GA-InsiderAdvantage/FOX 5: Romney 56, Obama 35

[Adam Griffin]

This details aren't out yet, but FOX 5 has a video and it seems completely whack. Look at these screenshots:

EDIT: This other video states that there were 438 (likely?) voters surveyed.





Seriously.

I can't wait to see how they came to these numbers.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

You'd think it's a formatting problem with the graphics, but the text in the link also has it.

[Adam Griffin]

Most likely it's a formatting problem with the graphics.

I thought about that. Are these people so dense that they just read whatever is in front of them? Even if they don't understand polls, it's very clear that the numbers are way short of 100%.

So - clinging to some semblance of faith in humanity - I want to assume that the numbers were correctly displayed on the screen.

Did you try to add them up to get sensible results? In the second graphic, 41+16=57. So if 43% of people would rather eat with Obama, the numbers still don't make sense. Maybe 45% (with an additional 2% undecided that are not displayed), but c'mon. No way a plurality of Georgians would rather eat with Romney.

Nevertheless, Romney at 56%? With 9% undecided? This would suggest that Romney could clear 60%, which is absolute nonsense. Whites would have to make up damn near 75% of the electorate to achieve a result like that.

[Eraserhead]

Uh... okay. Well, I guess this sort of thing would help explain why Romney is still sort of competitive in terms of the national PV. Still pretty hard to believe overall though.

[Bacon King]

I'm assuming the answers to the poll questions were something to the effect of "Romney, Obama, Neither, or Undecided" and FOX5 just goofed and completely ignored the undecideds when they made their infographic.

Also, keep in mind that every question after the actual Presidential race was only addressed to the Undecided Likely Voters. First, this might explain why the omitted "undecided" option polled so high- if someone is undecided on who to support, they're probably fairly likely to be undecided in picking which candidate is better for the economy/foreign policy/dinner/etc, as well. Second, it explains why Romney beats Obama so thoroughly on these questions- a significant chunk of Georgia's "undecided" voters always break to the right come election day, and this effect is certainly amplified by their fairly strict likely voter screen weeding out more of the traditional low-information undecided voters. However, it's all moot because all those detailed questions were only asked of literally thirty people (i.e., the 7% undecided among the 438 surveyed), so the margin of error for the subsample here is going to be astronomical anyway.


Also, as for the headline numbers, As a general rule of thumb you really shouldn't trust much from Insider Advantage.

They consistently underpoll minorities, for one: ~23% of respondents in their recent polls have been black, in spite of the fact that 29% of the state's registered voters are black and exit polls showed that 30% of 2008 voters were black (in addition to the disproportionately minority-heavy absentee voters, at that).

Even their simplest crosstabs get ridiculous as hell, too: back in July, they thought that 18% of blacks were undecided, that 14% of Republicans supported Obama, and that Georgia's young voters somehow schizophrenically gave >70% support to both Obama and a repeal of Obamacare. From their May poll, InsiderAdvantage taught us that Macon is an eternal sausagefest, with men outnumbering women three to one.

Oh, yeah, InsiderAdvantage is also the group that polled Gingrich winning with 26% here, only a week before Gingrich won... with 47%.

in summary: lol junk poll, and lol stupid FOX reporter

[pbrower2a]

I am not going to use this poster. Too many problems -- and little credibility. 

[Tender Branson]

Their polling team was probably on crack will compiling these figures.

GA will almost definitely be within 10 points on election day.

This poll would suggest that Obama gets only 8-10% of Whites in GA.

[old timey villain]

This is really bad, but I wouldn't put it past the local media to report this poll as if it was handed from god. I interned at a station in Atlanta and while their grasp of local politics was great, they were totally clueless when it came to Georgia's position relative to national politics. I doubt any of the reporters remembered Obama's strong showing here in 2008, or even Clinton winning the state in 1992.

They would do stories on the national race and usually start out with "Now Obama definitely won't win Georgia this year, but his poll numbers nationally are showing improvement." I guess it goes with the narrative that Georgia is a solidly red state with no hope of the other side ever winning here. Plus it calms the rich white people in the northern suburbs, where the network draws most of its viewers.

Obama will lose Georgia but by a respectable margin, for sure.

[Adam Griffin]

I'm assuming the answers to the poll questions were something to the effect of "Romney, Obama, Neither, or Undecided" and FOX5 just goofed and completely ignored the undecideds when they made their infographic.

Also, keep in mind that every question after the actual Presidential race was only addressed to the Undecided Likely Voters. First, this might explain why the omitted "undecided" option polled so high- if someone is undecided on who to support, they're probably fairly likely to be undecided in picking which candidate is better for the economy/foreign policy/dinner/etc, as well. Second, it explains why Romney beats Obama so thoroughly on these questions- a significant chunk of Georgia's "undecided" voters always break to the right come election day, and this effect is certainly amplified by their fairly strict likely voter screen weeding out more of the traditional low-information undecided voters. However, it's all moot because all those detailed questions were only asked of literally thirty people (i.e., the 7% undecided among the 438 surveyed), so the margin of error for the subsample here is going to be astronomical anyway.


Also, as for the headline numbers, As a general rule of thumb you really shouldn't trust much from Insider Advantage.

They consistently underpoll minorities, for one: ~23% of respondents in their recent polls have been black, in spite of the fact that 29% of the state's registered voters are black and exit polls showed that 30% of 2008 voters were black (in addition to the disproportionately minority-heavy absentee voters, at that).

Even their simplest crosstabs get ridiculous as hell, too: back in July, they thought that 18% of blacks were undecided, that 14% of Republicans supported Obama, and that Georgia's young voters somehow schizophrenically gave >70% support to both Obama and a repeal of Obamacare. From their May poll, InsiderAdvantage taught us that Macon is an eternal sausagefest, with men outnumbering women three to one.

Oh, yeah, InsiderAdvantage is also the group that polled Gingrich winning with 26% here, only a week before Gingrich won... with 47%.

in summary: lol junk poll, and lol stupid FOX reporter

Well that makes more sense - the graphics/undecided voter issue. IIRC, Gingrich was sagging in GA until the end; here's the poll they did on 3/4/12 showing Gingrich with 47%. So maybe they'll have an accurate poll the week of the election.