The Race for the Republican Nomination Bob Dole Still

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Race for the Republican Nomination Bob Dole Still The Earris fill THE HARRIS POLL 1996 #6 I For Release: Monday, January 29, 1996 THE RACE FOR THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION BOB DOLE STILL FAR AHEAD AS STEVE FORBES LEADS 'THE REST OF THE PACK by Humphrey Taylor Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole is still far ahead of the field as the first primary elections for the Republican nomination come closer. In a national poll of Republicans L and Independent voters, Dole wins 41% of the vote, with Steve Forbes a distant but clear second at 16%. Among Republicans alone, Senator Dole does even better, winniug 46% of ,their support, with Forbes receiving 13Ol0. These are the results of a nationwide Harris Poll of 598 Republicans and Independents surveyed between January 18 and January 22, 1996. The emergence of Steve Forbes as the principal challenger to Bob Dole has sharply reduced the likelihood that any other candidate can present a serious challenge in this race. Pat Buchanan (now at 1 I%), Phil Gramm (at 8%) and Lamar Alexander (at 4%) are the big losers from the Forbes candidacy. Forbes seems to be the beneficiary of several factors. He has shown that heavy advertising can work wonders. He is a fresh face, and a non-politician when experienced politicians are widely held in poor regard. His flat tax proposal is appealing to some people because of its simplicity, and because it sounds like a tax- cut. Humphrey Taylor is the Chairman and CEO of Louis Harris and Associates, lnc. Louis Harris & Associates, Inc. 11 1 Fifth Avenue, NYC (21 2) 539-9600 TABLE 1 FAMILIARITY WITH NINE POSSIBLE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES FOR PRESIDENT Base: Republican or Independent 4' "I'm going to read you some names of potential Republican presidential candidates. Are you familiar with (READ LIST), or not?" 1995 1996 April July October December January Yo Yo Yo Yo Yo Those familiar with: Bob Dole Pat Buchanan Phil Gramm Steve Forbes N/A N/A 44' 3 7 52 Lamar Alexander 2 3 24 2 3 3 1 3 3 Robert Dornan Dick Lugar Alan Keyes Asked as "Malcolm Steve Forbes" in the late October Survey TABLE 2 FIRST CHOICE FOR REPUBLIC NOMINEE FOR PRESIDENT Base: Republicans and Independents "Who's your first choice for the Republican presidential nomination in 1996?" 1995 1996 April July October December January Yo % Yo Yo Yo Bob Dole 47 Phil Gramm 9 Pat Buchanan 5 Steve Forbes NIA Lamar Alexander 2 Dick Lugar 1 Alan Keyes NIA Robert Dornan 1 Not sure 25 'Less than .5% TABLE 3 REPUBLICAN FIRST CHOICE AMONG REPUBLICANS January 18-22 Yo Bob Dole Phil Gramm Pat Buchanan Steve Forbes Lamar Alexander Dick Lugar Alan Keyes Robert Dornan Not sure METHODOLOGY This Harris Poll was conducted by telephone within the United States between January 18 and 22, among a nationwide cross section of 598 adults. Figures for age, sex, race, education and number of adults in household were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. In theory, with a sample of this size, one can say with 95 percent certainty that the results have a staZistical precision of plus or minus 4 percentage points of what they would be if the entire adult population had been polled with complete accuracy. Unfortunately, there are several other possible sources of error in all polls or surveys that are probably more serious than theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include refusals to be interviewed (non-response), question wording and question order, interviewer bias, weighting by demographic control data and screening (e.g., for likely voters). It is difficult or impossible to quantify the errors that may result from these factors. This statement conforms to the principles of disclosure of National Council on Public Polls. Contact Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., Information Services, 111 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10003, (21 2) 539-9697, for complete demographic details for the questions in this release. Compuserve address: 76702,2063 Other E-mail: [email protected] COPYRIGHT 1996 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC. ISSN 0895-7983 .
Recommended publications
  • 1996 Republican Party Primary Election March 12, 1996
    Texas Secretary of State Antonio O. Garza, Jr. Race Summary Report Unofficial Election Tabulation 1996 Republican Party Primary Election March 12, 1996 President/Vice President Precincts Reporting 8,179 Total Precincts 8,179 Percent Reporting100.0% Vote Total % of Vote Early Voting % of Early Vote Delegates Lamar Alexander 18,615 1.8% 11,432 5.0% Patrick J. 'Pat' Buchanan 217,778 21.4% 45,954 20.2% Charles E. Collins 628 0.1% 153 0.1% Bob Dole 566,658 55.6% 126,645 55.8% Susan Ducey 1,123 0.1% 295 0.1% Steve Forbes 130,787 12.8% 27,206 12.0% Phil Gramm 19,176 1.9% 4,094 1.8% Alan L. Keyes 41,697 4.1% 5,192 2.3% Mary 'France' LeTulle 651 0.1% 196 0.1% Richard G. Lugar 2,219 0.2% 866 0.4% Morry Taylor 454 0.0% 124 0.1% Uncommitted 18,903 1.9% 4,963 2.2% Vote Total 1,018,689 227,120 Voter Registration 9,698,506 % VR Voting 10.5 % % Voting Early 2.3 % U. S. Senator Precincts Reporting 8,179 Total Precincts 8,179 Percent Reporting100.0% Vote Total % of Vote Early Voting % of Early Vote Phil Gramm - Incumbent 837,417 85.0% 185,875 83.9% Henry C. (Hank) Grover 71,780 7.3% 17,312 7.8% David Young 75,976 7.7% 18,392 8.3% Vote Total 985,173 221,579 Voter Registration 9,698,506 % VR Voting 10.2 % % Voting Early 2.3 % 02/03/1998 04:16 pm Page 1 of 45 Texas Secretary of State Antonio O.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Directory TEXAS
    252 Congressional Directory TEXAS TEXAS (Population 2000, 20,851,820) SENATORS PHIL GRAMM, Republican, of College Station, TX; born in Fort Benning, GA, July 8, 1942, son of Sergeant and Mrs. Kenneth M. Gramm; education: B.B.A. and Ph.D., economics, Univer- sity of Georgia, Athens, 1961–67; professor of economics, Texas A&M University, College Sta- tion, 1967–78; author of several books including: ‘‘The Evolution of Modern Demand Theory’’ and ‘‘The Economics of Mineral Extraction’’; Episcopalian; married Dr. Wendy Lee Gramm, of Waialua, HI, 1970; two sons: Marshall and Jeff; coauthor of the Gramm-Latta I Budget, the Gramm-Latta II Omnibus Reconciliation Act, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced budget bill and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Act; committees: ranking member, Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs; Budget; Finance; elected to the U.S. House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1978, 1980 and 1982; resigned from the House on January 5, 1983, upon being denied a seat on the House Budget Committee; reelected as a Republican in a special election on February 12, 1983; chairman, Republican Senate Steering Committee, 1997–2001; elected chairman, National Republican Senatorial Committee for the 1991–92 term, and reelected for the 1993–94 term; elected to the U.S. Senate on November 6, 1984; reelected to each suc- ceeding Senate term. Office Listings http://www.senate.gov/senator/gramm.html 370 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510–4302 .......................... (202) 224–2934 Chief of Staff.—Ruth Cymber. Legislative Director.—Steve McMillin. Press Secretary.—Lawrence A. Neal. State Director.—Phil Wilson. Suite 1500, 2323 Bryan, Dallas, TX 75201 ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • ("DSCC") Files This Complaint Seeking an Immediate Investigation by the 7
    COMPLAINT BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION CBHMISSIOAl INTRODUCTXON - 1 The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ("DSCC") 7-_. J _j. c files this complaint seeking an immediate investigation by the 7 c; a > Federal Election Commission into the illegal spending A* practices of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee (WRSCIt). As the public record shows, and an investigation will confirm, the NRSC and a series of ostensibly nonprofit, nonpartisan groups have undertaken a significant and sustained effort to funnel "soft money101 into federal elections in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended or "the Act"), 2 U.S.C. 5s 431 et seq., and the Federal Election Commission (peFECt)Regulations, 11 C.F.R. 85 100.1 & sea. 'The term "aoft money" as ueed in this Complaint means funds,that would not be lawful for use in connection with any federal election (e.g., corporate or labor organization treasury funds, contributions in excess of the relevant contribution limit for federal elections). THE FACTS IN TBIS CABE On November 24, 1992, the state of Georgia held a unique runoff election for the office of United States Senator. Georgia law provided for a runoff if no candidate in the regularly scheduled November 3 general election received in excess of 50 percent of the vote. The 1992 runoff in Georg a was a hotly contested race between the Democratic incumbent Wyche Fowler, and his Republican opponent, Paul Coverdell. The Republicans presented this election as a %ust-win81 election. Exhibit 1. The Republicans were so intent on victory that Senator Dole announced he was willing to give up his seat on the Senate Agriculture Committee for Coverdell, if necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 104 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 141 WASHINGTON, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 1995 No. 154 Senate (Legislative day of Monday, September 25, 1995) The Senate met at 9 a.m., on the ex- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, JUS- Mr. President, I intend to be brief, piration of the recess, and was called to TICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICI- and I note the presence of the Senator order by the President pro tempore ARY, AND RELATED AGENCIES from North Dakota here on the floor. I [Mr. THURMOND]. APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996 know that he needs at least 10 minutes The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The of the 30 minutes for this side. I just want to recap the situation as PRAYER clerk will report the pending bill. The assistant legislative clerk read I see this amendment. First of all, Mr. The Chaplain, Dr. Lloyd John as follows: President, the choice is clear here what Ogilvie, offered the following prayer: A bill (H.R. 2076) making appropriations we are talking about. The question is Let us pray: for the Department of Commerce, Justice, whether we will auction this spectrum off, which, according to experts, the Lord of history, God of Abraham and and State, the Judiciary and related agen- value is between $300 and $700 million, Israel, we praise You for answered cies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, and for other purposes. or it will be granted to a very large and prayer for peace in the Middle East very powerful corporation in America manifested in the historic peace treaty The Senate resumed consideration of for considerably less money.
    [Show full text]
  • Libertarians in Bush's World
    ESSAY ON LIBERTY+ LIBERTARIANS IN BUSH’S WORLD Todd Seavey* Imagine ordinary, non-ideological people hearing about an obscure politi- cal sect called libertarianism, which emphasizes self-ownership, property rights, resistance to tyranny and violence, the reduction of taxation and regulation, control over one’s own investments, and the de-emphasizing of litigation as a primary means of dispute resolution. Since this philosophy has very few adherents in the general population and is very much a minority position among intellectuals, one might expect proponents of the creed to count themselves lucky, given the likely alternatives, if the president of the country in which most of them live increasingly emphasized the themes of freedom and ownership in his major speeches; toppled brutal totalitarian regimes in two countries while hounding democracy-hating theocratic terrorists around the globe; cut taxes (despite howls even from some in the free-market camp that the cuts were too deep); called for simplification of the tax code; appointed relatively industry-friendly officials to major regulatory bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration despite frequent criti- cism by the media; proposed partially privatizing Social Security (America’s largest socialist boondoggle but one long regarded as sacrosanct by political analysts); and pushed tort reform to combat the chilling effect of lawsuits on doctors and manu- facturers. + Essays on Liberty is a continuing series of the Journal of Law & Liberty, dedicated to explorations of freedom and law from perspectives outside the legal academy. * Director of Publications for the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org, HealthFactsAnd- Fears.com), which does not necessarily endorse the views expressed here.
    [Show full text]
  • (Pdf) Download
    NATIONAL & LOCAL NEWS MEDIA TV, RADIO, PRINT & ONLINE SOURCES Master List - Updated 04/2019 Pain Warriors Unite Washington Post: Website: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/submit-an-op-ed/?utm_term=.d1efbe184dbb What are the guidelines for letter submissions? Email: [email protected] We prefer letters that are fewer than 200 words and take as their starting point an article or other item appearing in The Post. They may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name; anonymous letters and letters written under pseudonyms will not be considered. For verification purposes, they must also include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers, including a daytime telephone number. Writers should disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject matter of their letters. If sending email, please put the text of the letter in the body and do not send attachments; attachments will not be read. What are the guidelines for op-ed submissions? Submissions should be limited to 800 words. We consider only completed articles and cannot commit to, or provide guidance on, article proposals. Op-eds may not have been submitted to, posted to or published by any other media. They must include the writer's full name — anonymous op-eds or op-eds written under pseudonyms will not be considered. They also must include the writer's home address, email address and telephone numbers. Additionally, we ask that writers disclose any personal or financial interest in the subject at hand. Please use our op-ed submission form L.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservative Movement
    Conservative Movement How did the conservative movement, routed in Barry Goldwater's catastrophic defeat to Lyndon Johnson in the 1964 presidential campaign, return to elect its champion Ronald Reagan just 16 years later? What at first looks like the political comeback of the century becomes, on closer examination, the product of a particular political moment that united an unstable coalition. In the liberal press, conservatives are often portrayed as a monolithic Right Wing. Close up, conservatives are as varied as their counterparts on the Left. Indeed, the circumstances of the late 1980s -- the demise of the Soviet Union, Reagan's legacy, the George H. W. Bush administration -- frayed the coalition of traditional conservatives, libertarian advocates of laissez-faire economics, and Cold War anti- communists first knitted together in the 1950s by William F. Buckley Jr. and the staff of the National Review. The Reagan coalition added to the conservative mix two rather incongruous groups: the religious right, primarily provincial white Protestant fundamentalists and evangelicals from the Sunbelt (defecting from the Democrats since the George Wallace's 1968 presidential campaign); and the neoconservatives, centered in New York and led predominantly by cosmopolitan, secular Jewish intellectuals. Goldwater's campaign in 1964 brought conservatives together for their first national electoral effort since Taft lost the Republican nomination to Eisenhower in 1952. Conservatives shared a distaste for Eisenhower's "modern Republicanism" that largely accepted the welfare state developed by Roosevelt's New Deal and Truman's Fair Deal. Undeterred by Goldwater's defeat, conservative activists regrouped and began developing institutions for the long haul.
