, a slightly lower threshold of acceptability on this issue - makes the difference, while still large, seem less dramatic. Four out of five voters (82 percent) say McCain is at least "somewhat likely" to be an effective commander-in-chief, but 62 percent - nearly two in three - say Obama is as well. In other words, majorities say both candidates meet the threshold.
Obama may or may not have a politically debilitating weakness on the question of being Commander-in-Chief, but he has not made much progress in the last few months convincing more voters of his abilities. The July CBS News Poll found almost the same results as it had in May: Sixty two percent said he was "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to be an effective commander-in-chief, and 25 percent made the "very likely" choice. In contrast to the rather static assessment of Obama, McCain had improved by five points on this measure in the same two months.
But running a military is not the only foreign policy matter, and on one foreign policy issue, Obama has shown a clear lead over McCain in recent polls. And that issue is NOT Iraq! The ABC News/Washington Post July Poll found a fairly even division - 47 percent trust McCain more on Iraq, 44 percent trust Obama more. Fox News found something similar in a poll conducted about ten days later: by 47 percent to 39 percent, voters said they "trusted" McCain more to deal with the situation in Iraq.
Where Obama is well ahead of McCain is in the perception that he will improve the image of the U.S. in the rest of the world. Nearly half of voters, 48 percent, say he will. Just 18 percent say that about McCain. It's not that the rest say the image will get worse in a McCain administration, but 59 percent say things just won't change.
But this raises the question: how much will it matter? Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal has made some historical comparisons that suggest meeting a foreign policy threshold may have mattered in previous elections. But "experience" and competence in foreign policy may not be the determining factor when it comes to the vote in the fall. Fewer than one in five adults name any foreign policy issue as the most important problem facing the country (and most of those references are to Iraq). In contrast, the economy and gas prices are named by more than half.
American voters may not care all that much what people in other countries think of us. And one trip may not resolve Obama's "experience" problem. Americans can sometimes be skeptical of the purpose of international travel and action. Even successful foreign trips by Americans Presidents don't necessarily boost their approval ratings. And when we ask the American public if politicians are sincere when they do something, or whether they are doing it for political gain, political gain almost always wins.
Obama's trip may be seen that way too. Halfway into this trip, the latest Fox News poll asked if Obama's trip was "better described as a fact-finding trip or as a campaign event." By 47 percent to 19 percent, in that poll at least, the public said it was a "campaign event." We'll see what happens when it's all over.
By Kathy Frankovic
Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved. Back in December, I wrote about how different ways of asking a question can produce different answers, especially when it comes to tracking characteristics like experience and other "presidential" qualities. Voters may perceive one candidate as having more experience than the other when they are asked to compare two candidates - but may believe both candidates have "enough" experience to handle the job. Despite Al Gore's lead in experience overall during the 2000 election campaign, more than six in ten registered voters thought George W. Bush had enough.
The "experience gap" - and especially how it plays out in the foreign policy realm - has played a role in the scheduling of Barack Obama's current trip to Europe and the Middle East. How big an "experience gap" in foreign policy is there today? And does anybody care?
Here are some comparisons from polls that were conducted before the trip. All of them asked two identical questions about each candidate, so we really can see whether a candidate has passed one experience test - being "Commander-in-Chief" with the majority of voters:
Obama may or may not have a politically debilitating weakness on the question of being Commander-in-Chief, but he has not made much progress in the last few months convincing more voters of his abilities. The July CBS News Poll found almost the same results as it had in May: Sixty two percent said he was "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to be an effective commander-in-chief, and 25 percent made the "very likely" choice. In contrast to the rather static assessment of Obama, McCain had improved by five points on this measure in the same two months.
But running a military is not the only foreign policy matter, and on one foreign policy issue, Obama has shown a clear lead over McCain in recent polls. And that issue is NOT Iraq! The ABC News/Washington Post July Poll found a fairly even division - 47 percent trust McCain more on Iraq, 44 percent trust Obama more. Fox News found something similar in a poll conducted about ten days later: by 47 percent to 39 percent, voters said they "trusted" McCain more to deal with the situation in Iraq.
Where Obama is well ahead of McCain is in the perception that he will improve the image of the U.S. in the rest of the world. Nearly half of voters, 48 percent, say he will. Just 18 percent say that about McCain. It's not that the rest say the image will get worse in a McCain administration, but 59 percent say things just won't change.
But this raises the question: how much will it matter? Pollster.com's Mark Blumenthal has made some historical comparisons that suggest meeting a foreign policy threshold may have mattered in previous elections. But "experience" and competence in foreign policy may not be the determining factor when it comes to the vote in the fall. Fewer than one in five adults name any foreign policy issue as the most important problem facing the country (and most of those references are to Iraq). In contrast, the economy and gas prices are named by more than half.
American voters may not care all that much what people in other countries think of us. And one trip may not resolve Obama's "experience" problem. Americans can sometimes be skeptical of the purpose of international travel and action. Even successful foreign trips by Americans Presidents don't necessarily boost their approval ratings. And when we ask the American public if politicians are sincere when they do something, or whether they are doing it for political gain, political gain almost always wins.
Obama's trip may be seen that way too. Halfway into this trip, the latest Fox News poll asked if Obama's trip was "better described as a fact-finding trip or as a campaign event." By 47 percent to 19 percent, in that poll at least, the public said it was a "campaign event." We'll see what happens when it's all over.
By Kathy Frankovic
Nice to see you found your CapsLk button. Whatever value your comment may have is mitigated by your decision to ''scream'' about it
At least Carter showed leadership on energy and foreign affairs. He was the last President to acknowledge that we can''t keep burning tens of millions of barrels of oil a day forever, no matter how much we pump out of the ground.
Carter installed solar panels on the White House. Reagan had them torn down his first week in office. That''s about all you need to know about Democratic vs Republican energy policy.
EVERYONE OF THE AIPAC MEMBERS AND THE SEND OTHER PEOPLES CHILDREN TO DEFEND ISRAEL AN THE OIL COMPANIES FOR THE NEXT HUNDRED YEAR CROWD ARE USING EVERYTHING IN THEIR ARSENAL TO DISCREDIT OBAMA.
THEY CANT BUY HIM!
THEY CANT BLACKMAIL HIM!
THEY WANTED TO TAKE HIM OUT ON THIS TRIP!
THEY KNOW HE IS GETTING AMERICA OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST WHERE AMERICA HAS BEEN BOGGED DOWN FOR THE PAST 65 YEARS!
IF THAT ANGERS THE RIGHT WING CHRISTIAN NUT JOBS AND THEIR BRAIN WASHED NEOCONS OR THE DUEL PASSPORT HOLDING AMERICAN ISRAELIS LIKE JOE LIEBERMAN THEN SO BE IT!
IT IS TIME AMERICA DID WHAT WAS IN ITS OWN BEST INTEREST!
THERE IS NOTHING IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT AMERICA NEEDS!
THERE IS NOTHING IN THE MIDDLE EAST THAT IS A THREAT TO AMERICA!
THE ONLY REASON MIDDLE EAST ARTICLES ARE KEPT IN THE AMERICAN MEDIA IS BECAUSE AIPAC MEMBERS RUN THE AMERICAN MEDIA AND FILM INDUSTRY!
AMERICA STAND UP OR SHUT UP!
TAKE BACK YOUR COUNTRY!
Senator Obama may be only a first term US Senator (with more years in his State legislature) but he''s already the leading Presidential contender.
McCain has been around much longer, and it''s taken all this time for him to get to the same level of achievement that Mr. Obama has achieved in much less time.
If McCain really had it, it would have been apparent long before now. It IS apparent that Senator Obama DOES have it, right out of the starting gate.
In short; it''s obvious who the more capable man really is: it''s Obama.
Vision, gifted statesmanship, charisma, excitement, energy, remarkable intelligence and phenomenal leadership skills are qualities that the world and a majority of U.S. citizens see in Barack Obama. All due respect to the longevity of John McCain''s Senate and military service, John McCain is not endowed with these qualities. They are useful qualities for a President of the United States.
Anyone that insists otherwise is either a die-hard Liberal that would sell out America just to get their guy elected, or an idiot.
People want to keep linking McCain to President Bush, but that is just an excuse. McCain is the ONLY candidate from EITHER side that has shown the ability to work with BOTH Conservatives and Liberals.
Onama has shown no such ability.
America is NOT Liberal or Conservative, It is a mixture of both, and we need a leader that sees that and is capable of working for it.
I guess Canadians and other foreigners around the world would like to choose OUR next president! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Posted by liberty_1776 at 04:29 PM : Jul 26, 2008
I guess Canadians and other foreigners around the world would like to choose OUR next president! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
#####
You are lucky they don''t.
You must be from Texas - All Hat and No Cattle...