THE TIMES POLL : Feinstein Clings to Slim Lead Over Huffington

Republican Senate challenger Mike Huffington has done significant damage to Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s public image, but after months of television commercials attacking her, the incumbent Democrat still holds a tenuous lead in a new Los Angeles Times poll.

Feinstein was 6 points ahead of Huffington--49% to 43%--among those voters who said they were most likely to cast a ballot on Election Day. Her lead was a bit wider among all of the state’s registered voters, with 49% backing Feinstein compared to 40% for Huffington, a freshman congressman from Santa Barbara.

“Under this relentless barrage, she has managed to stay ahead,” said Times Poll Director John Brennan. “But this race is close and she can’t be complacent.”

Just last March, the Times Poll found that Feinstein was the most popular lawmaker in California, with nearly two-thirds of the state’s voters reporting a favorable impression of the former San Francisco mayor. Most voters also said she was performing well in Washington. And she held a 30- point lead over Huffington, causing pundits to rate her a strong bet for reelection.

Since then, however, Huffington has pounded the incumbent in a relentless television attack. By May her lead had dropped to 52% to 38%.

Today, Feinstein’s favorable rating among the electorate has plummeted to 42% and voters are almost evenly split on whether she is doing a good job in Washington.

Huffington’s focus on Feinstein, however, has done little to establish his own image with many voters. As a result, 54% of voters-- including almost half of Huffington’s own supporters--still say they don’t know him well enough to have a favorable or unfavorable opinion. The rest of the voters were split evenly--23% on each side--between a favorable view of Huffington and an unfavorable one.

That enigmatic image is also reflected in the reasons that his supporters said they back his campaign. The top response was “nothing in particular, just like him.”

Perhaps because she is better known, Feinstein’s supporters were also more certain of their choice in candidates. Only a quarter of the Feinstein voters said they might switch to someone else; a third of Huffington’s supporters said they were not firmly committed.

The poll findings--both Feinstein’s sliding image and Huffington’s lack of an image--portend a race that is likely to be close and hard-fought.

The Times Poll surveyed 1,165 registered voters, including 721 who said they were likely to cast a ballot in November. It was the first time that the poll has studied likely voters in this race. The margin of sampling error for registered voters was 3 points either way, and it was 4 points either way for likely voters.

The survey examined one of the flash points in the contest between Huffington and Feinstein--that of the insider versus the outsider.

Feinstein has campaigned as an experienced lawmaker and vigorous advocate for California, a record that Huffington has derided as that of a career politician. Huffington, meanwhile, has run as a former business executive and political newcomer seeking to shake up Washington. Feinstein’s campaign has responded that he is inexperienced and ineffective.

In the poll, Feinstein appeared to come out ahead in the debate. “Even in these cynical, anti-Washington times, many see the advantage of having a seasoned politician with clout,” Brennan said.

Voters were asked to choose what type of senator they would rather have in Washington, “an experienced politician who knows how to get things from Washington for Californians, or a political outsider who thinks Washington should play a smaller role in Californians’ lives.” By 49% to 31%, voters picked the former.

Feinstein’s record in politics was a decisive issue for both her supporters and her opponents.

More than anything else, Feinstein voters said they backed her because she has been an effective senator. Among the other major reasons was her performance as mayor of San Francisco and her experience. The same reasons--her performance in the Senate and in San Francisco--were among the top responses that Feinstein’s critics gave for opposing her.

The senator’s two hallmark pieces of legislation--the assault weapons ban that passed recently and the pending Desert Protection Act--were mentioned by only a few respondents from both sides of the race.

A major factor in Huffington’s standing was opinions about his money. The Republican nominee has spent more than $10 million on the campaign from a fortune that he gained in the 1990 sale of his family’s Texas petroleum company. Feinstein, also a millionaire, has raised about $6.5 million for her campaign from contributors.

After “nothing in particular,” the second most popular reason for having a favorable opinion of the Republican was the candidate’s willingness to spend his own money and the fact that he does not rely on special interest contributions. The money was also the prime target of his detractors, many of whom said Huffington is trying to buy the election.

But among all voters, the survey indicated that Huffington’s use of his own money may cause him limited damage. When respondents were asked whether they are more or less likely to vote for Huffington because he is spending his own money, nearly two-thirds said it will not make a difference. Slightly more voters said it would cause them to oppose his candidacy than to support it (20% to 15%).

Feinstein’s connections to President Clinton had a similar drag on her campaign.

The President’s image in California has dropped from 59% favorable in March to just 44% in the most recent poll. Almost half of the respondents said they disapprove of Clinton’s job performance.

Huffington has sought to tie Feinstein’s fortunes to the President, citing her support for some of his programs, particularly the controversial 1993 budget package. Almost a third of the crucial independent voters said they would be less likely to vote for a congressional candidate who is a big supporter of Clinton.

But the poll found that almost half of all respondents said the Clinton connection does not matter.

“I characterize Clinton as a marginal drag on her,” Brennan said.

In general, the President’s sagging image is just part of a changing political landscape in California that is more hostile to Democrats than the one they faced in 1992 when the party carried the White House and the state’s two U.S. Senate seats.

That year, the Times Poll found that the Democrats were considered the party best able to handle problems. Now, Republicans have won that label by a narrow margin.

There is evidence in the poll that Huffington has benefited from the shift. Independent voters, who favored Feinstein almost 2 to 1 in May, are now almost evenly split between the two candidates.

Feinstein has also lost ground among elderly voters, a crucial group whose reliability is particularly important when turnout on Election Day is low. Feinstein had a 22-point lead among voters over age 65 last May; that dropped to just 6 points in the latest survey.

Even with the slippage, Feinstein maintained her lead among most demographic groups.

Demographically, one of Huffington’s stronger categories was upper-income voters. Among those earning more than $60,000 in annual salaries, the race is a dead heat.

Huffington also has more weakness in his Republican base than Feinstein does among Democrats. Feinstein was supported by 38% of non-conservative Republican voters while Huffington was winning 27% of non-liberal Democrats.

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll interviewed 1,503 adults statewide, by telephone, Sept. 8-11. Included in the sample were 1,165 registered voters and 721 likely voters. Telephone numbers were chosen from a list of all exchanges in the state. Random-digit dialing techniques were used so that listed and unlisted numbers could be contacted. Interviews were in English and Spanish. The sample was weighted slightly to conform more closely with census figures for sex, race, age and education. The margin of sampling error for the total and registered-voter samples is plus or minus 3 percentage points; for likely voters it is 4 points. For certain subgroups, the error margin may be somewhat higher. Poll results can also be affected by factors such as the wording of questions and the order in which they are presented.

The Senate Race

In the race for U.S. Senate Democrat Dianne Feinstein holds a 6-point edge over GOP challenger Mike Huffington among likely voters.

If the election for U.S. Senate were held today, for whom would you vote?

Registered Voters Likely Voters Feinstein 49% 49% Huffington 40% 43% Someone else 1% - Don’t know 10% 8%

***

Why do you like Feinstein? (Among those who like her. Top responses volunteered.*) Registered Voters Done good job as senator/Effective officeholder: 26% Good record as San Francisco mayor: 18% Nothing in particular/Just like her: 12% ***

Why do you dislike Feinstein? (Among those who dislike her. Top responses volunteered.*) Registered Voters Nothing in particular/Just don’t like her: 16% Poor record as San Francisco mayor: 13% Done poor job as senator/Ineffective officeholder: 11% ***

Why do you like Huffington? (Among those who like him. Top responses volunteered.*) Registered Voters Nothing in particular/Just like him: 20% Spends his own money/Not attached to special interests: 12% He’s a Republican: 12% ***

Why do you dislike Huffington? (Among those who dislike him. Top responses volunteered.*) Registered Voters Spends too much money on campaign/Trying to buy election: 24% Carpetbagger/Not from California/From Texas: 22% He’s rich/An elitist: 21% ***

Does the fact that Huffington will spend $15 million of his own money on the Senate campaign make you more or less likely to vote for him? Registered Voters More likely: 15% Less likely: 20% No effect: 62% Don’t know: 3% ***

Do you think Feinstein is too close to Bill Clinton and his policies, or does she not support Clinton enough, or is her support about what t should be? Registered Voters Too close: 19% Does not support him enough: 4% Support what it should be: 46% Don’t know: 31% * Numbers do not add up to 100% because not all responses are given.

Source: Los Angeles Times poll of California voters, Sept. 8-11