FAUX News Poll Romney 46/ Obama 45 LV Oct 7 to Oct 9

[jezebel]

Brett Baier teased their new poll coming up at 6pm. He said something like we will see how big Mitt Romney's debate bounce is.

EDIT: It's on their website already.

Romney 46/ Obama 45 LV Oct 7 to Oct 9. Was Obama 48/Romney 43 last poll.

[Shivering Jemmy]

1. Not bad

Given heightened R enthusiasm not bad at all

What are registered voters I wonder

[jezebel]

3. I just checked. Its 46-44 Obama/Romney.

[Drunken Irishman]

5. That is the most frustrating thing about this election...

Obama leads in every RV model but loses in the LV ... suggesting that more people support Obama, but they're not going to vote.

That's what Republicans are banking on and so far it's working ... depress voter turnout among Obama supporters. They do that and they'll win.

[sadbear]

2. Post-debate, pre-jobs report, huh?

It's already outdated.

[Drunken Irishman]

4. No. It was taken between Oct. 7th to Oct. 9th...

The jobs report came out on the 5th, so, this has allowed for appropriate time for both the debate and jobs numbers to settle in.

[jsmirman]

6. The chances that FAUX News was going to publish a poll at odds with the narrative they favor

I don't like the whole "dismiss a poll we previously took as gospel" spin thing, but a Faux News poll?

Please.

I'll wait to see some real polls that fully incorporate the post-debate landscape.

[Blue Yorker]

14. So how do you explain the September numbers where Obama led by 5%?

You can't explain that without coming up with some weird theory.

[AlinPA]

17. Fox 'news" is not a credible news channel, they never were. This includes their "polls".

[Blue Yorker]

18. Is Ipsos credible?

in your opinion?

[AlinPA]

19. Yes, reasonably so. But with all the crap Fox "news" transmits, people respect their “polls”?

Hannity, Palin, Rove, O’Reilly, VanSustern, Cavuto, especially the idiots in the morning (Fox and Friends), and they are called a news organization?

[Blue Yorker]

22. Hannity and Rove don't go out there and poll people

A bipartisan firm does: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2012/10/10/fox-news-poll-race-shifts-toward-romney-after-debate/

"The Fox News Poll is conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and
Shaw & Company Research (R). The poll was conducted by telephone with live interviewers
October 7-9, 2012, among a random national sample of 1,204 registered voters (RV).
A subsample of 1,109 has been defined as likely voters (LV), with a margin of error of ± 3
percentage points."

[AlinPA]

23. Defending Fox “news’ as credible just because they publish a number that happens to agree with some

polling organization (Ipsos)? Give me a break. We are talking Fox ‘news” here, not some real news organization.

[jsmirman]

20. Bullshit. Impossibly simple.

No one can deny that some move took place after the debate.

The two questions are:

1) How much and

2) How lasting.

In September, they had to be inline with other polling.

Romney had given them no reason for optimism - in fact, the very opposite - and so that period was unquestionably powder-holding time.

But if you don't imagine that Fox news has powder to expend, you're fucking crazy.

September: Go with the flow - everyone will laugh at you if you're fighting the tide

Post-Debate: This is our opportunity - pile in hard, and see if we can massage this into a post-debate effect with some carry to it.

I swear, there are things that people act like equate to splitting the atom when they are so impossibly fucking simple.

[ProSense]

7. August poll: Romney 45, Obama 44

Back to pre convention number

8/19 - 8/21

Romney (R) 45

Obama (D) 44

Romney +1


9/9 - 9/11

Romney (R) 43

Obama (D) 48

Obama +5


9/24 - 9/26

Romney (R) 43

Obama (D) 48

Obama +5

[busterbrown]

8. I never believed for a second that Fox does anything to promote public awareness......

Everything they do has an anti-Obama/democratic agenda/slant
I really believe that they posted pro Obama polls only because they wanted to
scare the shit out of their base, because the know they really have a serious problem.

[Blue Yorker]

11. That's a very intricate conspiracy theory

lol.

[busterbrown]

30. Exactly! Very Clever......

[hrmjustin]

9. it is not horrible.

[Democratopia]

10. That is near enough for Obama to still be ahead in enough swing states.

[aaaaaa5a]

12. Has anyone else noticed that Romney is always stuck between 46-47%?

It seems like when he is leading in a poll, its always because Obama is below 46% Its never because Romney is around 49%+


Its like no matter what... Romney is stuck at about 47%. And the only determining factor as to whether or not it is a good poll for him is if the President comes in at 49-50% or 44-45%.

[aaaaaa5a]

13. Look at these numbers for Romney in the FOX news poll

45% (August)

43% (September)

43% (October)

46% (Current)


Romney's support doesn't really move. It never really has. pardon the pun, but he really has become Mr. 47%.

[jsmirman]

15. Again - do people seriously think Fox was going to publish a poll showing the bounce dissipating?

Not in a million years.

This is the one gleaming moment for a narrative they like.

Forget evaluating them as a "press" outfit, it would be a straight-up business disaster for them to come out today with a post-debate poll showing Obama back in the lead.

We'll see what the real polls say - and I'm not telling you I know how those will report - but this one is pretty easy to dismiss.

