Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: National Survey (Fox 4/6-7)

Topics: poll

Fox News / Opinion Dynamics
4/6-7/10; 900 registered voters, 3% margin of error
359 Democrats, 5% margin of error
326 Republicans, 5% margin of error
160 independents, 8% margin of error
Mode: Live telephone interviews
(Fox News: story, toplines)

National

Obama Job Approval
43% Approve, 48% Disapprove (chart)
Dems: 80 / 12 (chart)
Reps: 7 / 87 (chart)
Inds: 38 / 49 (chart)
Economy: 43 / 53 (chart)
Health Care: 40 / 53 (chart)

Congressional Job Approval
21% Approve, 72% Disapprove (chart)

2010 Congress: Generic Ballot
43% Republican, 39% Democrat (chart)

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barack Obama: 50 / 45 (chart)
Nancy Pelosi: 29 / 53
Democratic Party: 42 / 49
Republican Party: 40 / 50
Tea Party movement: 36 / 34
John Boehner: 12 / 18
Harry Reid: 16 / 37
The IRS: 49 / 38

Based on what you know, do you favor or oppose the new health care law?
39% Favor, 54% Oppose (chart)

Party ID
40% Democrat, 36% Republican, 18% independent (chart)

 

Comments
Stillow:

That approvel # for O is just downright ugly!

____________________

Stillow:

By the way,k I think the poll was taken April 6-7, notMarch...!

____________________

Mayor Quimby:

Long poll. Some of the big questions and results:

18. Right now, how interested are you in the November elections?

Dems: 58%
GOP: 69%

20. Are you more or less likely to vote for a candidate if President Obama
campaigns for them?

More: 29%
Less: 45%

35. Do you think the new health care law is more likely to help keep the country from going further into debt or is it more likely to push the country further into debt?

Less Debt: 22%
More Debt: 65%

38. Under the new health care law, do you think your health care costs will increase, decrease or stay about the same?

Increase: 56%
Decrease: 5%
Same: 35%

51A. (n=444, ±5) Do you favor or oppose increasing offshore drilling for oil and
gas in U.S. coastal areas?

Yes: 70%
No: 22%

____________________

Field Marshal:

"18. Right now, how interested are you in the November elections?

Dems: 58%
GOP: 69%"

Mayor, i think this question is the most important one in the survey. It will be interesting to see where it lands in late October.

____________________

jack:

I don't trust biased pollsters. I don't trust Fox because it's a blatantly pro-Republican outlet. I don't trust Rasmussen because he's a conservative hack. i don't trust Daily Kos/Research2000 because Kos is an Obama loyalist and biased Democrat. I'll stick with Gallup, surveyusa, Pew, etc.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

This poll clearly underpolls Democrats, making it not horrible, considering it is Fox news. Still Nancy Pelosi has higher favorables than Boehner. Who even knows who Boehner is? I think Michelle Bachmann has declared herself House Minority leader, and has made many more public appearances than either Kantor or Boehner.

What surprised me the most about a Fox poll is that many favorables of the IRS.

America is the most Schitzophrenic nation in the world. It is so funny, that every time America turn so the right for their answers, it may seem good for a short time, but bites us in the back. When we see the kind of reprehensible bills they will put on Obama's desk to veto, like rolling back healthcare, building new nukes, weapons, and the GOP's love for war spending, but disdain for spending on providing health care for human beings. The party that cares about the unborn, but once you are born, they don't care if your momma gets thrown out on the street, or loses her job and benefits. That is what the far right in America is all about.

Thankfully Obama got health care passed, and will pass a landmark education bill. I am sure that he'll have more accomplishments by 2012 than most other previous presidents did. A majority of voters would have to be absolutely delusional not to see that.

____________________

Stillow:

Underpolls Dems? They make up 40 percent of the sample..............how is that underpolling Dems?

We're getting rid of our nukes while other countires are trying to get them, real smat move!

If it wasn't for al lthat war spending you hate you'd be speaking German, Japanese or Russian right now....

The HC you hail as a victory is seen by a majority of America as a negative thing......which most likely will be tossed out by the scotus or totally defunded by the GOp until its eventually repealed and replaced.

I know you libs long for the J. Carter days....but we've played this game before, the country gets mad at a righty, then tosses in a lib like Carter and they last one term.....

Sorry farleft, your savior will be a one term pres and be ranked down there with carter.

____________________

Xenobion:

Ha you wish Stillow... dont' know the dog in the race when you don't have one. Right now every Republican Presidential front runner is hurting...

Obama is quite Clintonesque and whether is Romney, Palin, or Huckabee they're all Bob Doles not ready to be 2x losers.

HC favorability is up 10 points so far. But its all in the minds eye as Americans waked up in November and realize they still have their same Health Care and the Economy will be a smidge better. I anticipate republicans in 2010 to snatch defeat with the claws of victory in many arenas given that any incumbant president loses seats in the senate and house with some regularity.

____________________

lat:

Stillow,

So by your way of thinking I guess Ronnie and Bush 41 were idiots also when they did the original START treaty? I guess they too wanted to bolster our enemies?

____________________

kevin626:

So in a FoxNews poll,the IRS has a 13 percent higher favorability rating then the Tea Party. I bet that is not what they had in mind when they asked about the IRS.

____________________

sjt22:

We're getting rid of our nukes while other countires are trying to get them, real smat move!

Indeed, quite smat. Doing exactly the same thing that Ronald Reagan did with regards to nukes, which I'm sure means that Ronald Reagan was some kind of idiot as well, right Stilow?

Oh no, we'll only have 1500 nukes! That's barely enough to kill every living thing on the planet more than a few times over! Whatever shall we do with so few weapons at the ready?

____________________

Stillow:

X - Where have I heard that narrative before....oh ya, in NJ, VA and MA. Only libs living in fantasy land seem to think the Dems are rebounding and HC populairty is up....I know you love those internet ecnomist polls though!

I was told by lib after lib o nthis ite, I think even you said it, that onc eHC was passed Dems and O's approvals would go way up.....hmmmmmm, haven't seen it yet.

You libs keep talking and saying stuff, but reality keeps doign the exact oppositte!

____________________

Field Marshal:

Its not the number of nukes that i have a problem with, its coming out with definitive scenarios of when we would use them that i take issue with.

W. decreased the number of nukes we have in our arsenal more than any other president; by nearly two-thirds.

If you are going to develop clear cut situations of when and where you would use them, then keep them to yourself and the upper-echelon!

____________________

sjt22:

@ FM

We have always tried to develop clear cut situations of when and where to use them. Obama's "new" criteria aren't a problem. He says we won't use them against non-nuclear countries if they are in compliance with NPT. This excludes nations like Iran and North Korea.

He also says that he will reserve the right to change this policy if there is a mass biological attack. So basically it says "don't violate NPT and don't use biological weapons and we wont' nuke you". Seems pretty

If you are going to develop clear cut situations of when and where you would use them, then keep them to yourself and the upper-echelon!

You've missed the point. The reason for telling everyone this is to reassure and encourage other nations that they don't need to try and develop WMDs and they should honor the NPT. Play by the rules and we wont' blast you to hell (at least not with nukes). Diplomacy 101.

____________________

sjt22:

W. decreased the number of nukes we have in our arsenal more than any other president; by nearly two-thirds.

And where were the howls of protest then?

Where was the conservative outrage when Reagan negotiated (a sure sign of weakness!) with the "Evil Empire" in order to reduce our nuclear stockpiles? Or when he spoke and wrote passionately about his dream of a nuclear weapon free world? Where was this conservative bitching and pants wetting at that point?

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR