The Electability Test

By Laurence I. Barrett

"Electability" is a word in the political jargon that offends the ear and distracts primary voters from the parochial concerns that usually consume nominating politics. This year four candidates are nonetheless relying on the E word as a big part of their pitch, arguing that they can make it in November by reaching beyond their core supporters. A TIME poll taken last week by Yankelovich Clancy Shulman demonstrates that Bob Dole has the strongest claim to ecumenical appeal; Pat Robertson, Al Gore and Paul Simon have the least.

Dole's pragmatism and his knack for conveying gritty independence make the Senate Republican leader more appealing than his rivals to the opposition party. Among registered Democrats, 39% say they would consider voting for Dole. For George Bush, the figure is 26%, and for Pat Robertson only 14%. Similarly, when Democrats are asked who they think the strongest Republican candidate would be, 51% name Dole and 39% Bush.

Though the survey was taken just after the New Hampshire primary, when Dole received bad reviews for his harsh comments about Bush, the public seems to have paid little attention to that part of the media buzz. When all registered voters are asked whether they consider either Bush or Dole "too quick- tempered to be President," 43% say neither, 15% name Bush and 12% Dole. Though Bush had just received a snowstorm of favorable publicity for winning New Hampshire, his lead over Dole among likely Republican voters shrank from 25 points in January to 18 points last week. Dole, however, still faces serious obstacles. Bush's advantage over Dole is greatest in the South (53% vs. 23%), where the next major round will be fought.

Robertson, the former televangelist, might be doing Dole a service by eating into Bush's Southern strength. But though the South is Robertson's strongest geographical base, he draws only 15% of likely Republican voters there in TIME's poll. He also attracts wall-to-wall hostility. When registered voters from both parties are asked which candidates "would you definitely not vote for," Robertson tops the list with 72%. Only 17% say they would consider casting a ballot for him.

A charismatic Christian who uses fervent congregations as political beachheads, just as Jesse Jackson employs black churches, Robertson nonetheless has failed to unite even his own religious family. Likely Republican voters who describe themselves as Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christians divide 44% for Bush, 30% for Dole and only 14% for Robertson. Jackson attracts overwhelming support from blacks, churchly and secular, because his message is that of economic populism. Moralism dominates Robertson's pitch, even though he now avoids mentioning his long membership in the Baptist ministry.

Despite that ostentatious omission, Robertson cannot get far from the pulpit in the public's mind. Even Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, when asked if they are more or less likely to vote for him in view of his former status as a clergyman, answer "less likely" by 42% to 25%. Among all registered voters, the split is more negative, 46% to 19%. Yet Robertson can still be an important political player in some states. He has shown a great talent for squeezing the maximum turnout from his pool of sympathizers. Robertson also hopes to attract socially conservative Democrats who think all their national candidates are too liberal.

The Democrat trying to shuck that liberal image is Al Gore of Tennessee, who seeks a broad coalition in the political center. A fellow Senator, Paul Simon, argues that despite his record as an old-fashioned liberal, he has always attracted Republican votes in his home state of Illinois. TIME's poll had bad news for both. Among all registered voters, they scored close to the top of the "would not vote for" category, with 65% each. Republicans found them even less attractive (73% saying no to Gore, 71% to Simon), and registered Democrats gave them an identical vote of least confidence (62%).

For Simon, the results are cruelly frustrating. He got no boost at all from his respectable showings in Iowa and New Hampshire. Voters apparently have wearied of his bland image and vague proposals. In Gore's case, his stiff posture as the argumentative aginner in Democratic debates may be grating on the electorate

The two Democrats who have gained most are Michael Dukakis and Richard Gephardt, propelled by respective victories in New Hampshire and Iowa. Dukakis, fourth among likely Democratic voters in last month's TIME poll, reached the top of the list for the first time in a national survey. Gephardt rose from sixth place to third. Both fared relatively well on electability measurements. But before any Democrat starts humming Hail to the Chief, he should take note of the indecisiveness afflicting Democratic voters. Only one- third of them say they are certain about their present preferences. More than half say they are "only somewhat satisfied" or "not satisfied at all" with the current roster of candidates.

Republicans, meanwhile, are hardening their choices. Nearly half now say they are certain about their picks, vs. 29% in January. The difference is a function of stature and familiarity. Bush and Dole are universally known in their party and enjoy reputations as national figures. The Democratic candidates, perched lower on the political ladder, must still prove they are eligible to climb. Until they do, the rank and file will continue to write its preferences in sand rather than concrete.

CHART: TEXT NOT AVAILABLE

CREDIT: NO CREDIT

CAPTION: Which descriptions apply to these candidates?

DESCRIPTION: Ranks Democratic and Republican presidential candidates in several categories.