data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0191e/0191e31414271c7d26239bd892d17f272a648226" alt=""
A clear majority of voters (56%) signaled that they would be “less likely” to vote for a presidential candidate proposing universal abortion coverage compared to (31%) who would be “more likely” to support such a candidate. Intensity runs strongest among those opposed to the idea, with 45% indicating they would be “much less likely” to vote in favor of a candidate whose plan forced taxpayers to pay for abortion, compared to 19% who would be “much more likely” to endorse such a candidate. Opposition to universal abortion coverage crossed nearly every demographic including sex, race, region, and age.
Some of the poll’s most interesting findings include the following:
* Independent voters of all ages and sex would be less likely to vote for a candidate that proposed a national health care plan with universal coverage of abortion at taxpayer expense.
* Although a majority of Democrats would support a candidate that proposed a national health care plan with universal coverage of abortion at taxpayer expense, the support is soft at best (51%).
* Resistance to abortion coverage is consistent between both sexes and all ages. Women aged 55 or older are the most opposed to such coverage (59% are less likely to vote for a candidate endorsing it), men of all ages follow in opposition (57% less likely to vote for a candidate endorsing it), and the majority of (51%) of women aged 18-54 are less likely to support such a candidates.
* Widespread disapproval of candidates who support taxpayer-funded abortion coverage spans all but one region of the United States —New England.