The Times Poll : Zschau’s Momentum Paring Cranston Lead

With only about two weeks remaining before Election Day, veteran Sen. Alan Cranston is clinging to a narrow seven-point lead over fast-gaining Rep. Ed Zschau, who for the first time in the long Senate campaign has solidified his own Republican base, The Los Angeles Times Poll has found.

No longer quite the enigma to voters that he once was--thanks to a $2.5-million barrage of television advertising last month--Zschau now is in a position where he can overtake Cranston by maintaining the momentum he has been showing down the stretch drive of the race.

What Cranston has going for him, The Times Poll observed, is the voters’ tremendous respect for his experience.

Experience ‘Most Important’

A senator for three terms, spanning almost 18 years, and currently the Senate Minority Whip, Cranston is favored by 8 of 10 voters who list “experience” as “the single most important quality” they consider when deciding which candidate to support.

On the other hand, voters who mostly take into consideration a candidate’s “political philosophy” and “fresh, young ideas” side by large margins with Zschau.

“Cranston’s experience and Zschau’s ‘young ideas’ are two sides of the same coin,” said Times Poll Director I. A. Lewis. “They are different attitudes toward the age issue, which is playing an important background role in this Senate campaign.”

Cranston is 72 and generally thought by political strategists to be vulnerable because of the voters habitual quest for a new face, particularly in a heavy media-oriented state like California. Zschau, a two-term congressman for four years from Los Altos, is 46.

The Times Poll interviewed 1,594 registered California voters by telephone for six days ending last Thursday. The margin of error for this size survey is 3% in either direction.

Among those interviewed, Lewis selected 990 who seemed to be the most likely actually to vote on Nov. 4. This judgment was reached after analyzing people’s answers to a series of questions designed to determine their past voting behavior and stated intentions on Election Day.

3 Minor Candidates

Among the “most likely” voters, Cranston led Zschau by 45% to 38%, with 16% undecided. The margin of error for this size group is 4%.

Times interviewers also offered voters the names of three minor party candidates who will be on the ballot: Libertarian Breck McKinley, American Independent Edward Vallen and Paul Kangas of the Peace and Freedom Party. They received 1% among them.

Zschau’s momentum since The Times Poll conducted a similar survey Sept. 5-9 can be measured in two ways: with his progress among the “most likely” voters, where he closed Cranston’s lead by 10 points, and also among all those registered. In this survey, Cranston led Zschau by six points among all registered voters--40% to 34%, with 25% undecided and 1% for the others. That represents a nine-point narrowing of the gap for Zschau.

Another illustration of Zschau momentum was that nearly one-third of his supporters had decided to vote for him within the last month. Less than one-fifth of Cranston’s supporters had sided with him during this period of heavy campaigning. Conversely, half of the incumbent’s supporters said they actually had decided to vote for him more than six months ago, and the vast majority of these “always knew” they would back him.

When The Times interviewed Californians in September, Zschau was having trouble even winning the votes of his own party. Fewer than half the Republicans were supporting him. But this has dramatically changed, due probably in large part to two factors: the natural tendency of Republicans, in the end, to support one of their own--the so-called “return of the native,” as pollsters describe it--and an abrupt strategy switch to more aggressive anti-Cranston campaigning.

In this survey, Zschau was supported by two-thirds of the Republicans. Fewer than 1 in 5 sided with Cranston. Zschau also had a slight edge among independent voters, who frequently determine the difference on Election Day. But among Democrats, Cranston had a big 4-1 lead.

One advantage Cranston has is that his support, built over a political career of four decades, is much firmer than Zschau’s. Among Cranston’s supporters, 72% were “certain” they would vote for him. Just 58% of Zschau’s supporters were “certain” of their vote.

There also was another measurement of Cranston’s strong and Zschau’s soft support: Among Cranston voters, 63% had a “very favorable” impression of him. Just 26% of the Zschau voters had a “very favorable” impression of their candidate.

The impression of Cranston among all likely voters was 61% favorable, 36% unfavorable. For Zschau, it was 50% favorable, 33% unfavorable.

Perhaps also significant for Zschau, President Reagan still is highly regarded by his fellow Californians. Their impression of the President was 68% favorable, 30% unfavorable. Reagan intends to campaign in California on behalf of Zschau about the time polls open, urging voters to help him retain a Republican-controlled Senate during the final two years of his presidency.

Cranston’s biggest plus in the view of voters, by far, is his experience. Read a list of nine “qualities” of a candidate and asked which they regard as “the single most important” one in deciding who to support, half of the senator’s voters said “experience.” Only 1 in 20 of Zschau’s supporters cited this quality.

Zschau’s big pluses were “political philosophy,” chosen by a third of his supporters, and “fresh, young ideas,” cited by more than a fifth. Just 1 in 100 of Cranston’s voters said they liked him because of his “fresh, young ideas.”

Ironically, the campaign issues helping these two Senate candidates the most have little, if anything, to do with the office they are running for.

The issue that separated Cranston from Zschau to the incumbent’s particular advantage was Proposition 65, the anti-toxics measure that would be implemented by state government if approved by voters. Cranston strongly supports the highly popular initiative; Zschau is opposed.

By the same token, Zschau is helped substantially by his strong opposition to state Supreme Court Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird’s bid for reelection. Cranston is neutral. To a lesser extent, Zschau also is aided by his staunch support of the death penalty, which Cranston long has opposed.

Zschau and Cranston supporters alike placed “drugs” near or at the top of their list of “most important issues.” But, despite Zschau TV commercials attacking Cranston’s voting record on drugs, this did not seem to be a cutting issue in the contest.

Cranston has accused Zschau in TV commercials of “flip-flopping” on issues. And, indeed, when asked which candidate “has the clearest focus on his own personal objectives and doesn’t flip-flop on the issues,” Cranston got the nod by a 4-3 ratio. But this did not appear to be particularly salient when stacked against other campaign factors.

The two candidates were virtually tied among Anglo voters. Minorities therefore were providing Cranston with the margin of his slim lead--2 to 1 among Latinos and 10 to 1 among blacks.

Around the state, Cranston led roughly 4 to 3 in Los Angeles County, by a whisker in the rest of Southern California and 5 to 3 in the San Francisco Bay Area. The two were tied in the remainder of Northern California.

THE RACE FOR U.S. SENATOR These Los Angeles Times Poll figures reflect responses to a telephone survey between Oct. 11 and Oct. 16. of 990 likely California voters.

Voters were asked which candidate . . .

Cranston Zschau

Neither