Advertisement

Typical Town Reveals Issues, Motives in '60

Does the fact that the question of religion is generally shrugged off and occasionally met with hostility indicate that it is a decisive factor that voters are embarrassed to discuss? Or does it simply mean that people are tired of hearing about the whole thing and will vote as they please without paying the slightest attention to religion? One tends to hope that the latter interpretation is correct, but fears that the former is more likely.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the campaign detected by the survey team is the degree to which voters are returning to their traditional party allegiances, a phenomenon that augurs well for the Democrats. President Eisenhower scored two sweeping victories because he was able to disassociate himself from the Republican Party and score heavily with Democrats and independents; there is little indication that Nixon has been able to make a similar impact.

Of those voters who classified themselves as Democrats, or who by their answers to questions indicated Democratic leanings, 73.5 per cent preferred Kennedy, 14.3 per cent Nixon, and 12.2 per cent undecided. Nixon ran even more strongly among Republicans than his opponent did among Democrats; the vice-president captured 90 per cent of the Republic

The CRIMSON wishes to thank Professor V. O. Key for his advice in preparing the survey. can vote. Independents who had made up their minds were voting 2 to 1 for Kennedy.

This tendency to vote the party rather than the man is unusual in a town like Brooklyn with a long history of ticket-splitting (two years after giving Eisenhower a whooping vote of confidence, the voters returned Democratic Governor Abraham Ribicoff to office with just as handsome a majority). It would seem to indicate that, despite the publicity and exposure given both candidates, neither has succeeded in impressing his personality upon the voters.

Advertisement

A patron at Eddie's Bar offered this reason for the lack of passion for either candidate: "They're both liars. I'm not going to vote for either one this time. Neither of those guys is qualified to be President of the United States." This was not the majority view, however; for every voter displaying a lack of enthusiasm for both men, the survey found at least two who said that "they're both qualified men." A barber in the Quebec section of town called the electorate "confused." He said, "No real issue separates Nixon and Kennedy. They're a couple of very good men." To resolve this confusion, he said, "most people are voting their habits."

Even those expressing approval of both candidates seemed detached from their favorite. Kennedy won approval for his intelligence, vigor, and overall "polish," but when asked to state their major reason for preferring the Senator, most voters either shrugged or said "I'm a Democrat." Nixon fans reacted similarly. While citing the Vice-President's experience and maturity as the most compelling factor affecting their vote, at least half of the voters preferring Nixon spoke more favorably about the Republican and unfavorably about the Democratic Party than they did about their own candidate.

Little Disfavor of Nixon

Of the two candidates, Kennedy seems to have rubbed more voters the wrong way than has Nixon. A few Democrats spoke of the vice-president's "evasiveness" and "double talk," but many more Nixon supporters called Kennedy hasty, glib, and "too quick with the answers."

The lack of commitment becomes more clear upon examination of answers to the question "Would you say it makes a lot of difference who wins, or not too much difference?" More than half of the respondents indicated that the outcome of the election would make little difference. This was especially true among the Kennedy adherents; 27 of the 44 who preferred Kennedy felt that the outcome of the race would not make much difference. Nixon supporters were a bit more concerned, but the majority of them also doubted that the election returns would affect them very much. A 60-year-old business executive said, "I'll still have to work for a living and I'm too old to go to war, so I doubt that it will affect me."

In other parts of the country, the failure of the candidates to stir up fervor and evoke an emotional response has been attributed, in part, to the annoyance of those whose pre-convention favorites failed to get the nomination. Such is not the case in Brooklyn. Although about 1/4 of those questioned mentioned in response to a specific question that they would have preferred to see another candidate nominated, very few seemed particularly upset about the fact that their choice had failed. In half the cases, the name mentioned was that of Henry Cabot Lodge, who seems to have support among Republicans and Democrats. Only two voters would have preferred Adlai Stevenson, four would have preferred Nelson Rockefeller, and two Barry Gold water.

Little Mention of Johnson

In contrast to Lodge, the Democratic candidate for Vice-President seems to have had little impact on the voters. Almost none of the Kennedy supporters ever mentioned Lyndon Johnson's name(in contrast to several favorable references to Lodge), and only four of the Nixon voters talked about the Senate Majority Leader.

There is, however, one candidate who would have little trouble in carrying Brooklyn were he a candidate--President Eisenhower. In answer to the question: "Have you generally approved or disapproved of the job Eisenhower has done in the past eight years?", four out of every five expressed approval. Usually the reaction was mild; those who were emphatic in their admiration for the President were few in number as those who disapproved. Most of the voters echoed the sentiments of a technician who had voted for Stevenson in 1956 and plans to vote for Kennedy this time. "He's done as good a job as anybody could have done," she said. "I can't kick."

Combined with the relative lack of fervor for the candidates, this general respect for and approval of the President raises what may be a crucial issue when the voters step into the voting booths next Tuesday. In these dying days of the campaign, Mr. Eisenhower has taken off the kid gloves and is in there swinging for his party. Will this increased activity suffice to woo some of the luke warm support away from Kennedy and push the undecided voters into Nixon's camp? Undoubtedly, a few Kennedy partisans will be forced to reexamine their choice as a result of the President's efforts. But in the main these people are Democrats who, after an eight-year flirtation with the enemy are somewhat relieved to be able to return to the fold once again. Although the joint television appearances apparently have erased the image of Nixon as a sinister and tricky individual, there is little evidence that his personality has had any great impact on Democratic voters.

As far as the undecided voters are concerned, the survey team found this bloc neither as large nor as enigmatic as other polls have found it to be. About ten per cent of the voters had not yet made up their minds. The interviewers found that the people in this group were, on the whole, less concerned and less interested than those who had decided, and therefore less likely to vote. Only half of them had seen any of the television debates--as opposed to more than three quarters of the committed voters), and most of them had little to say about the issues or personalities involved in the comparing. Significantly, none of the undecided voters, or those who refused to announce their intentions, knew the names of either candidate for Congressman-at-large, and only three know the name of either candidate for Congress.

Nevertheless, unconcerned voters go to the polls too, and it is possible that their vote could be heavily influenced by the President. The degree to which the Eisenhower many will rub off on Nixon, and the eventual effort of the religious issue are the two great in ponderables of this campaign. Together, they could well stem the Kennedy tide that new paper men around the country have been porting. On the other hand, the religious issue cuts both ways, and if anti-Catholic as managers to repel enough Catholics as anti-bigots, that plus the general majority superior organizational strength which Democrats enjoy could be enough to put Kennedy over.

As Brooklyn goes, so goes the nation. But how will Brooklyn go? On the basis of the weeks of study, we can only conclude with to rather evasive but nonetheless reasonable statement that it will be very, very close.TOWN HALL IN BROOKLYN CONNECTIOUT "So goes the nation?"

Advertisement