Poll: Character Trumps Policy for Voters

[Alamom]

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070311/D8NPSFU00.html

Mar 11, 5:11 AM (ET)

By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON


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.

>

But in an AP-AOL News poll conducted in January, only 44 percent said they thought Bush was honest. His decline in the category of trust is widely attributed to the fallout from the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The drop is most prominent among people 30 to 39, suburban women, married women with children and people with household incomes in the $50,000 to $75,000 bracket. Bush's collapse in the character test should serve as a warning to the 2008 presidential candidates. Character matters, voters say, and they already are sizing up the field.

>

Among Democrats, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York leads with 38 percent, followed by Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois at 21 percent. Former Vice President Al Gore is at 14 percent and 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards is at 10 percent. The rest of the field is in single digits. Clinton leads Obama among voters who mention honesty and strong character, compassion, intelligence and stance on issues. The former first lady is tied with Obama among the small number of respondents who value experience, a surprise given Obama's short stint in Washington.

>

"The problem is it's almost impossible to find a human being who lives up to the expectations of voters. Everyone has things they've done that they're not proud of," Schmidt said.
"Nobody's character is perfect."

[Kutjara]

1. For once, I'd like to see an election...

...where the issues are more important than the candidate's hairstyle. People just can't be bothered to think about issues, so they just vote for the one "with the most trustworthy face," or the "nicest smile." Quite how anyone thinks they can know a candidate's character after all the image grooming and spin that goes on during a campaign, I can't begin to fathom. Honestly, I think we'd end up with a better President if we just drew straws.

I believe Shrub was a "character" candidate, and look how that turned out.

[ClintonTyree]

2. Precisely...

"W" was going to return honesty and *dignitude* back to the White House. He had all the credentials of a man of character, the good spin about his character anyway. We can clearly see how that turned out. Power does something to people and the power of the Presidency invites dishonesty and deceit.
Yet Americans are willing to be totally duped again by another "character". :eyes: Won't these people ever learn? A person's policy positions are much more important than their carefully crafted image. Bush is the finest example of that "bait and switch" this country has ever seen. Both his character and policies suck. There isn't an honest bone in his body.

[sutz12]

3. Obviously, their ability to recognize good character is a bit flawed....n t

[no_hypocrisy]

5. Flawed? I'd say ignored.

Despite being told all the blemishes and flaws of Rudolph Giuliani, it still seems that even the rightwing fundamentalist republicans are enamoured with "America's Mayor" because in their eyes, Rudy singlehandedly chased out the terrorists from NYC on 9-11 and that a vote for Rudy is the same as a vote to destroy the terrorists.

[Deja Q]

4. What next, Gingrich promoting one-spouse-for-life programs?

People would still buy into him anyway. :crazy: