Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Upper Midwesterns Back McCain on Foreign Policy; Domestic Policy Mixed

Bookmark and Share

A series of SurveyUSA polls across the Upper Midwest finds registered voters more confident John McCain can better handle foreign policy issues and immigration, while Barack Obama has the edge on health care. In a surprising turn, Obama ends up with a draw against McCain on economic issues.

The polls, conducted in Iowa, Minnesota, and Wisconsin from August 15-17, bolster the conventional wisdom that McCain’s forte is foreign policy. In all three states, registered voters believe the Arizona Senator would do a better job handling the war in Iraq and fighting terrorism.

Despite opposition to the war in Iraq across the Upper Midwest in recent years, McCain’s support for the war – and his steadfast support for the troop surge in 2007 – does not seem to have damaged the GOP nominee. McCain is viewed as better equipped to handle the war in Iowa (49 to 42 percent), Minnesota (46 to 43 percent), and Wisconsin (50 to 41 percent). This is not a good sign for Obama, whose centerpiece foreign policy argument is that he has better judgment than McCain (Obama was opposed to the war back in 2003).

McCain – and Republican candidates generally – have held an advantage over Democrats when it comes to handling the war on terrorism, and the SurveyUSA poll supports that trend. McCain holds a double-digit advantage over Obama in all three states on the terrorism issue: 53 to 36 percent in Iowa, 50 to 36 percent in Minnesota, and 53 to 35 percent in Wisconsin.

On the domestic front, although McCain as recent as early 2007 shared similar views on immigration policy to Obama, the Arizona Senator now holds a clear edge on the issue (McCain has since adopted a more hard-line policy emphasizing border enforcement first, consonant with his Party and Americans overall). McCain holds a double-digit advantage on immigration in Wisconsin (49 to 36 percent), and a somewhat smaller lead on the issue in Iowa (45 to 38 percent) and Minnesota (44 to 37 percent).

To no surprise, Barack Obama holds a very large advantage on the issue of handling health care. Health care was a centerpiece to Obama’s primary campaign victory, and has been an issue Democrats have long held the upper hand against the GOP. McCain has also been taken to task by pundits for his lack of a vision on domestic policy issues. Obama holds a double-digit lead over McCain on health care in Iowa (51 to 33 percent), Minnesota (52 to 37 percent) and Wisconsin (48 to 38 percent).

But when it comes to economic issues, Obama has not been able to leverage the unease Upper Midwesterns are feeling with high gas prices and difficulties with the home mortgage sector under the current Republican administration. Obama holds only a slight advantage over McCain on the economy in Iowa (47 to 43 percent) and Minnesota (46 to 44 percent), with McCain slightly on top in Wisconsin (45 to 43 percent). Pundits have criticized Obama for not mapping out enough specifics in his economic plan.

The SurveyUSA polls confirm that the Upper Midwest is the battleground for the 2008 presidential campaign.

Previous post: Obama-Biden: Familiar Bedfellows...Though You'd Never Know It
Next post: Trust in Government Drops By Nearly Half In Minnesota Since 2004

5 Comments


  • The competition between Obama and McCain is really colossal. The question for this is not, who’s going to be the next president? Instead, who’s the best leader between the two? Election is really a competition, but I hope win or lose, they would still continue on helping for economic development. I hope so.

    But then, let see what will be the outcome of this year’s presidential election. Our future will depends on our decisions.

    Post Courtesy of Personal Money Store Professional

  • It is interesting after the election to see how much support McCain lost in these states due to the massive issues surrounding the economy. I would speculate that had the economy not become the major issue in the last six weeks of the campaign, that he would have carried these states and perhaps the White House.

  • It is interesting after the election to see how much support McCain lost in these states due to the massive issues surrounding the economy. I would speculate that had the economy not become the major issue in the last six weeks of the campaign, that he would have carried these states and perhaps the White House.

  • McCain lost for one simple reason. Obama was a far better person for the Presidency of the United States who was also a far better public speaker. McCain had one upside to his campaign, which was foreign policy and he beat it too death. McCain failed to understand that the nation no longer wanted any part of this massive mistake of a war in Iraq.

  • The competition between Obama and McCain is really colossal. The question for this is not, who’s going to be the next president? Instead, who’s the best leader between the two?test

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Strange Bedfellows: A Historical Review of Divided US Senate Delegations

    Over the last century, states have been twice as likely to be represented by a single political party in the U.S. Senate than have a split delegation; only Delaware, Iowa, and Illinois have been divided more than half the time.

    Political Crumbs

    Haugh to Reach New Heights

    The North Carolina U.S. Senate race between Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan and Republican Thom Tillis may go down to the wire next Tuesday, but along the way Libertarian nominee Sean Haugh is poised to set a state record for a non-major party candidate. Haugh, who previously won 1.5 percent of the vote in the Tar Heel State's 2002 race, has polled at or above five percent in 10 of the last 12 polls that included his name. The current high water mark for a third party or independent candidate in a North Carolina U.S. Senate election is just 3.3 percent, recorded by Libertarian Robert Emory back in 1992. Only one other candidate has eclipsed the three percent mark - Libertarian Christopher Cole with 3.1 percent in 2008.


    Gubernatorial Highs and Lows

    Two sitting governors currently hold the record for the highest gubernatorial vote ever received in their respective states by a non-incumbent: Republican Matt Mead of Wyoming (65.7 percent in 2010) and outgoing GOPer Dave Heineman of Nebraska (73.4 percent in 2006). Republican Gary Herbert of Utah had not previously won a gubernatorial contest when he notched a state record 64.1 percent for his first victory in 2010, but was an incumbent at the time after ascending to the position in 2009 after the early departure of Jon Huntsman. Meanwhile, two sitting governors hold the record in their states for the lowest mark ever recorded by a winning gubernatorial candidate (incumbent or otherwise): independent-turned-Democrat Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island (36.1 percent in 2010) and Democrat Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (47.8 percent in 2013).


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting