Possible Negatives for Candidates: Vote for Bank Bailout, Palin Support
In the upcoming midterm elections, two factors have emerged as major potential negatives for candidates: Fully 46% say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported government loans to banks during the financial crisis two years ago, while nearly as many (42%) say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate backed by Sarah Palin.
Far smaller percentages say they would be more likely to vote for candidates who had supported the major loans to financial institutions (13%) or had Palin campaign for them (15%). These evaluations have changed little since August.
By contrast, bringing home federal dollars continues to be viewed as a potential asset for a congressional candidate. About half (53%) say they would be more likely to vote for a candidate who has a record of bringing government projects and money to their districts. Just 11% say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who brought home federal money and projects.
The latest Pew Research/National Journal Congressional Connection poll, sponsored by SHRM, conducted Sept. 30-Oct. 3 among 1,002 adults, finds further indications of anti-incumbent sentiment in this election year. About a quarter (26%) say they would be less likely to vote for an incumbent running for reelection while only about half as many (12%) say they would be more likely to support an incumbent; still, about half (53%) say this would make no difference in their vote either way.
The public continues to express more mixed views of other candidate traits and characteristics. About a third (32%) say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who is a supporter of the Tea Party movement, while 21% say they would be more likely to vote for such a candidate. And a third (33%) say they would be less likely, rather than more likely (24%), to favor a candidate for whom Barack Obama campaigns.
Americans are split over whether they are more likely to vote for candidates who supported the health care law enacted earlier this year; 35% say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who supported the legislation, while 36% say they would be more likely.
And the survey finds there is limited benefit to being a candidate who has never held elective office. About two-in-ten (21%) say this would make them more likely to vote for a candidate, 27% say less likely and nearly half (47%) say it would make no difference.
Divisions over Campaign Appearances by Obama, Palin
Just as in August, Republicans, Democrats and independents differ considerably about the impact of campaign appearances by Sarah Palin or Barack Obama -- as well as a candidate's affiliation with the Tea Party movement.
Nearly four-in-ten Republicans (38%) say campaign support from Palin would make them more likely to vote for a candidate, but 45% say it would make no difference. Just 12% say this would make them less likely to support a candidate.
Two-thirds of Democrats (67%) say a Palin appearance would make them less likely to vote for a candidate, up from 58% in August. By about four-to-one, more independents say Palin's support would make them less likely to vote for a candidate than say it would make them more likely to do so (43% less likely, 11% more likely); 44% of independents say it would make no difference.
About half of Democrats (49%) say Obama's campaign help would make them more likely to vote for a congressional candidate while just 10% say it would make them less likely to vote for that candidate (40% say it would make no difference). By contrast, Republicans view an Obama campaign stop as a considerable liability: 72% of Republicans say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate if Barack Obama campaigns on his or her behalf. This is up from 57% in early August.
Among independents, 44% say that Obama campaigning for a candidate would make no difference to their vote; 32% say it would make them less likely to vote for that candidate while just 20% say that it would make them more likely to support that candidate.
Support for the Tea Party is, on balance, viewed more positively by Republicans and more negatively by Democrats, while independents are divided. About four-in-ten Republicans (42%) say a candidate's support for the Tea Party movement would make them more likely to vote for that candidate; just 9% say the Tea Party affiliation would make them less likely to vote for a candidate (39% say it would make no difference). Among conservative Republicans, a 54% majority say they are more likely to vote for a Tea Party supporter.
More than half of Democrats (54%) say Tea Party affiliation would make them less likely to vote for a candidate with just 8% saying it would make them more likely to do so. A plurality of independents (43%) say Tea Party support would make no difference in their vote, while 22% say this would make them more likely to vote for a candidate and 29% say it would make them less likely to do so.
Continuing Divides Over Contentious Votes
While partisans differ considerably in how they view the impact of a candidate's support for the health care overhaul on their votes this fall, independents are more divided. Among Republicans, 72% say they are less likely to vote for a candidate who supported the health care law enacted earlier this year; 15% say this will make no difference and 9% say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supported the legislation. Two-thirds of Democrats (67%), meanwhile, say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supported the legislation, just 11% say less likely and 20% say this will make no difference.
Among independents, about three-in-ten (29%) say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supported the health care bill, while 37% say they are less likely to support that candidate, 31% say this issue will make no difference in their vote.
Majorities of Republicans (64%) and independents (52%) say they are less likely to vote for candidates who supported the major government loans made to banks in response to the 2008 financial crisis. Among Democrats, 31% say they are less likely to vote for candidates who supported the bank bailouts, while 21% say they are more likely to support these candidates; 44% say this will make no difference.
Impact of Incumbency, New Faces
Both Republicans and independents are divided about whether being new to electoral politics is an advantage or a disadvantage to congressional candidates this year; 26% of Republicans say they are more likely to vote for someone who has never held elective office, while about the same number (29%) say they are less likely to vote for a candidate who has never held elective office; 41% say this would not make a difference in their vote. Independents are similarly split (25% more likely, 21% less likely, 49% no difference).
While the plurality of Democrats (47%) say relative inexperience with electoral politics would not make a difference in their vote, by a ratio of more than two-to-one Democrats see relative newness as a hindrance rather than a help to candidates (35% less likely, 15% more likely).
Looking at the impact of incumbency, 37% of Republicans and 30% of independents say they are less likely to vote for a candidate who is an incumbent seeking re-election. Just 13% of Democrats agree. More than six-in-ten Democrats (63%) say incumbency will make no difference in their vote, compared with 44% of Republicans and 52% of independents.
Few Republicans (10%), Democrats (17%) or independents (11%) say they are more likely to vote for a candidate because of incumbency.
More Continue to Say Earmarks a Benefit
By ratios of at least two-to-one, more Republicans, Democrats and independents say they are more likely, rather than less likely to vote for a candidate with a record of bringing government projects and money to their districts. About two-thirds of Democrats (68%) say they are more likely to vote for candidates with records of earmarking; 42% of Republicans and 51% of independents say the same. Relatively small numbers of each group say this would make them less likely to vote for a candidate (19% of Republicans, 14% of independents and 3% of Democrats.)
View the topline and survey methodology at people-press.org.