[Blue Yorker]

16. Would you say the Fox poll is in line, worse, or better than others from a similar period?

?

[jsmirman]

21. I don't understand your question, prosense has likely answered it in this thread

and I answered your other question in this thread already.

[Blue Yorker]

24. The conspiratorial view would work if Fox had put Romney ahead by more than 1%

Having a poll in line in Ipsos and only 1% more pro-Romney than Gallup is not consistent with the conspiracy theory that Fox is making things up in order to aid Romney.

[jsmirman]

26. You are getting to the point of being ridiculous

How the fuck do you know?

These are the first purely post-debate/post-jobs number numbers to come out, as far as I am aware.

When you've masterminded your first grand conspiracy, I'll get back to you about definitive statements on the absolute way to pull it off.

I can tell you that I would be subtle about it if I were working a plan.

[Blue Yorker]

28. Are you he who determines the purity of post-debate dates?

Seriously. You just made the most subjective statement I've seen all day. What was the day in which the post-debate polls ceased to be "impure"? Get a grip.

[jsmirman]

29. The idea that we're not all waiting to see post-jobs number days

divorced from the immediate period post-debate is absurd and reality-defiant.

Everyone is curious about how that is going to look.

I'm beginning to think you're trolling.

I didn't before, but I'm getting there fast.

[Blue Yorker]

32. Are you sure you will believe all polls conducted post-jobs-report?

100% sure?

[jsmirman]

33. I'm not a poll denier. This is FOX FUCKING NEWS.

I'm sorry, but for any rational person, they have well-earned the right over the last decade plus to be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I notice that you have not answered the point I made about intrade. UP from where it was when the Fox announcement was made to 62.7%.

[Blue Yorker]

34. has any expert discussed the relationship between Intrade and polls?

How linear is it? How likely is it to be due to a reaction to this one poll?

[jsmirman]

35. It's a market. Like any market. If this were significant news, it would have moved it.

If it's deemed not to be significant news, it doesn't move it.

Based on: Three Years of trading and following a market's every move, shake, and shudder.

[Blue Yorker]

37. Something must have happened since the Fox poll, because it's 61.6% now

What happened? Maybe some of the people who learned of the Fox News at a later time brought it down?

[jsmirman]

39. Think of why the body of your post doesn't make sense

are you seriously suggesting that the first people to watch/follow Fox can make a killing by just waiting for the news to "percolate"?

That makes no sense.

You don't get to make money - in basically *any* market - by being first to publicly available news in this day and age.

Now 61.6% is definitely down.

Suggesting the bounce may be holding, which would mean our Pres fucked up good and special and took everyone's efforts - including Romney's to finish himself off - and managed to throw them down the crapper in one night. I hope that's not the case, but it is possible.

I was hopeful that things would readjust by tomorrow afternoon, so I still have almost a full day on that.

I don't follow intrade religiously, though, so I don't know if it tends to have more noise up and down after normal business hours.

If it's at 61.5 or thereabouts by the time Biden takes the stage, we're going to need Biden to put down a hell of a debate.

[jsmirman]

40. 62.8% now, btw

thought you might like to know.

[jsmirman]

27. I seriously think you need to answer as to whether you are aware that this is the first

post-debate AND post-jobs number polling to come out.

If I'm wrong about that, you have nothing to answer for. I don't think I'm wrong about that, unless I missed something else that was equivalent to October 7th to October 9th.

If I'm right, you need to either explain that you missed this crucial distinction or it sure seems like you are trolling.

[Blue Yorker]

31. You are misinformed, and your reasoning is strange

The jobs report was released on October 5th; yet instead of citing polls conducted during Oct. 6 or later, you push it to the 7th in order to exclude Ipsos, which had the same outcome, and was 6th to the 10th.

Rasmussen also has Romney ahead by 1% and it was conducted 7th to the 9th too.

[jsmirman]

25. And let me try to assuage your concerns like so

Intrade has held steady from before and after this announcement.

Intrade cannot be expected to predict the future accurately. It is a market. It is a bunch of people's best guesses interacting to set a price on a contract.

What it can be expected to do - because it is an efficient market, in this sense - is to immediately incorporate widely available public news.

There's no such thing as "a slow reaction" to something that is actually important new news.

If there were, well, then, any one of us could essentially start printing money.

There have to be reasons for Intrade to treat this "news" with hardly a ripple.

And I don't think it's because people are waiting to see how Joe Biden does, because anyone who trades is willing, if the trade does what they wanted it to do, to move in and out of a trade within a day.

[tarheelsunc]

36. This FUX with News poll is screwed up.

From the crosstabs:

32% of likely voters believe Obama's policies are working
17% believe it is too risky to change now
So, 49% support Obama, 48% voted "vote him out", 3% said "don't know." Yet, Romney is leading 46%-45%?

5% of likely voters don't know who Paul Ryan even is.

50% of participants say Obama will raise their taxes, only 41% for Romney

Apparently 78% of LVs saw the debate. That's not what the TV numbers say.

Romney's favorability: 52-42. Favorable to unfavorable. I HIGHLY doubt it.

[Democratopia]

38. Estimated 67 million people saw the debate but Fox poll puts it way too high at 78%