THE TIMES POLL : Feinstein Keeping Slim Lead Over Huffington

California voters are increasingly sour about both of their choices for U.S. Senate, but for the first time since early spring the Los Angeles Times Poll found that incumbent Dianne Feinstein’s lead over Republican challenger Mike Huffington has stopped shrinking.

Feinstein’s seven-point edge--49% to 42%--among those voters who said they were most likely to cast a ballot on Election Day is about the same as it was in a Times poll completed about a month ago. Among all registered voters, Feinstein is favored 49% to 40% over Huffington, a freshman congressman from Santa Barbara.

Each previous poll conducted this year by The Times has found Feinstein’s lead cut about in half. It dropped from 30 points to 14 points between March and May, then to 6 points by September.

“It is still a close race that could go either way,” said Susan Pinkus, who supervised The Times’ statewide survey completed last Tuesday. “Opinions are very volatile.”

Although the head-to-head matchup did not change from September, the latest poll found opinions of both candidates were still plummeting.

Nearly half of the state’s voters now have an unfavorable impression of the incumbent Democrat and, for the first time since her statewide support was measured by The Times in March, 1990, Feinstein’s rating was more negative than positive. Just 39% of the respondents had a favorable opinion of her.

It was a dramatic turnabout for Feinstein, driven largely by a barrage of attack television commercials from Huffington that have aired with little interruption for the last seven months. Feinstein has also waged a largely negative television campaign since June, but she has had far less to spend.

Just last March, Feinstein was ranked the most popular politician in California with nearly two-thirds of the state’s voters reporting a favorable opinion of the freshman senator. Now, she is given lower marks than Republican Gov. Pete Wilson, whose ratings have rebounded modestly since the beginning of the year.

Feinstein’s performance on the job was also graded lower than both Wilson’s and President Clinton’s.

For Huffington, the poll indicates that voters are beginning to form opinions about the Republican nominee, who was virtually unknown in California when he began his bid for the U.S. Senate.

With less than a month remaining until the Nov. 8 election, a quarter of the respondents still say they do not know enough about the GOP candidate to express an opinion. But that’s down sharply from last month, when more than half said they knew little about Huffington.

Most of those who have made up their minds, however, appear to have developed a negative impression of Huffington. Since last month, those reporting an unfavorable opinion of Huffington almost doubled to 45% while those with a favorable impression increased by about 8 points to 31%.

The Times Poll questioned 1,232 registered voters, of whom 821 are considered likely to cast a ballot. The margin of sampling error for registered voters is 3 percentage points in either direction; for likely voters it is 4 points in either direction. Margins of error for smaller subgroups of voters may be larger.

California’s U.S. Senate race is headed for a national record as the most expensive congressional contest in history, due largely to the expectation that Huffington will spend more than $20 million of his personal fortune on the campaign.

Most of the money has gone for television commercials and both candidates have spent most of their money on attacks, the most cost-effective political tactic.

One result is that the credibility of both candidates has suffered. Feinstein retains a small edge on the issue, with about a third of the respondents saying she is more honest than her opponent, compared to about a quarter who sided with Huffington.

Another effect of the negative emphasis is that about half of the state’s voters consider their choice of candidates to be “the lesser of two evils,” not a politician they like. That feeling was significant for both candidates, but it was more common among Huffington’s supporters (58%) than Feinstein’s (45%).

Last week, voters got their first good look at the two candidates when Feinstein and Huffington debated on CNN’s “Larry King Live” program. But while debates can sometimes be a turning point in close political races, the poll indicates that this exchange has not been a significant factor.

Just 19% of voters said they saw the debate and many of those said it had no effect on their decision. Huffington did slightly better than Feinstein among voters who said the debate shaped their opinion.

In another recent development, Huffington’s wife has been the subject of numerous media stories examining her role in the campaign and her past connection to a controversial religious sect. But the survey indicated that most voters consider a candidate’s spouse to be out of bounds for political debate.

More than two-thirds of the respondents--including Republicans and Democrats--said a candidate’s spouse should “never be made an issue in a political campaign.”

Overall, the snapshot provided by the poll shows a race that is still up for grabs. Both campaigns could find good and bad news in the results. Both campaigns also appear to have found fertile ground in their attacks.

Huffington has portrayed Feinstein as a career politician under the influence of Washington’s powerful special interests. He has also broadcast commercials criticizing Feinstein’s connection to President Clinton and her support for his 1993 economic package.

Half of the voters agreed that Feinstein is a “tax and spend Democrat” while just a quarter said that description does not fit. The tax-and-spend label was applied by more than a third of the Democratic voters and about half of the independent voters.

