Opting Out of Public Funding Unlikely to Hurt Obama

[Hope And Change]

Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters
June 19, 2008

Do you favor or oppose public funding of Presidential Campaigns?

Favor
30%

Oppose
46%

Not Sure
24%




Opting Out of Public Funding Unlikely to Hurt Obama


Friday, June 20, 2008

Despite all the agonized media coverage of Barack Obama’s decision to opt out of public funding for Election 2008, the decision is likely to have little impact on Obama’s standing with voters. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that just 30% of voters favor public funding and just 16% say it is Very Important in determining their vote. These results are consistent with earlier polling on the topic.

Although it costs them nothing, very few taxpayers even bother to check off the box on their tax form designating money to the Presidential campaign fund.

One reason voters remain unenthusiastic about public funding is that they don’t see it as a way to reduce corruption. Seventy-four percent (74%) believe that rich people and special interest groups will find way to get around any campaign finance regulations to influence politicians. Only 13% disagree. This, too, is consistent with earlier research showing that voters have a healthy skepticism of the process—57% say it’s not possible to run a Presidential campaign without ties to lobbyists and most say that either Obama or McCain will probably be influenced by lobbyists.

Voters overwhelmingly believe the federal government has become a special interest group that looks out primarily for its own interests. Only 17% say that the government today reflects the will of the people.

The new survey finds that, by a two-to-one margin, voters reject the notion that a candidate’s ability to raise money is a reflection of popular support. Fifty-one percent (51%) of voters correctly identified Obama as the candidate who opted out of public funding while 14% thought it was McCain.

Obama announced his decision to opt out of public funding yesterday in a video e-mailed to supporters. The timing of that decision has already provided a short-term benefit by shifting the discussion away from energy topics. McCain’s support for offshore oil drilling, announced earlier this week, has proven to be surprisingly popular on a topic that is very important to voters. For the Obama campaign, it is much better to discuss campaign finance issues which generate little public passion.

more...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/opting_out_of_public_funding_unlikely_to_hurt_obama

[tekisui]

1. By rejecting PACs and Lobbyist,

Obama is funded Publicly. Unlike mcDubya.

[Raine]

2. Agreed. I really don't think the public

cares that much about funding. It seems like election after election the public isn't that interested in where the money comes from.

[LiberalFighter]

3. Gibson on ABC questioning why Obama needs so much money

I would ask why questioning the funding when they didn't when Bush ran in 2004?

Bush - $367,227,801
Kerry - $326,236,288

[last1standing]

4. Of course it won't hurt him.

No one bases their vote on whether the candidate took government funds. If they did everyone would take them, not just candidates who can't raise money. Obama made the right decision and as much as the pundits cry, he'll still bring in up to five times the cash McCain can and none of it will be from PACs and lobbyists. That's what bothers so many on the right.

[musicblind]

5. Yeah, I think this is going to HELP Obama!

He is going to have so much money McCain will go cross eyed.


I hope.

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

6. Obama will have the money to contest every state he wants to

I'm sure when John McCain is running all over North Carolina in October trying to avoid being the new Goldwater, the commentariat will still be questioning Obama's decision.