    [Show full text]
  • Patrick Joseph Buchanan, “Culture War Speech: Address to the Republican National Convention” (17 August 1992)
    Voices of Democracy 7 (2012): 47‐59 Miller 47 PATRICK JOSEPH BUCHANAN, “CULTURE WAR SPEECH: ADDRESS TO THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION” (17 AUGUST 1992) Eric C. Miller Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania Abstract: Patrick Buchanan's speech from the 1992 Republican National Convention is frequently cited as a definitive artifact of the culture wars of the late twentieth century. After challenging President George H.W. Bush in the Republican Primary, Buchanan agreed to endorse Bush in exchange for a primetime speaking slot at the RNC in Houston. Having attacked Bush over tax policy, Buchanan drew on social issues to stir passions and unite the GOP behind Bush's candidacy. Keywords: Buchanan, Bush, culture war, family values, Republican National Convention On August 17, 1992, conservative commentator Patrick J. Buchanan addressed the Republican National Convention, delivering a speech that would long be remembered as the definitive statement of the American "culture war." Diagnosing the national condition as one of spiritual decline, Buchanan neatly divided the American populace into two competing camps— one that was traditional, patriotic, and conservative, and another that was radical, deviant, and fiercely liberal. A vote for George H. W. Bush, Buchanan declared, was a vote for the former; a vote for William Jefferson Clinton was a vote for the latter. If Americans were to emerge from their spiritual descent and return to the "Judeo‐Christian" values upon which the nation was founded, it was vital that they support of the Republican ticket. Couched in the language of warfare, the stakes of Buchanan's vision were unmistakably high. But in order to understand Buchanan's argument—indeed, to understand why he was afforded a speaking slot at the RNC in the first place—one must first understand a few things about his life, career, politics, and the context in which these events unfolded.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tea Party and American Populism Today: Between Protest, Patriotism and Paranoia
    The American State – symposium Michael Minkenberg The Tea Party and American Populism Today: Between Protest, Patriotism and Paranoia Abstract This article takes a closer look at the Tea Party by adding a transatlantic perspective. Its aim is to show that the Tea Party is a genuine right-wing movement with strong affinities to the Republican Party which revives par- ticular American traditions of conservatism and the radical right. Its support base is not ‘the mainstream’ but a particular cross section of the white middle classes. In this, it is the American mirror image of many European parties and movements of the populist radical right which share the Tea Party’s anti-establishment message, its ultra-patriotism and ethnocentrism. It also shares some of its characteristics with the Christian Right with which it competes and cooperates when aiming at influencing the Republican Party and Washington while marking the merger of the Christian Right with Southern conservatism. Key words: Populism, American conservatism, radical right, Christian Right, Republican Party 1. Introduction “Keep your government hands off my Medicare!” (at a town hall meeting in South Carolina, quoted in Zernike 2011a, p. 135) After more than one and a half years of its existence and unmistakable presence in American politics, and of its accompanying scrutiny, the Tea Party movement remains a deeply ambivalent phenomenon. Ambivalent in terms of its independence as a movement or and its relationship to the Republican party, conservative business elites, or right-wing media; ambivalent in terms of its message, the kind of change it advocates in explicit de- marcation from the change its adherents attribute to President Obama; ambivalent about its social base as a true grass-roots or an elite-driven network of organizations and activ- ists, a middle class or cross-class movement (see Rahe 2011; Rasmussen/Schoen 2010; Williamson et al.
    [Show full text]
  • The Invisible Primary and the 1996 Presidential Nomination
    The Invisible Primary and the 1996 Presidential Nomination Thomas R. Marshall, University of Texas at Arlington The 1996 presidential nominations process will not begin with the first state primaries and caucuses. By January 1996 the candidates had already spent millions of dollars and thousands of days campaigning during the "in­ visible primary." The 1996 nominations race features several new prac­ tices—such as the front-loading of delegate-selection events, and the re- emergence of Washington insiders as the early GOP leaders. For the first time since 1964 the Democrat Party did not face a spirited nominations race. This article reviews the prenomination season for the 1996 presidential race with evidence available by early January 1996. Public Opinion Public opinion remained relatively stable during the 1995 "invisible primary," just as it typically has in recent presidential contests.1 Heavy spending in key primary and caucus states, debates among the candidates, and the entry and exit of candidates all failed to move public opinion polls during 1995. In the absence of saturation media coverage and media labeling of "winners" and "losers" in the early caucuses and primaries, few dramatic poll shifts appeared. The Republicans Throughout 1995, the Gallup Poll reported only slight changes in the first-choice preferences of self-identified Republicans and independents leaning Republicans. Between April 1995 and January 1996, front-runner Bob Dole’s support varied only from a low of 45 percent to a high of 51 percent. Support for Senator Phil Gramm varied only from a low of seven percent to a high of 13 percent.
    [Show full text]
  • Senator Dole FR: Kerry
    This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas http://dolearchives.ku.edu TO: Senator Dole FR: Kerry RE: Senator Gramm' s "Founding Member Me·eting" Monday, October 18 8:30 a.m. Mayflower Hotel *You will be meeting with approximately 70 big money donors to Phil Gramm in town for two days of speakers and events. *Senator McCain will be giving the group a tour of the Capitol on Sunday night. You are the first speaker on Monday. Others include Senators Simpson, Grassley, Hutchison, Mack and Bennett, Brent Scowcroft, and Congressman Armey. *They're looking for 5-10 minutes of informal remarks, followed by Q&A. Page 1 of 13 IJCT- 14- 1'3'33 12: HJ FRIJM FR!Et,ms UF F'H!L CiRHMM TO ~1d0d2243153 P . 02 This document is from the collections at the Dole Archives, University of Kansas GRhttp://dolearchives.ku.edu.. ~\lI\11 a '96 CO(vnv1rrTEE M E M 0 R A N D U M 1'0: Kerry FROM: Heather Hopkins DATE: October 14, 1993 RE: Senator Gramm's Founding Member Meeting Thank you for scheduling Senator Bob Dole as the breakfast speaker at Senator Grarnm's Founding Member Me~ting. I wanted to confirm the details: DATE: Monday, October 18, 1993 SITE: The Mayflower Hotel 1127 Connecticut Avenue, NW 202/347-3000 ROOM: The Chinese Room (On the lobby level, down the promenade) TIME: 8:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Heather Hopkins or Ann Miller will meet Se nator Dole in the front lobby of the hotel.
    [Show full text]
  • Fileprod-Prc-Dc\Peoplepress\Pew Projects
    FOR RELEASE: MONDAY, JANUARY 29, 1996 FORBES DRAWS EVEN WITH DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Kohut, Director Robert C. Toth, Senior Associate Kimberly Parker, Research Director Margaret Petrella, Survey Analyst Pew Research Center for The People & The Press 202/293-3126 http://www.people-press.org FORBES DRAWS EVEN WITH DOLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE Political newcomer Steve Forbes has moved into a statistical tie with Bob Dole for top honors in the New Hampshire primary. A Pew Research Center poll of 543 likely voters taken January 25-28 finds the millionaire publisher leading the Senator 29% to 24%, but the lead is within the poll's margin of sampling error. Well behind the two front runners are Lamar Alexander (11%), Pat Buchanan (11%), and Phil Gramm (10%), all in a statistical tie for third place. All other candidates register less than 5% support. Despite the big margin that separates Forbes and Dole from the second tier of candidates, voter attitudes in New Hampshire are highly volatile. Only a tiny minority of respondents describe themselves as strong supporters of any of the candidates (Dole 6%, Forbes 7%, Alexander 2%, Gramm 2%, and Buchanan 5%). There is also widespread discontent among New Hampshire voters with the Republican field, which is currently working to Forbes's advantage. A 64% majority of likely voters gave the Republican candidates as a group a negative rating of fair or poor. Forbes leads Dole by a 30% to 22% margin among these disaffected voters, while Dole leads 32% to 26% among voters who view the Republican field as good or excellent overall.
    [Show full text]