{"id":40802245091,"date":"2020-01-06T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-01-06T14:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/?post_type=poll&p=40802245091"},"modified":"2020-01-06T09:17:47","modified_gmt":"2020-01-06T14:17:47","slug":"monmouthpoll_us_010620","status":"publish","type":"poll","link":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/reports\/monmouthpoll_us_010620\/","title":{"rendered":"Is Experience or Ideology More Important to Voters?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

West\nLong Branch, NJ<\/em> \u2013 Are American voters looking for a presidential\ncandidate who adheres to a particular ideology or are they more interested in\nfinding someone with a specific political pedigree? Or is it a mixture of these\ntwo dimensions?  The Monmouth University Poll<\/em><\/strong> conducted\na test of five different qualities the American electorate may look for in a\npresidential candidate and found that voters prioritize different frames to\nassess their choices. For some it is conservative, progressive or moderate\nissue positions that matter most while others prioritize political experience\nor being a political outsider over any ideological stance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The poll presented five qualities\nin ten pairings and asked voters which matters more to them in choosing a\npresidential candidate. In a direct matchup between two r\u00e9sum\u00e9-related qualities,\nvoters prefer a presidential candidate with political experience (56%) over one\nwho is a political outsider (35%).  When\ncomparing different positions on the political ideology spectrum, a candidate\nwith moderate issue positions is preferred to one with either conservative (59%\nto 36%) or progressive (60% to 33%) views by most voters. When a moderate\nideological stance is pitted against political experience, voters are almost\nevenly divided between prioritizing moderate issue positions (48%) or political\nexperience (43%) as the more important quality when choosing a presidential\ncandidate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Political experience outpolls\nboth conservative (55% to 40%) and progressive (52% to 36%) issue positions as\nthe quality voters value more. Moderate issue positions (59%) are preferred to\nbeing a political outsider (32%) for most voters.  Other choices posed by the poll show a nearly\neven split in voter preference for a political outsider (46%) versus\nconservative positions (43%) and a political outsider (44%) versus progressive positions\n(46%), as well as for conservative (47%) versus progressive (45%) issue\npositions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Responses to the ten forced-choice\npairings were used to build a typology* of presidential candidate quality priorities\nalong both dimensions \u2013 political r\u00e9sum\u00e9 and ideological stance.  Overall, half of the American electorate can\nbe classified as ideological voters, preferring a specific issue position over\nany other quality. However, these voters\u2019 priorities are nearly evenly divided\namong conservative (18%), progressive (15%), and moderate (17%) views. Just\nover 1 in 4 voters look at a candidate\u2019s background over any specific set of\nissue stances, with 18% preferring someone with political experience and 9%\npreferring a political outsider.  Another\n22% of American voters, though, do not express a singular preference for any one\nof the five candidate characteristics polled and are much harder to classify\nwhen these two dimensions are considered jointly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe have a tendency to talk\nabout the vote choice along just one dimension. Yes, many voters value ideology\nover other considerations, but quite a few are looking primarily at political\npedigree to make their decision. And still others give equal weight to both\ndimensions. We really need to take this complexity into account before we try\nto slot voters and candidates into one-dimensional lanes,\u201d said Patrick Murray,\ndirector of the independent Monmouth University Polling Institute.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth University Poll<\/em> finds\nstrong relationships between voter quality preferences and political identity. A\nmajority of self-identified Republicans and Republican-leaning voters stake out\nan ideological position in choosing a presidential candidate, with 36%\nclassified as prioritizing conservative issue positions over all other\nqualities, 13% prioritizing a candidate with moderate positions and 4% prioritizing\na progressive candidate. About 1 in 5 Republicans and Republican-leaning voters\nlook primarily at a candidate\u2019s r\u00e9sum\u00e9 rather than ideology, with those who prefer a\npolitical outsider (18%) outnumbering those who prioritize political experience\n(4%) in their vote decision. Another 25% of Republican voters do not have a prevailing\npriority when all five qualities are considered simultaneously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A majority of voters who self-identify as Democrats and Democratic leaners\nare likely to be ideology-first voters, with 30% classified as prioritizing progressive\nissue positions, 21% moderate positions, and just 2% conservative positions.\nHowever, a sizable number of Democratic voters (28%) prioritize political\nexperience over any ideological position, while just 2% prioritize being a political\noutsider as their top candidate value. Another 17% of Democrats are mixed in\ntheir candidate quality priorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Among pure independent voters who do not lean toward either party, just\nover a third are ideological voters (20% moderate, 12% conservative, and 5%\nprogressive), while 26% value political experience over all the other qualities\npolled and 5% value being a political outsider. Nearly 1 in 3 independents (32%)\ncannot be pinned down as prioritizing any single quality on these two\ndimensions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSome voters choose the\ncandidate\u2019s political background as the highest priority in their ballot\ndecision, but experience voters end up aligning with Democrats while outsider\nvoters fall into the Republican camp. This is probably a byproduct of who sits\nin the Oval Office right now,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE QUALITY\n PRIORITY VOTER TYPOLOGY<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n R\u00e9sum\u00e9<\/strong><\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n Ideology<\/strong>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n Outsider<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Experience<\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n Conservative<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Progressive<\/em>\n <\/td>\n Moderate<\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n Mixed<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n All voters\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 17%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 22%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Republicans\n + leaners\n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 36%\n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 13%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Democrats + leaners\n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 28%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 2%\n <\/td>\n 30%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 17%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Pure independents\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 12%\n <\/td>\n 5%\n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 32%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
White men, no college degree <\/td>\n 13%\n <\/td>\n 6%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td>\n 11%\n <\/td>\n 13%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 27%\n <\/td><\/tr>
White women, no college degree <\/td>\n 6%\n <\/td>\n 19%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 16%\n <\/td>\n 16%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 26%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
White men, college graduates <\/td>\n 14%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n 13%\n <\/td>\n 17%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 19%\n <\/td><\/tr>
White women, college graduates <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 16%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 18%\n <\/td>\n 30%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 17%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Men of color\n <\/td>\n 8%\n <\/td>\n 25%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 20%\n <\/td>\n 15%\n <\/td>\n 12%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 19%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Women of color\n <\/td>\n 9%\n <\/td>\n 29%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 4%\n <\/td>\n 24%\n <\/td>\n 21%\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n 14%\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  \n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td>\n  \n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

Another way to look at these voter\ntypes is by examining the self-described political affiliations of each group.  Two groups primarily identify themselves as\nRepublican or Republican-leaning voters \u2013 the conservative priority group (86%)\nand the outsider group (84%) \u2013 while two others are primarily made up of Democrats\nand Democratic leaners \u2013 the progressive priority group (84%) and the\nexperience group (70%). Voters who prioritize moderate issue positions in a\npresidential candidate are more likely to align with or lean toward Democrats\n(52%) than Republicans (32%), while 15% see themselves as pure independents.\nMixed dimension voters include Republicans (48%), Democrats (33%) and pure\nindependents (19%).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Progressive voters are the\nyoungest voting bloc (51% under 35 years old), while the conservative (13%) and\noutsider (12%) groups are the least likely to include younger voters. The most\nracially diverse group are those who prioritize political experience (49% people\nof color), followed by the progressive issue group (40%). Voters in both the progressive\n(43%) and moderate (43%) groups are more likely than others to have graduated college.\nJust over 6 in 10 voters in the conservative (65%) and outsider (63%) groups\nare men, while women dominate the progressive (61%), moderate (62%), and experience\n(60%) groups. Voters in the mixed typology group with no single quality\npreference are more evenly balanced by gender (53% men and 47% women).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt is important to note that\nthis poll looked at only two dimensions along which voters make their candidate\nchoice. There are certainly other factors which should be examined, but these\nresults offer a counterpoint to narratives that try to lump American voters\ninto one-dimensional ideological lanes,\u201d said Murray.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nearly all outsider voters (92%)\nand conservative voters (87%) support President Donald Trump\u2019s reelection,\nwhile the vast majority of experience voters (84%) and progressive voters (90%)\nwant someone new. Moderate voters are also likely to want a different president\n(75%). Those in the mixed preference group are evenly divided on their 2020\nvote (50% would reelect Trump and 47% want someone new).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This two-dimensional quality priority\ntypology also helps to classify voters in the Democratic nomination contest,\nbut it does not fully explain individual candidate choice. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning\nvoters nationwide, those who prioritize experience over the other four qualities\npolled tend to back Joe Biden (44%) more than any other candidate in the field,\nincluding Elizabeth Warren (14%), Bernie Sanders (12%), Pete Buttigieg (6%),\nAmy Klobuchar (4%), and Mike Bloomberg (4%). Among progressive priority voters,\n43% support Sanders and 25% back Warren, with 9% for Biden and 7% for\nButtigieg. Among moderate priority voters, 23% support Biden, 14% Buttigieg,\n11% Sanders, 11% Bloomberg, 9% Warren, and 7% Klobuchar. Among the remaining\nDemocrats, including those who cannot be assigned to a specific quality\npreference as well as a handful of outsider and conservative voters, 28%\nsupport Biden, 16% Warren, 10% Sanders, 8% Buttigieg, 5% Klobuchar, and 5%\nBloomberg.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cEven when we analyze voters\non two dimensions rather than just one, it is really difficult to pin them down\ninto a single lane. The American electorate is a little more complex than we\nlike to give it credit for,\u201d said Murray. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth University Poll<\/em>\nwas conducted by telephone from December 4 to 8, 2019 with 903 adults in the United States. The results in this\nrelease are based on 838 registered voters and have a +\/- 3.4\npercentage point sampling margin of error. The poll was conducted by the Monmouth University Polling\nInstitute in West Long Branch, NJ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

