Executive Decision Results for 3/25-4/8

Over the past two weeks our hypothetical chief executives had to make a foreign-policy decision concerning NATO expansion. (Click here to view the full Executive Decision memo, with suggestions from aides, for this scenario.) The options presented to the President by his or her aides were the following:

*Option A. Take a public stand opposing eastward NATO expansion.

*Option B. Take a public stand advocating NATO's absorption of the former Eastern-Bloc countries and the Baltic States--and, ultimately, Russia.

The Results

Oppose NATO Expansion: 59%

Advocate NATO expansion: 41%

The nays have it. Their eighteen-point advantage shows solid but not overwhelming support for curtailing NATO expansion. A number of respondents expressed a desire for a third option or middle way.

Party Lines. Support for NATO expansion was slightly higher among Democrats (46%) than Republicans (39%). The stronger resistance to NATO expansion among Republicans may in a small way be attributable to the party's isolationist strain, a strain that dates back at least as far as Senator Robert Taft's opposition to NATO at midcentury. But the largest opposition to NATO expansion came from those not affiliated with either major party: nearly 70% of these people opposed NATO expansion.

The Significance of the Issue. Only two people (both Democrats) believed that the NATO issue was completely irrelevant to the presidential election. No one believed the NATO issue to be the single most important issue. 46% of respondents believed the issue to be "not very important" as an election issue. 38% believed it to be "fairly important." 14% believed the issue to be "very important."

Among Republicans 38% believed the issue to be "not very important," 46% believed the issue to be "fairly important," and 17% thought it "very important." Among Democrats, 50% thought the issue not very important, 31% thought it "fairly important" and 14% thought it very important. Among Independents, unregistereds, and others, 45% thought the issue "not very important," 42% thought it was "fairly important" and 13% thought it "very important." When presenting future Executive Decision results, we'll show comparative data demonstrating the relative importance, among respondents, of the various Executive Decision issues presented.

Age. We had only one respondent who was under 18 and only nine who were older than 55. 47% of the respondents who indicated how old they were fell between the ages of between 18 and 34. 32% were between the ages of 35 and 44. 11% fell between the ages of 44 and 55. The ratio of those opposing NATO expansion to those advocating it held roughly constant across age groups.

Race and Gender. We didn't expect that race or sex would be significant factors in this Executive Decision and indeed they weren't. Breakdowns by gender and race revealed only that Executive Decision respondents were preponderantly white and male. We hope this will change over time.