Feinstein was also hurt by taking political contributions from special interests, an attack Huffington has used frequently. More than half of the voters said the contributions made no difference, but just over a third said it made them less likely to support the incumbent.

Feinstein’s criticism of Huffington has focused on his background as a former Texan who moved to California in 1991 with a fortune made from his family’s oil and gas company. Feinstein has also demanded that Huffington release his personal income taxes, as she has, because he has financed his campaign out of his pocket.

The accusations seem to have scored points for Feinstein, the poll suggests.

About a third of the voters said they were less likely to support Huffington because he moved recently to California. Almost the same percentage said the Republican’s refusal to release his income taxes will diminish their opinion of Huffington.

At the same time, Huffington’s decision to finance his own campaign did not appear to have a significant effect on his candidacy. In all, 60% said it made no difference to them and almost as many said it was good as said it was bad.

Feinstein found a similar mild effect on her race from President Clinton, whose sagging image improved slightly among California voters in the latest poll.

Almost half of those surveyed said it made no difference whether a candidate for Senate supported Clinton most of the time. More said they would be less likely to support such a candidate (30%), compared to those who would be more likely to (21%).

On the campaign trail, the two candidates have shown a strikingly different interpretation of what their job should be as a U.S. Senator.

In his freshman term as a House member, Huffington has not introduced many bills and he has voted against most major appropriations because he believes government should be scaled back. In contrast, Feinstein has fought for every possible benefit for California--including funding from the crime bill and disaster relief.

In the poll, almost half of the respondents said they would favor “an experienced politician who knows how to get things from Washington for Californians” rather than a “political outsider who thinks Washington should play a smaller role in Californians’ lives.” About a third said they would prefer an outsider.

The difference was largely partisan, with Democrats widely favoring experience (58% to 23%) and Republicans preferring an outsider (45% to 37%).

Feinstein says her biggest accomplishment during her first term as a Senator was the passage of a ban on the sale and manufacture of assault-style weapons, which was signed by President Clinton last month as part of the crime bill.

The poll indicated that twice as many voters were more likely to support Feinstein because of the assault weapons ban (42%) as were less likely (20%). About a third said it would have no effect on their decision.

Small Feinstein Lead Holding

With less than a month to go before the Nov. 8 election, Democratic U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s favorability ratings have become more negative than positive. Yet, among likely voters she maintains a seven-point lead over Republican Mike Huffington. If the election were held today for U.S. senator from California, for whom would you vote? 10/94:

Registered Voters Likely Voters Feinstein 49% 49% Huffington 40% 42% Someone else 1% 1% Don’t know 10% 8%

9/94:

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

Are you planning to vote for that candidate more because you like him or her, or more because he or she is the lesser of two evils?*

Registered Voters Feinstein Voters Like candidate and policies 44% 51% Lesser of two evils 51% 45% Don’t know 5% 4%

Huffington Voters Like candidate and policies 37% Lesser of two evils 58% Don’t know 5%

What is your impression of Dianne Feinstein?

10/94 9/94 Favorable 39% 42% Unfavorable 47% 37% Don’t know 14% 21%

What is your impression of Michael Huffington?

10/94 9/94 Favorable 31% 23% Unfavorable 45% 23% Don’t know 24% 54%

Does the fact that Huffington moved to California from Texas in 1991 make you more or less likely to vote for him?

More likely: 3%

Less likely: 34%

No effect: 62%

Don’t know: 1%

Does the fact that Huffington has not disclosed his income tax returns to the public make you more or less likely to vote for him?

More likely: 1%

Less likely: 37%

No effect: 61%

Don’t know: 1%

Does the fact that Feinstein was a principal sponsor of a measure banning 19 kinds of assault weapons, which was part of the federal crime bill, make you more or less likely to vote for her?

More likely: 42%

Less likely: 20%

No effect: 37%

Don’t know: 1%

Does Feinstein’s acceptance of campaign contributions from special interest groups make you more or less likely to vote for her?

More likely: 2%

Less likely: 37%

No effect: 59%

Don’t know: 2%

* Asked of respondents who will vote for U.S. Senate candidate

Source: LA Times polls of California voters

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll interviewed 1,641 adults statewide, by telephone, Oct. 8-11. Included in the sample are 1,232 registered voters and 821 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. The sample was weighted slightly to conform more closely with census figures for sex, race, age and education. Interviewing was conducted in English and Spanish. The margin of sampling error for the total sample and the sample of all registered voters 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 other factors such as question wording and the order in which questions are presented.