GALLUP NEWS SERVICE
PRINCETON, NJ -- After weeks of refusing to speak to the press about his relationship with Chandra Levy, last week U.S. Rep. Gary Condit broke his silence in interviews with Connie Chung, a local California television station, and People and Newsweek magazines. A CNN/USA Today/优蜜传媒poll over the weekend suggests that Condit was unsuccessful in improving his image among the national public, and a separate CNN/优蜜传媒poll in his California district finds substantial opposition to any re-election effort he might make.
According to the national poll, three-quarters of Americans say it is either very likely (45%) or somewhat likely (30%) that Condit tried to obstruct the investigation into Levy's disappearance. In addition, 62% of Americans say it is either very likely (31%) or somewhat likely (31%) that Condit was directly involved in her disappearance, figures that are little changed from a 优蜜传媒poll conducted in early August. The public is sharply critical of the California congressman. By overwhelming majorities, Americans say that Condit is immoral (77%), dishonest (79%), and uncaring (67%).
Although there is little change in the overall percentage of Americans who say that Condit was directly involved in Levy's disappearance, Americans who saw part of Chung's interview, or the interview conducted by a local Sacramento television station, indicate that the interviews made them think more negatively about the congressman. Only 2% say they feel more favorably toward Condit after seeing him interviewed, while 51% say they feel less favorably. Similarly, by 67% to 16%, viewers say they are more rather than less suspicious of Condit's actions concerning the investigation, and by 71% to 16% viewers say he lied at some point during the interview. When asked whether he was justified in refusing to respond to questions about his relationship with Levy, Americans say he was not, by 66% to 31%.
Constituents Less Critical of Condit, but Oppose His Re-Election by Two-to-One Majority
The poll in Condit's congressional district finds the people there generally less negative about their representative than are Americans across the country, but still sufficiently critical to oppose his re-election by greater than a two-to-one margin. Overall, Condit's constituents approve of the job he is doing as their representative by 48% to 37%, but disapprove of him "as a person" by the larger margin of 56% to 28%.
Residents of the 18th Congressional District in California are somewhat divided over whether they are embarrassed by his actions: 46% say they are; 53% say they are not. Still, more than seven in 10 believe he owes an apology to the people in his district, and to the Levy family. And when asked if they would vote for him if he decided to run for re-election, only 29% say they would, while 61% say they would not. These percentages opposing his re-election are identical to those found among registered voters in the district.
The people in Condit's district are somewhat less skeptical about Condit's behavior than are Americans across the country. When asked how likely it is that Condit was directly involved in Levy's disappearance, 48% of his constituents say it is either very or somewhat likely, substantially smaller than the 62% of the national public expressing that view. Similarly, 59% of Condit's constituents say the congressman tried to obstruct the investigation into Levy's disappearance, compared with 75% of the national public. Also, while only 43% of Americans across the country believe Condit is either very or somewhat concerned about the Levy family, 58% of Condit's constituents hold that opinion of their congressman.
Nevertheless, like the national public, the people in Condit's district also say that seeing Condit's interviews made them feel less rather than more favorably toward the representative -- by 46% to 3%, with the rest indicating the interviews had no effect on their opinion of him. Earlier, Condit had sent a letter to households in his district, but the effect of that letter also seemed to be more negative than positive, by 29% to 8%, with the rest saying the letter had no effect.
SurveyMethods
Results of the national sample are based on telephone interviews with -- 814 -- national adults, aged 18+, conducted August 24-26, 2001. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points. Results based on the subsample of -- 707 -- people who indicate they are registered to vote also have a margin of sampling error of ±4 percentage points. Results based on the subsample of -- 533 -- adults who saw televised interviews with Gary Condit or saw rebroadcasts of the Condit interviews have a margin of sampling error of ±5 percentage points.
Results from the 18th Congressional District in California are based on telephone interviews with -- 501 -- adults in that district, aged 18+, conducted August 24-25, 2001. For results based on the total sample of adults in the 18th Congressional District in California, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±5 percentage points.
How closely have you been following the news concerning the investigation into the disappearance of Chandra Levy, the 24-year-old Washington intern who disappeared more than three months ago -- very closely, somewhat closely, not too closely, or not at all?
|
Very |
Somewhat closely |
Not too closely |
|
No |
|
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
23 |
45 |
23 |
8 |
1 |
|
2001 Aug 3-5 |
22 |
47 |
20 |
11 |
* |
|
2001 Jul 19-22 |
22 |
40 |
25 |
12 |
1 |
|
2001 Jul 10-11 |
20 |
43 |
22 |
15 |
* |
|
Speech Watchers |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
31 |
45 |
19 |
4 |
1 |
|
* Less than 0.5% |
|||||
Now, I have a few questions concerning Gary Condit, the California Congressman who, according to some reports, had an extramarital affair with Chandra Levy.
11. How likely do you think it is that Gary Condit was directly involved in the disappearance of Chandra Levy -- very likely, somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely?
|
Very |
Somewhat likely |
Not too |
Not at all |
No |
|
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
31 |
31 |
15 |
14 |
9 |
|
2001 Aug 3-5 |
29 |
36 |
17 |
10 |
8 |
|
2001 Jul 19-22 |
24 |
40 |
16 |
10 |
10 |
|
2001 Jul 10-11 |
28 |
37 |
13 |
7 |
15 |
|
Speech Watchers |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
33 |
30 |
17 |
14 |
6 |
12. How likely do you think it is that at any point Gary Condit tried to obstruct the investigation into the disappearance of Chandra Levy -- very likely, somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely?
|
|
Very |
Somewhat likely |
Not too |
Not at all likely |
No |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
45 |
30 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
|
Speech Watchers |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
50 |
26 |
11 |
9 |
4 |
Q.13 ASKED OF HALF SAMPLE
13. Just your opinion, which of the following better applies to the way you feel about Gary Condit -- [RANDOM ORDER]?
BASED ON -- 386 -- NATIONAL ADULTS IN FORM A; ±5 PCT. PTS.
A. He is -- [ROTATED: moral (or) immoral]?
|
|
Moral |
Immoral |
NEITHER (vol.) |
No opinion |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
10 |
77 |
3 |
10 |
|
Speech Watchers ^ |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
10 |
81 |
3 |
6 |
|
^ N=253; ±5 PCT. PTS. |
||||
B. He is -- [ROTATED: honest (or) dishonest]?
|
|
Honest |
Dishonest |
NEITHER (vol.) |
No opinion |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
10 |
79 |
3 |
8 |
|
Speech Watchers ^ |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
10 |
84 |
2 |
4 |
|
^ N=253; ±5 PCT. PTS. |
||||
C. He is -- [ROTATED: caring (or) uncaring]?
|
|
Caring |
Uncaring |
NEITHER (vol.) |
No opinion |
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
22 |
67 |
2 |
9 |
|
Speech Watchers ^ |
||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
19 |
76 |
1 |
4 |
|
^ N=253; ±5 PCT. PTS. |
||||
|
(vol.) Volunteered response |
||||
14. How concerned do you think Gary Condit is about Chandra Levy and her family -- very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned, or not concerned at all?
|
|
|
|
|
Not concerned |
|
|
% |
% |
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
13 |
30 |
27 |
25 |
5 |
|
Speech Watchers |
|||||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
13 |
31 |
27 |
28 |
1 |
15. Did you or did you not happen to see either the interview with Gary Condit that was conducted by Connie Chung on the ABC program "Primetime Live" on Thursday or the interview conducted with Condit on Thursday by a local Sacramento television station?
|
|
Yes, saw |
No, did not |
No opinion |
|
% |
% |
% |
|
|
National Adults |
|||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
35 |
64 |
1 |
|
Speech Watchers |
|||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
56 |
43 |
1 |
16. Did you see parts of the interviews rebroadcast later on the news or other programs, or did you not see any part of the interviews?
BASED ON -- 495 -- ADULTS WHO DID NOT SEE TELEVISED INTERVIEWS; ±5 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Yes, saw parts rebroadcast |
No, did not |
No |
|
National Adults |
|||
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
42% |
57 |
1 |
COMBINED RESPONSES (Q.15/Q.16)
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
|
|
National Adults |
|
|
% |
|
|
Saw "Primetime Live"/Sacramento interview |
35 |
|
Saw rebroadcast |
28 |
|
Did not see any part of the interview |
37 |
17. Do you have a more favorable or less favorable view of Condit as a result of this interview, or did it not affect your opinion either way?
BASED ON -- 533 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ±5 PCT. PTS.
|
|
More |
Less |
Did not |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
2% |
51 |
46 |
1 |
18. Did the interview make you -- [ROTATED: more suspicious (or) less suspicious] -- of Condit's actions concerning the investigation into Chandra Levy's disappearance?
BASED ON -- 533 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ±5 PCT. PTS.
|
|
More suspicious |
Less suspicious |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
67% |
16 |
17 |
19. At several points in the interview, Condit did not directly answer questions about the nature of his relationship with Chandra Levy. Do you think he was justified or unjustified in doing so?
BASED ON -- 533 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ±5 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Justified |
Unjustified |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
31% |
66 |
3 |
20. Do you think Condit did or did not lie during any point in the interview?
BASED ON -- 533 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ±5 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Yes, did |
No, did not |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-26 |
71% |
16 |
13 |
RESULTS FROM CNN/GALLUP POLL
IN CALIFORNIA'S 18TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Gary Condit is handling his job as your congressman?
|
Approve |
Disapprove |
No opinion |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
48% |
37 |
15 |
2. And apart from whether you approve or disapprove of the way Gary Condit is handling his job as your congressman, what do you think of Condit as a person? Do you approve or disapprove of him?
|
Approve |
Disapprove |
No opinion |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
28% |
56 |
16 |
Next,
3. If Gary Condit were to run for re-election to the House of Representatives from your district, do you think you would vote for him, or not?
|
|
Yes, would |
No, |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
29% |
61 |
10 |
|
Registered Voters ^ |
29% |
61 |
10 |
|
^N=427, +/-6 PCT. PTS. |
4. How likely do you think it is that Gary Condit was directly involved in the disappearance of Chandra Levy [SHON-dra LEE-vee] -- very likely, somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely?
|
|
Very |
Somewhat likely |
Not too likely |
Not at all likely |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
19% |
29 |
18 |
26 |
8 |
5. How likely do you think it is that at any point Gary Condit tried to obstruct the investigation into the disappearance of Chandra Levy -- very likely, somewhat likely, not too likely, or not at all likely?
|
|
Very |
Somewhat likely |
Not too likely |
Not at all likely |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
30% |
29 |
18 |
17 |
6 |
6. Are you embarrassed that Gary Condit represents your district in Congress, or not?
|
Yes, embarrassed |
No, not |
No opinion |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
46% |
53 |
1 |
7. How concerned do you think Gary Condit is about Chandra Levy and her family -- very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned, or not concerned at all?
|
|
|
|
|
Not concerned |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
25% |
33 |
19 |
19 |
4 |
8. Did you or did you not happen to see either the interview with Gary Condit that was conducted by Connie Chung on the ABC program "Primetime Live" on Thursday or the interview conducted with Condit on Thursday by a local Sacramento television station?
|
|
Yes, saw |
No, did not |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
57% |
42 |
1 |
9. Did you see parts of the interviews rebroadcast later on the news or other programs, or did you not see any part of the interviews?
BASED ON --187 -- ADULTS WHO DID NOT SEE TELEVISED INTERVIEWS; ± 9 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Yes, saw parts rebroadcast |
No, did not |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
34% |
65 |
1 |
COMBINED RESPONSES (Q.8/Q.9)
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
|
|
% |
|
|
Saw "Primetime Live"/Sacramento interview |
57 |
|
Saw rebroadcast |
15 |
|
Did not see any part of the interview |
28 |
10. Do you have a more favorable or less favorable view of Condit as a result of this interview, or did it not affect your opinion either way?
BASED ON -- 380 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ± 7 PCT. PTS.
|
|
More |
Less |
Did not |
No |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
3% |
46 |
50 |
1 |
11. Did the interview make you -- [ROTATED: more suspicious (or) less suspicious] -- of Condit's actions concerning the investigation into Chandra Levy's disappearance?
BASED ON -- 380 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ± 7 PCT. PTS.
|
|
More suspicious |
Less suspicious |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
51% |
23 |
26 |
12. At several points in the interview, Condit did not directly answer questions about the nature of his relationship with Chandra Levy. Do you think he was justified or unjustified in doing so?
BASED ON -- 380 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ± 7 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Justified |
Unjustified |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
39% |
54 |
7 |
13. Do you think Condit did or did not lie during any point in the interview?
BASED ON -- 380 -- WHO SAW TELEVISED INTERVIEWS OR REBROADCASTS; ± 7 PCT. PTS.
|
|
Yes, did |
No, did not |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
58% |
29 |
13 |
14. Now thinking about the letter that Gary Condit mailed to all of his constituents, did the letter make you feel more favorably or less favorably toward Condit, or did it have no effect on your view of him?
|
More favorably |
Less favorably |
No effect |
No opinion |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
8% |
29 |
49 |
14 |
15. Do you think Condit should or should not apologize to -- [RANDOM ORDER]?
A. The people who live in your congressional district
|
|
Should |
Should not |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
72% |
22 |
6 |
B. The Levy family
|
|
Should |
Should not |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
73% |
20 |
7 |
COMBINED RESPONSES
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
|
|
% |
|
|
Should apologize to both |
63 |
|
Should apologize to the people who live in congressional district |
8 |
|
Should apologize to the Levy family |
7 |
|
Should not apologize to either |
13 |
|
No opinion |
9 |
16. Overall, do you feel the news media have acted responsibly or irresponsibly in this situation?
|
|
Responsibly |
Irresponsibly |
No opinion |
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
49% |
43 |
8 |
Finally,
17. Thinking back to the election for Congress in November 2000, did you vote for -- [ROTATED: Gary Condit, the Democrat (or) Steve Wilson, the Republican], or did you not happen to vote for Congress in 2000?
|
Condit |
Wilson |
Did not vote |
OTHER (vol.) |
No opinion |
|
|
2001 Aug 24-25 |
51% |
12 |
31 |
2 |
4 |
|
Registered Voters ^ |
60% |
13 |
21 |
2 |
4 |
^ N=427, +/- 6 PCT PTS
(vol.) Volunteered response