* The presidential candidate quality priority typology\nwas created by first counting the number of times a specific quality was chosen\nwhen pitted against each other quality in a forced-choice pairing, with the\npotential values ranging from \u201c0\u201d (quality was never chosen as the higher\npriority) to \u201c4\u201d (quality was chosen as the higher priority in every pairing).  Voters were then classified as preferring a\nspecific type of quality if it was chosen more often than the other four\nqualities in at least three of the matchups. The vast majority of those\nassigned to a specific quality chose it as their preference in all four\npairings (i.e. 92% of outsider voters chose the political outsider against each\nof the other four qualities, experience was 98%, conservative 97%, progressive 95%,\nand moderate 94%). The remaining voters assigned to a specific quality\npreferred that quality in three pairings while opting not to make a choice\neither way in the remaining matchup involving that quality.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

QUESTIONS\nAND RESULTS      <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

(* Some columns may not add to 100% due to rounding.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[Q1-12 previously released.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

13.<\/span> Voters look at many different qualities when choosing a presidential candidate to support. For each of the following pairs of qualities I read, please tell me which one is more important to you if you had to choose.[ITEMS WERE ROTATED<\/em>] [CHOICES WERE ROTATED<\/em>]<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone who is a political outsider or someone with political experience <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political outsider\n <\/td>\n 35%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political\n experience\n <\/td>\n 56%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with conservative issue positions or someone with moderate issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Conservative issue positions\n <\/td>\n 36%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Moderate\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 59%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 5%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with progressive issue positions or\nsomeone with moderate issue positions         <\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Progressive issue positions\n <\/td>\n 33%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Moderate\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 60%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 7%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone who is a political outsider or someone\nwith conservative issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political outsider\n <\/td>\n 46%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Conservative\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 11%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone who is a political outsider or someone\nwith progressive issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political outsider\n <\/td>\n 44%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Progressive\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 46%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 10%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone who is a political outsider or someone\nwith moderate issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political outsider\n <\/td>\n 32%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Moderate\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 59%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with political experience or someone\nwith conservative issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political experience\n <\/td>\n 55%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Conservative\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 40%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 6%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with political experience or someone\nwith progressive issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political experience\n <\/td>\n 52%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Progressive\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 36%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 12%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with political experience or someone\nwith moderate issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Political experience\n <\/td>\n 43%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Moderate\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 48%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 9%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Someone with\nconservative issue positions or someone with progressive issue positions<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n  \n <\/td> Dec.<\/strong>
2019<\/strong> <\/td><\/tr>
\n Conservative issue positions\n <\/td>\n 47%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n Progressive\n issue positions\n <\/td>\n 45%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n (VOL) Don\u2019t know\n <\/td>\n 8%<\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  (n)<\/em><\/em>\n <\/td>\n (838)<\/em><\/strong>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

[Q14-26 previously released.<\/em>]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

METHODOLOGY<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Monmouth\nUniversity Poll<\/em> was sponsored and conducted by the Monmouth University\nPolling Institute from December 4 to 8, 2019 with a national random sample of 903\nadults age 18 and older, in English. This includes 363 contacted by a live\ninterviewer on a landline telephone and 540 contacted by a live interviewer on\na cell phone. The results in this poll\nrelease are based on a subsample of 838 registered voters. Telephone numbers were selected through\nrandom digit dialing and landline respondents were selected with a modified\nTroldahl-Carter youngest adult household screen. Monmouth is responsible for\nall aspects of the survey design, data weighting and analysis. The full sample\nis weighted for region, age, education, gender and race based on US Census\ninformation (CPS 2018 supplement). Data collection support provided by\nBraun Research (field) and Dynata (RDD sample). For results based on the registered\nvoter sample, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to\nsampling has a maximum margin of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points\n(unadjusted for sample design). Sampling error can be larger for\nsub-groups (see table below). In addition to sampling error, one should\nbear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting\nsurveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n DEMOGRAPHICS (weighted)<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n REGISTERED VOTERS<\/em>\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 27% Republican<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 42%\n Independent<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 31%\n Democrat<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 49% Male<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 51%\n Female<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 28% 18-34<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 34% 35-54<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 38% 55+<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 67% White<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 12% Black<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 15% Hispanic<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n   6% Asian\/Other<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 68% No degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n 32% 4 year degree<\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr>
\n  <\/em>\n <\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>\n\n\n\n

Click on pdf file\nlink below for full methodology and results by key demographic groups.<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

1 in 5 voters cannot be pinned down on either dimension<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":40802245094,"template":"","geography":[18],"class_list":["post-40802245091","poll","type-poll","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","geography-national"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802245091","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/poll"}],"version-history":[{"count":19,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802245091\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40802245146,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/poll\/40802245091\/revisions\/40802245146"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/40802245094"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40802245091"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"geography","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.monmouth.edu\/polling-institute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/geography?post=40802245091"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}