Sen. Boxer Leading in Reelection Matchups

On the strength of her incumbency and the relative anonymity of her opponents, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer holds a commanding lead in her race for reelection, easily defeating her Republican opponents in projected November matchups, the Los Angeles Times Poll has found.

On the strength of his self-financed advertising campaign, car alarm magnate Darrell Issa has emerged at the top of the GOP field for the June primary, inching out state Treasurer Matt Fong.

Yet the survey illustrated that strength is, at least in this case, a relative term: Boxer, for all her luck against her challengers, remains far less popular than the state’s other Democratic senator, Dianne Feinstein, with fewer than half of registered voters giving her a positive job rating. And Issa, for all his burgeoning advances, remains a slightly weaker general election opponent for Boxer than Fong because of the treasurer’s ability to attract a broader range of voters.

Among registered voters, Boxer leads her June primary opponents with 42%, to 14% for Issa and 11% for Fong. When the poll looked at those voters likely to cast ballots, Boxer remained at 42% but Issa jumped to 20% and Fong to 12%. U.S. Rep. Frank Riggs of Windsor, who dropped out of the race after the polling began, carried 7% of likely voters and 6% of registered voters.

Under terms of the state’s new blanket primary, all candidates will appear on the same ballot, with the top vote-getters in each party moving on to the November general election.

Issa, who has spent about $4 million in advertising his candidacy, more than doubled his support among registered voters in the last six months, rising from 6% last October. Fong, meanwhile, slipped slightly from 16%.

Boxer’s lead remained constant despite sniping by both of her Republican opponents, and despite her absence from the television and radio waves. She has only token Democratic opposition.

“Even without a campaign, she’s doing well,” said Times Poll Director Susan Pinkus.

Pinkus cited Boxer’s 52% to 36% edge against Fong, and her 54% to 34% drubbing of Issa in hypothetical November matchups. Although races typically tighten before the general election, Boxer has the advantage for now.

“At this point, Boxer does not have to campaign,” Pinkus added. “The Republican candidates are really unknown.”

The Times Poll questioned 1,409 Californians, including 1,105 registered voters and 566 likely voters, April 4-9. The margin of sampling error is 3 percentage points in either direction for registered voters and 4 points for likely voters.

Boxer’s Hold on Electorate

A first-term senator with a history of polarizing the electorate, Boxer has faced a strategic decision this spring--whether to run ads reminding voters of her tenure, or husband her campaign funds for the summer and fall after voters have chosen the Republican nominee.

The poll suggests that Boxer’s decision thus far--to hold off advertising--has not hurt her. She was retaining her base--only 16% of Democrats defected to Republican candidates when asked their preferences for June. And Boxer picked up 10% of Republican voters as well.

But Boxer’s hold on the electorate is clearly tenuous. Only 45% of registered voters, and 60% of Democratic voters, said they approve of the way she has handled her job--figures that are below expectations for an incumbent. Feinstein, for example, won favorable ratings from 53% of registered voters and 72% of Democrats.

Pinkus attributed the comparison to Boxer’s relatively low-key term. While Feinstein has grabbed public attention with her campaigns against automatic guns, against certification of Mexico as a full partner in the U.S. war against drugs and for a desert protection bill, Boxer has yet to latch on to a policy matter with which voters can identify.

“Nobody knows what she’s doing as a senator,” Pinkus said. “She doesn’t come out and make a splash, like Feinstein did with assault weapons. She really hasn’t made a name for herself.”

Boxer’s job ratings have remained fairly steady over the years, although she has inched slightly upward in popularity in the last six months. Her job approval rating of 45% positive and 27% negative was a slight improvement over the 42% to 32% margin of six months ago.

Younger women continue to form a bulwark of support for Boxer, much as they did in her election in 1992. Slightly more than half--51%--of women under 40 sided with her, to 11% for Fong and 5% for Issa. Comparatively, 43% of older women sided with Boxer, to 10% for Fong and 14% for Issa.

Overall, Boxer continues to lag slightly among men, earning 38% of their votes and 46% of women’s votes. Among the Republican candidates, Issa drew 16% of men and 11% of women and Fong 11% of both sexes.

When she is compared to the Republicans, however, Boxer’s weaknesses are eclipsed by he rivals’ anonymity.

