Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pres08: Fox Poll's Favorable/Unfavorable Ratings
Political Arithmetik ^ | 2/1/07 | Charles Franklin

Posted on 02/03/2007 11:14:14 AM PST by freespirited

Fox News' new poll, completed 1/30-31/07, provides a new look at the favorable and unfavorable ratings of the leading presidential contenders. Rudy Giuliani continues to lead the pack in the balance of favorable to unfavorable ratings in the new Fox poll with 54% favorable to 24% unfavorable . John McCain enjoys a net-positive evaluation, though not as strongly positive as Giuliani, at 45%-29%. Among Democrats, Hillary Clinton strongly divides voters yet manages a 50%-44% net positive rating. Less well known John Edwards has an 8 point net positive (41%-33%) while Barack Obama has the best balance, 41%-20% but the largest number of voters unable to rate him (38%.)

Three political figures have net negative ratings in the Fox poll. Mitt Romney is the least well known among all the candidates and suffers a net negative rating of 11%-22%, but with 67% unable to rate. Newt Gingrich, who has adopted a wait-and-see approach to the presidential campaign, suffers a 22%-49% net negative, while Al Gore, who seems quite uninterested in the race, has a somewhat better but still net negative 39%-51%.

(For comparison, see my similar analysis of an early January CBS News poll here. That post also discusses the plots and how to read them in greater detail.)

The extent to which partisans divide over the candidates is clear above. Hillary Clinton remains the most polarizing figure with strongly net negative views among Republicans, strongly positive views among Democrats, and a near balance yet net negative among independents. (The purple dot is independents, the black dot is the population as a whole, with the now conventional red for Republican and blue for Democrats.)

McCain and Giuliani do well among independents and even with Democrats. Gore and Gingrich in contrast both divide the electorate and manage net positives only among their own partisans. Edwards splits partisan camps, though not as strongly as Clinton and roughly balances the sides and among independents. Obama does quite well among independents, but is developing a Republican opposition. Romney remains a mystery to all partisan groups, which cluster and don't know him.

There has been some movement in the Fox ratings, but the most recent prior poll varies a great deal in how old it is. Clinton's most recent poll was just last October, and little seems to have changed. Several other candidates were measured in May 2006. But Edwards' last reading was in October 2004 (during his run for the Vice-Presidency) and Gingrich's dates back to 1998! So look at change with due caution.

Finally, the balance of not knowing the candidate versus knowing but not enough to rate them can be instructive. In the earlier CBS News poll, there was a clear differentiation between the better known and the lesser known candidates. The new Fox poll lacks almost all of the lesser known figures, so that pattern is less pronounced here than in the CBS data (here) Still, among these candidates, it is interesting the Obama now more closely resembles the better known candidates, while only Romney remains in the space occupied by the least known in the CBS poll.


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: gopnomination; politicianratings; ratnomination
This is a cool website by a professor who teaches political science. Lots of interesting graphs and data.
1 posted on 02/03/2007 11:14:21 AM PST by freespirited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freespirited
It is 21 months from an election. It is utterly moronic for the Junk Media to be polling. Frankly the ONLY reason these polls are done is to help the DC Old Boy's Club pre select the candidates that will be offered by making sure only certain names get mentioned.

Frankly ALL "News Media" polling should be banned as an illegal contribution in kind to candidates. It done for ONLY one reason. To push or hinder certain candidates based on the editors and publishers personal predisposed to support a set of candidates
2 posted on 02/03/2007 11:20:06 AM PST by MNJohnnie ( If they say "speaking truth to power,"-they haven't had a l thought since the Beatles broke up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie; freespirited

All of what you say may be true, however I find it interesting... sometimes the polling numbers hold up and sometimes they don't.


3 posted on 02/03/2007 11:22:28 AM PST by DKNY ("You may have to fight a battle more than once to win it." --Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DKNY

You are right. I am taking it all too seriously. It is nothing more then something for the media to past the time with waiting for real news to show up. I just object to the way it is cynically being used to pre shape the 2008 political battlefield. The way Dean self destructed in 2003-2004 is pretty much proof the polling data at this point is nothing but Junk Media self abuse at it's worst.


4 posted on 02/03/2007 11:34:15 AM PST by MNJohnnie ( If they say "speaking truth to power,"-they haven't had a l thought since the Beatles broke up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

The broadcast media are very ratings-driven. They must have evidence that viewers want to hear this stuff.


5 posted on 02/03/2007 11:40:59 AM PST by freespirited (What about Dingell-Norwood?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freespirited
The media does not care what we think and it is not poll driven. The media is only interested in influencing the voters to vote their world view. In this regard they will lied, misrepresent, and distort to present their case for you to consider under the guise of reporting the news. The mainstream news media presents only the liberal view. Don't believe anything that you read or see on TV until you have check it out on the internet, google, blogs, talk radio and newspaper and TV. You will find another word for liberal is liar! Of course, they will accuse the opponents of lying. No inteligent person that wants to know the truth in news is a liberal!!
6 posted on 02/03/2007 12:32:35 PM PST by jomitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson