On the Memorial Day weekend, I took a poll of 800 Illinois voters who intend to take part in the Democratic primary for president. They were asked: If the primary were held that day, for whom would they vote for president? Regardless of whom they chose, what was their opinion of the candidates — favorable or unfavorable?

The results: Illinois' U.S. Sen. Paul Simon was the choice of 36 percent, New York Gov. Mario Cuomo got 18 percent and the Rev. Jesse Jackson, also from Illinois, received 8 percent. No one else received over 5 percent.

Favorable ratings were 51 percent for Simon, 32 percent for Cuomo and 28 percent for Jackson. Unfavorable ratings for the same candidates were: Simon with 18 percent, Cuomo with 19 percent and Jackson with 40 percent.

What are the voters telling the candidates? They want commitment.

Jackson's vote in this poll is very interesting. From black voters only, he received 39 percent of the vote. Keep in mind that Chicago Mayor Harold Washington received a near unanimous 98 percent vote from blacks when he defeated Edward Vrdolyak in April and won reelection as mayor. While Jackson has not lost an iota of his popularity among blacks since his presidential bid four years ago and has improved his position with whites since then, he does not have the monolithic black support given to the mayor. Will he get it?

The black constituency is also waiting to see if Jackson can deliver on his commitment to make a good run for the presidency on real issues and hard work. Many blacks feel that they "gave at the office" for Jackson four years ago. Now, they apparently want a definite commitment from their champion so they know their votes won't be wasted.

Simon's 51 percent favorable rating and low unfavorable rating clearly indicate the feeling that he is one of the good guys. Yet he has served only two years of his U.S Senate term after a tough election to win that seat, and voters are wondering about his commitment. They are asking: Has he given up his commitment to the Senate? Of does he owe us, the voters of Illinois, a greater commitment to be our president? The voters have not made up their minds.

On Cuomo, the poll shows an anomaly. The New Yorker has both high favorable and unfavorable ratings. This implies that the voters either like him a lot or can't stand him. In a curious way, this is in his favor.

Cuomo is one of those politicians who has the courage to take definite stands on issues. He doesn't back pedal nor say maybe. For example, he is against the death penalty, period. People may like or dislike this particular stand, but it is a cinch they generally approve of someone who takes a firm position and sticks to it. Paradoxically, Cuomo is an unknown factor since he is a noncandidate.

From this poll and others, it is apparent that voters want commitment.

Gary Hart is out of the race, but his spectre has not gone away. Sure, politicians are now careful to exhibit their faithful wives, but there is a serious side to Hart's story that illustrates how voters are looking for commitment. The voters are quietly saying: "Gary, why didn't you have the commitment to stay away from women when the presidency was at stake? And if you were innocent, why didn't you have the courage to fight, instead of retreating into retirement?"

There is the same kind of reaction on the Irangate troubles with President Reagan. The voters are saying: "Why did you sell out your commitment not to make deals with Iran? Why did you go covert when you always promised to be honest and open?"

Both Gary Hart and Ronald Reagan have been held in high esteem by Americans because they have had the courage to take stands, even unpopular ones. Reagan, as a result of switching his position on Iran, has been bent. Hart — well — Hart is broken.

In short, the voters are telling the canidates: "Stay committed to your issues.

If you do, we will give you our votes!"

Michael McKeon is head ofMcKeon & Associates, a national polling organization.