Rasmussen: Only 8% Rate National Security as Top Voting Issue

[sailingaway]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2011/only_8_rate_national_security_as_top_voting_issue


Just eight percent (8%) of voters nationwide currently rate national security issues such as the War on Terror as their top voting issue. That’s down from 20% on Election Day 2008 when Barack Obama was elected and down from 41% on Election Day 2004 when George W. Bush was reelected.

The relative unimportance of national security issues helps explain why President Obama’s overall job approval rating showed little lasting change despite overwhelmingly positive reviews for the mission that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Rasmussen Reports tracking data shows that 46% now rate the economy as their top voting issue, a figure that has remained fairly constant during Obama’s time in office. When Bush was reelected in 2004, just 26% rated the economy as their top issue. The importance of economic issues grew when the recession arrived. Daily consumer tracking shows that the number of Americans who rate their own personal finances as good or excellent has fallen since Obama’s inauguration and even more sharply since the fall of 2008.

[heavenlyboy34]

And what is Rasmussen's record in regards to its accuracy? (seriously, I don't know) /curious

[sailingaway]

And what is Rasmussen's record in regards to its accuracy? (seriously, I don't know) /curious

Pretty good. There is a dispute with dem polling sites that say R is gop friendly, but it seems to be that R usually uses the 'likely voter' model on candidate questions and Dem polling companies use 'registered voter' or 'all adults' until 90 days before an election. Voting patterns being what they are 'likely voter' gives a more conservative result. But they are one of the big ones.

[angelatc]

I like how they call the wars National Security issues, and not foreign policy.

[sailingaway]

I like how they call the wars National Security issues, and not foreign policy.

as far as I am concerned national security issues being low means 'get rid of TSA' too.

[AuH20]

National security is a loser issue at this stage. The main issues are jobs and taxes.
It's amusing that the folks at Fox attempt to make national security this paramount issue in the debates, which shows their bias against RP.

[freshjiva]

I'm not sure how to interpret this:

1) Does this mean Ron Paul can hammer home the fact that he's the only legitimate candidate to bring the troops home and end the wars, and thereby secure a large voting block (i.e. 92% of Americans who say National Security is no longer a top priority)

or

2) Does this mean Ron Paul should minimize the foreign policy critique and focus on pro-growth initiatives?

[sailingaway]

If they ever give him economic questions he should show he has the answer to issues that are worrying people -- in so much as there is a government answer (often - get out of the way.) However, his social security/medicare answer includes NEEDING the funds from overseas spending so that will come into it.

[AuH20]

I'm not sure how to interpret this:

1) Does this mean Ron Paul can hammer home the fact that he's the only legitimate candidate to bring the troops home and end the wars, and thereby secure a large voting block (i.e. 92% of Americans who say National Security is no longer a top priority)

or

2) Does this mean Ron Paul should minimize the foreign policy critique and focus on pro-growth initiatives?

Choice 2 every minute of the waking day. He loses votes every second he talks about foreign policy because it doesn't personally affect citizens. That's why it's so low on the issue totem pole.

[freshjiva]

He loses votes every second he talks about foreign policy because it doesn't personally affect citizens. That's why it's so low on the issue totem pole.

But maybe that's why it can sell. If ending the wars barely affects the daily lives of people, what better way to ease the federal deficit? Austerity without cutting anything seniors or the poor rely on. $500B/yr in annual savings means we can eliminate cap gains taxes AND slash personal income taxes by 25%.

[sailingaway]

But maybe that's why it can sell. If ending the wars barely affects the daily lives of people, what better way to ease the federal deficit? Austerity without cutting anything seniors or the poor rely on. $500B/yr in annual savings means we can eliminate cap gains taxes AND slash personal income taxes by 25%.

That is the point I have been waiting for him to make clear. We need money and can't have both. Medicare will fall apart if we keep spending on military adventures that are not necessary for our national security. We can cut hundreds of billions every year there and use it to.... fix the programs they DO care about.