Overall, 69% of registered voters said they either were unaware of Issa or didn’t know enough about him to have an impression--a stunning figure given the amount he has spent on advertising. Fong was unknown by about the same number of people, 66%. Riggs was unknown to 84%, a reality that contributed to his decision to leave the race.

Boxer, in contrast, was known to all but 18% of the electorate.

Republicans Side With Conservative Ideology

At this point, the Times poll showed, the race for the Republican nomination boils down to a familiar scenario: The party’s strongly ideological voters are siding more with a conservative who shares their viewpoint than with a more moderate candidate who could help their chances of picking up the seat in November.

Fong is, after all, losing to Issa among likely voters and, by a slim margin, among registered voters. But at the same time he trails Boxer by only 16 points, compared with Issa’s 20-point deficit. Fong’s campaign has shown signs of wear and tear lately. He has changed strategists and has yet to counter any of Issa’s advertising on television. He has also lacked a popular and concise message to attract voters.

“He still has to get past the primary--and he’s not doing it,” Pinkus said.

If he manages to do so, the poll indicates, Fong could present a somewhat stronger challenge for Boxer, though he is not within striking distance of her right now.

When the poll measured potential November matchups, Fong attracted slightly more Democrats, liberals and moderates than Issa, and tied him among conservatives. He also drew slightly more women--29% to 26%--cutting into Boxer’s strength.

Among voters age 65 and over, who tend to be more reliable voters than the young, Fong trailed Boxer by only 2 points, 46% to 44%, while Issa fell behind her by a 51% to 42% margin. Fong was also only 4 points behind Boxer among those making more than $60,000 a year, while Issa was 11 percentage points back. Among whites, Boxer led Fong by 8 points, 49% to 41%, while she beat Issa by a 51% to 39% margin.

In the state’s geographic areas, Fong held Boxer to a draw in the areas of Southern California outside Los Angeles County, 45% to 44%, where Issa ran 12 points behind Boxer. In Boxer’s home base in the Bay Area, Fong carried 21% to Issa’s 17%. Los Angeles County was firm Boxer turf no matter who the opponent was: She defeated Fong by a 56% to 29% gap and Issa 54% to 31%.

Although Issa did surge into the lead among the Republican candidates, the poll called into question how effective his advertising has been. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jane Harman has spent slightly more than Issa on television ads, but also has gotten a bigger splash--only 39% said they didn’t have an impression of her, compared to Issa’s 66%. A second Democratic gubernatorial candidate, Al Checchi, has spent three times Issa’s budget and was known by all but 29%

“Commercials are helping Checchi and Harman become household names,” Pinkus said. “Not Issa. That doesn’t say much for his campaign. Fong is unknown by 66%--he has the same positive rating, without advertising.”

* BOXER ON CLINTON

Sen. Boxer defended her lack of comments on allegations against President Clinton. A3

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Incumbent Leads

For whom would you vote if the June primary election for U.S. senator were held today and the candidates were:

(asked of likely voters)

*

Boxer: 42%

Issa: 20%

Don’t Know: 19%

Riggs*: 7%

Fong: 12%

*

* What is your impression of. . .

(asked of registered voters)

*

. . .Barbara Boxer?

Favorable: 52%

Unfavorable: 30

Don’t know / Haven’t heard enough: 18

*

. . . Matt Fong?

Favorable: 25$

Unfavorable: 9

Don’t know / Haven’t heard enough: 66

*

. . . Darrell Issa?Favorable: 22%

Unfavorable: 9

Don’t know / Haven’t heard enough: 69

* On the last day of polling, Rep. Frank Riggs announced his withdrawal from the race.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Who Would Win

For whom would you vote if the November general election were held today and the Senate candidates were:

(asked of registered voters)

* Boxer vs. Fong

Boxer: 52%

Fong: 36%

Don’t Know: 12%

*

* Boxer vs. Issa

Boxer: 54$

Issa: 34%

Don’t Know: 12%

Source: L.A. Times Poll

Source: L.A. Times Poll

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Poll contacted 1,409 adults in California, including 1,105 registered voters and 566 likely voters, by telephone April 4-9. 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 with census figures for sex, race, age, education, region and registration. The margin of sampling error for all adults and registered voters is plus or minus 3 percentage points and 4 points for likely voters; 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. Interviews were conducted in English and Spanish. Although Asians were interviewed and are part of the total sample, there were not enough Asian voters to break out as a separate subgroup.

Times Poll results are also available on the World Wide Web at http//www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/POLLS/