Poll: This is the more potent issue than gender in 2016

Printed from: https://newbostonpost.com/2016/02/26/poll-this-is-the-more-potent-issue-than-gender-in-2016/

WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton could be the nation’s first female president. Bernie Sanders warns of the role of super PACs in politics. While the two themes have become a big part of their primary contest, Americans view the issues very differently.

Nineteen percent of Americans say they would be more likely to vote for a presidential candidate if the person is a woman, according to a new Associated Press-GfK poll, while 64 percent say a candidate’s gender has no bearing on their vote.

In a sign of Sanders’ potent message on political money, the poll finds that 46 percent say they’re more likely to vote for a candidate who doesn’t want outside groups supporting his or her campaign. Only 13 percent are less likely to vote for a candidate like that and 38 percent says it makes no difference.

Sanders notes his opposition to super PACs at every event and rails against the influence of “millionaires and billionaires” in the political system. His robust online fundraising operation has drawn more than 4 million contributions since last spring and his average donation of $27 is so well-known among his supporters they often shout out the number when he talks about it during rallies.

Clinton is more overt about her attempt to break the glass ceiling compared to her 2008 presidential campaign, when she emphasized her experience and toughness. She often tells audiences that she’s not asking for their vote “simply because I’m a woman” but because she would bring the views and perspective of a woman to the White House, pointing to the deal-making bipartisan work by female senators as an example of what it might offer to the country.

“Hillary Clinton certainly doesn’t expect any woman to vote for her because she’s a woman. She wants people to vote for her because she’s going to make a difference in their lives,” said Clinton’s chief strategist, Joel Benenson, during an appearance Thursday at the American Enterprise Institute.

The poll suggested that as Clinton navigates the primary against Sanders, she cannot rely heavily on her potential to become the first woman to win the White House. In the first three contests, Sanders has won an overwhelming support among young voters, including women, while Clinton has generated enthusiasm among older voters, including women from the Baby Boomer generation.

Among Democrats, the poll showed that 28 percent said they’re more likely to vote for a female president, including 12 percent who said they’re much more likely to do so. But about 64 percent of Democrats said it made no difference. The poll also found that women were not significantly more likely than men to say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who is a woman.

“There are other issues — qualifications, experience. That’s my point of view at this point,” said Maria Valdez-Fisher, 70, a poll respondent from Brownsville, Texas, who said she is volunteering for Clinton’s campaign ahead of the state’s March 1 primary. Citing the importance of electability, Valdez-Fisher said, “I believe she’s the only one who can beat a Republican as opposed to Bernie.”

For Sanders, his anti-establishment message has touched a nerve at a time when many voters are wary of special interests and the influence of Wall Street. Among Democrats, 42 percent said that refusing outside groups’ support is a positive and 17 percent considered it to be a negative.

The poll also showed businessman Donald Trump’s staying power, as 56 percent of Republicans surveyed said a candidate’s decision to refuse the support of outside groups would make them more likely to vote for that candidate. Trump has repeatedly argued that his vast wealth allows him to self-fund his campaign and not be beholden to outside interests. The poll found just 8 percent said it would make them less likely to vote for a candidate.

Joe Barreiro, 61, a Democrat from Joliet, Illinois, said he was leaning toward Sanders in his state’s primary next month in part because the Vermont senator has shunned outside money.

“It’s out of hand because the amount of the money being spent on elections is unbelievable,” he said. “It’s not a quid pro quo but there are obvious influences when you supply that kind of money to a candidate.”