Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 20, 2014, 09:26:24 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  2012 Elections
| | |-+  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Tender Branson, Sheriff Buford TX Justice)
| | | |-+  FOX National: Obama leads by 7
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: FOX National: Obama leads by 7  (Read 902 times)
ajb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 872
United States


View Profile
« on: May 16, 2012, 05:29:03 pm »
Ignore

Obama 46
Romney 39

Was 46-46 three weeks ago. Just in case any narrative about the race was beginning to gel for you...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/16/fox-news-poll-obama-pulls-ahead-romney-as-presidential-race-heats-up/
Logged
oakvale
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8554
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2012, 05:38:59 pm »
Ignore

Main thing about this poll that jumps out you is the Partisan ID. The D/R/I is 42/34/20%. Like most pollsters out there, Fox is drastically overpolling Democrats. 2008 saw 39/32/29% turnout among Dems. So to believe Fox's poll, you'd have to believe that '12 Democratic turnout will be greater than '08. Almost no one believes that. For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

Umengus? Is that you?

e: Seriously, though, this seems a bit high. I'd say Obama's up 3-4 points nationally at present.
Logged

Senior Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in Atlasia.
GRIMES FOR KENTUCKY SENATOR
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4495
Venezuela


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2012, 05:42:39 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.
Logged

Try this wonderful POPULIST BLOG...

http://onlinelunchpail.blogspot.com
ajb
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 872
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2012, 05:45:46 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.

It's worth remembering that 2004 was the best presidential election of the last 24 years for the Republicans. So while Democrats may be a little oversampled here, it would be pretty silly to re-weight the sample so that Ds and Rs were at parity.
Logged
AmericanNation
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 945


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 1.91

View Profile
« Reply #4 on: May 16, 2012, 05:54:23 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.

It's worth remembering that 2004 was the best presidential election of the last 24 years for the Republicans. So while Democrats may be a little oversampled here, it would be pretty silly to re-weight the sample so that Ds and Rs were at parity.

If I had to say, I'd say:
1) Republicans are more motivated than 2004
2) Romney is better with independents/moderates than Bush
3) Romney is a better candidate outside of the Bush states than Bush was.   
Logged



BaldEagle1991
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1077
United States


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: May 16, 2012, 05:56:56 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.

It's worth remembering that 2004 was the best presidential election of the last 24 years for the Republicans. So while Democrats may be a little oversampled here, it would be pretty silly to re-weight the sample so that Ds and Rs were at parity.

If I had to say, I'd say:
1) Republicans are more motivated than 2004
2) Romney is better with independents/moderates than Bush
3) Romney is a better candidate outside of the Bush states than Bush was.   



#3 is still false. Romney is no better in the blue states (perhaps except Massachusetts and Michigan) than Bush was.
Logged

"Weezy F Baby and the F is for Phenomenal" - Lil' Wayne

"Look at this photograph/Every time I do it makes me laugh/How did our eyes get so red?/And what the hell is on Joey's head?" - Nickelback
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4495
Venezuela


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: May 16, 2012, 05:58:29 pm »
Ignore

And to be fair, this isn't 2008 Smiley

I know.  It's even BETTER than 2008!
Logged

Try this wonderful POPULIST BLOG...

http://onlinelunchpail.blogspot.com
R2D2
20RP12
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 21656
Germany


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: May 16, 2012, 06:00:46 pm »
Ignore

Surprised to see Obama up by this much in a FOX poll.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2012, 06:03:10 pm by Failures and Fallacies, A Tale Of My Life »Logged

AmericanNation
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 945


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 1.91

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: May 16, 2012, 07:03:06 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.

It's worth remembering that 2004 was the best presidential election of the last 24 years for the Republicans. So while Democrats may be a little oversampled here, it would be pretty silly to re-weight the sample so that Ds and Rs were at parity.

If I had to say, I'd say:
1) Republicans are more motivated than 2004
2) Romney is better with independents/moderates than Bush
3) Romney is a better candidate outside of the Bush states than Bush was.   



#3 is still false. Romney is no better in the blue states (perhaps except Massachusetts and Michigan) than Bush was.

You mean it's false now?  Yea, the challenger of an incumbent typically has to do some work over more than a month long time frame. 

Romney is probably better than Bush (given that a campaign goes on more than a month) in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and New Hampshire.       
Logged



AmericanNation
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 945


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 1.91

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: May 16, 2012, 07:24:44 pm »
Ignore

back to the topic,

This poll is of Registered Voters... So, of the sample that will actually vote the margin is probably 1 to 3 points. 
Logged



old timey villain
cope1989
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1703


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: May 16, 2012, 09:22:22 pm »
Ignore

For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

This is not 2004.

It's worth remembering that 2004 was the best presidential election of the last 24 years for the Republicans. So while Democrats may be a little oversampled here, it would be pretty silly to re-weight the sample so that Ds and Rs were at parity.

If I had to say, I'd say:
1) Republicans are more motivated than 2004
2) Romney is better with independents/moderates than Bush
3) Romney is a better candidate outside of the Bush states than Bush was.   



#3 is still false. Romney is no better in the blue states (perhaps except Massachusetts and Michigan) than Bush was.

You mean it's false now?  Yea, the challenger of an incumbent typically has to do some work over more than a month long time frame. 

Romney is probably better than Bush (given that a campaign goes on more than a month) in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and New Hampshire.       

Bush's incumbency status in 2004 was probably equal to Romney's NE/Midwest roots as a challenger, so it's a wash
Logged

Can't we all just get along?
Miles
MilesC56
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 12977
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.26, S: 6.26

View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 16, 2012, 09:41:44 pm »
Ignore

Dominating.
Logged

FBF
Fuzzybigfoot
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3944
United States


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: May 16, 2012, 09:46:27 pm »
Ignore

The sampling does favor Democrats a bit much, but it might not be too far off considering that Mitt isn't the most exciting nominee.  Tongue
Logged
tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18090
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 16, 2012, 09:49:47 pm »
Ignore

So FOX is only legit when Obama is leading. If Romney leads, its a Republican hack.
Logged

A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
-Jackie Robinson
Bandit3 the Worker
Populist3
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4495
Venezuela


Political Matrix
E: -10.00, S: -9.92

View Profile
« Reply #14 on: May 16, 2012, 09:51:18 pm »
Ignore

The sampling does favor Democrats a bit much, but it might not be too far off considering that Mitt isn't the most exciting nominee.  Tongue

The problem with Mitt isn't that he's boring. It's that he's greedy, spoiled, incompetent, extreme, and a nut.
Logged

Try this wonderful POPULIST BLOG...

http://onlinelunchpail.blogspot.com
tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18090
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2012, 10:24:13 pm »
Ignore

The sampling does favor Democrats a bit much, but it might not be too far off considering that Mitt isn't the most exciting nominee.  Tongue

The problem with Mitt isn't that he's boring. It's that he's greedy, spoiled, incompetent, extreme, and a nut.
Lies! Ironic though, you calling someone else an extreme nut.
Logged

A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives.
-Jackie Robinson
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1753
Mexico


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2012, 10:25:29 pm »
Ignore

Troll polls. Troll polls everywhere
Logged




Bernie would probably win Vermont if Obama were deemed to have more than 272 evs in the vag.
Umengus
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1934
Belgium


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: May 17, 2012, 04:16:59 am »
Ignore

Main thing about this poll that jumps out you is the Partisan ID. The D/R/I is 42/34/20%. Like most pollsters out there, Fox is drastically overpolling Democrats. 2008 saw 39/32/29% turnout among Dems. So to believe Fox's poll, you'd have to believe that '12 Democratic turnout will be greater than '08. Almost no one believes that. For a reference point, '04 turnout was 37/37/26%

Umengus? Is that you?

e: Seriously, though, this seems a bit high. I'd say Obama's up 3-4 points nationally at present.


lol no, it's not me. just another decent guy... Wink I'm on this forum for 2003 and I have understood that Party id of the samples is the key: cfr last polls: foxnews, ppp,... "junk" polls because party id completely crazy IMO.

"it's the party id, stupid !"
Logged

Re: France 2012: the official thread
« Reply #622 on: July 25, 2011, 04:44:20 pm » 

Quote from: Umengus on July 25, 2011, 03:19:09 pm

against Aubry, Sarkozy will win. Aubry is a very bad candidate for prime time : no charisma, no sympathy, muslim connection, stupid ideas,... and sarkozy is a good candidate...

but against hollande, sarkozy will lose."

Censured by REALPOLITIK due to "offensive content".

"It ought to be noted that there's no freedom of speech here." xahar
Eraserhead
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 37904
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: May 17, 2012, 05:15:04 am »
Ignore

back to the topic,

This poll is of Registered Voters... So, of the sample that will actually vote the margin is probably 1 to 3 points. 

It doesn't work like that.
Logged

AmericanNation
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 945


Political Matrix
E: 4.90, S: 1.91

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: May 17, 2012, 12:57:43 pm »
Ignore

back to the topic,

This poll is of Registered Voters... So, of the sample that will actually vote the margin is probably 1 to 3 points. 

It doesn't work like that.

Sometimes it does work something like that.  How do you think it works?
Logged



Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines