Published barely 10 minutes ago.
UPDATE: The details:
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 925 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from September 25 to September 27. For the total sample, it has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
In other words, this is the first published poll based on a survey completely after Cain won Saturday’s straw poll.
UPDATE II: Let’s compare numbers with the previous Fox poll:
Romney ……… Sept. 9/25-27: 23% …. Aug. 29-31: 18%
Perry …………. Sept. 9/25-27: 19% …. Aug. 29-31: 26%
Cain …………… Sept. 9/25-27: 17% …. Aug. 29-31: 4%
Gingrich …….. Sept. 9/25-27: 11% …. Aug. 29-31: 3%
Paul ……………. Sept. 9/25-27: 6% …. Aug. 29-31: 6%
Bachmann ……. Sept. 9/25-27: 3% …. Aug. 29-31: 8%
Santorum ……. Sept. 9/25-27: 3% …. Aug. 29-31: 4%
So three September debates in the span of 15 days — Sept. 7 in Simi Valley (NBC), Sept. 12 in Tampa (CNN) and Sept. 22 in Orlando (Fox) — have completely re-arranged the GOP field.
UPDATE III: Why the big shift to Cain? Well, the Aug. 29-31 poll included Sarah Palin — she got 8% — while the latest poll didn’t.
Are Palinistas becoming Cainiacs?
UPDATE IV: Allahpundit wields the knife on Perry:
This is what happens when the big takeaways from your debate performance are (a) you hate your own base and (b) you sound brain damaged.
Dude. That was cold.
UPDATE V: Thanks for the link, Ace, but — is there something in the water these days? — Palin did not mean to put down Herman Cain with that “flavor of the week” phrase. She’s actually a huge fan of Cain. (And I’ll delete the hell out of any commenter who goes there, IYKWIMAITYD.)
Jeff Goldstein notes Palin’s latest policy commentary: She’s keeping her fire targeted at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Except that you can’t use that kind of metaphor any more. Because it’s “hate” or something.
Voters. Not likely voters.
Likely voters would almost certainly give Cain bigger numbers.
I think that is right. But it is certainly a step in the right direction.
Despite these poll results, the mainstream media will resist treating him as a serious candidate because accepting him as a serious candidate would result in cognitive dissonance.
If Palin decides not to run, the big beneficiary will be Cain, not Perry or Bachmann.
I love Herman Cain. He’s the only one that I’ve given a donation to so far.
I wish everyone would quit picking on my Governor though. He really is a nice guy and so much of the misunderstanding is due to not understanding Texas.
Just a note on the border issue: Perry’s right on the borders .. the border backs up to the Rio Grande River. where many Texas ranchers do not want a big fence. So what are you going to do? Force them to comply with the Gov’t against their wishes? I thought Conservatives were against this type of attitude. The border can be sealed with drones and boots on the ground. It was the Federal Gov’t that has interferred with the progress of sealing the border because it is against their agenda. I have seen the borders protected, at both the California and Texas borders. It can be done. We just need a President that believes in enforcing the Border Laws.
Well considering AP is still in cyber love with Meggie Mac and she dislikes Perry, what else can he say?
[…] 3 Comments and 0 Reactions […]
She is running!
As a Texan Perry always talks tough on the border when election time comes around and then slinks back into his hole.Our deficit is now growing at a faster pace then the Federal government.
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/09/28/cain-i-couldnt-support-perry-if-hes-the-nominee/
It is starting already. I suspect Cain meant in the primaries (which is fine). But in the general election Cain would not support Perry if he were the nominee? WTF?
The only deal breaker guy is Huntsman (because if he is the nominee, I am heading for the moutains anyway to hole out the coming collapse). Heck, I would support Ron Paul if he was the nominee and Dr. Paul is a nut job. Just that he is a fiscal hawk and in that regard far better than Obama.
I will believe it when I see it. She sounded a bit…equivocal today.
I’ll agree with that. It seems that Perry and Romney are both going to battle over the center. Which ironically means that after hearing how all these ‘other’ candidates were splitting the right of the GOP, may mean that the Conservatives coalesce around a candidate faster than the Establishment does.
Also, seeing as Fox has been in the tank for Romney since, well, forever, it’s not surprising to me if this poll shows a blip in his direction.
Hunstman and Romney are both on my “I will never vote for” list. And yes, I mean if spineless-milquetoast say-anything to get elected Romney is nominated, I WILL vote 3rd party.
I see your manpal Herman made another unforced error w the never support Perry dealio. Spin it for me, Stacey!!!!!1!!11!
I believe I saw a 5% margin of error when they put this on the tele.
I’m very suspicious of FNC polls.
She is running Joe. If she doesn’t you can throw the pie at my face.Lol.
A fence is a force multiplier and not a panacea. Neither a fence nor personnel nor eVerify are enough to slow/stop illegal immigration; but it’s essential to have all three… and more. They complement each other and fail completely lacking any single component.
As to the case of ranchers and border fencing, I think this is actually a valid case for eminent domain. It is a national security issue as well as a State sovereignty one. So, yes, ranchers will have to lose or at least provide access to any Federal border security personnel assuming a contiguous physical barrier cannot be erected.
I don’t like or dislike Perry, but nice has nothing to do with it. He needs to be right, or Right. We’re discovering he really isn’t enough of either. Better than SCoaMF? Sure, but that’s an unacceptably low bar.
I agree with you on Cain mistake. He should never say that about a same party candidate even if that is his true feelings.
Then you are voting for Obama. And that sucks. In terms of Romney.
In terms of Huntsman, you have a point.
Huntsman has no chance.He would actually fare better in the Democrat primary. I think if Romney was to win the nomination you will see a splitting of the Republican party for good.It could turn a great year for congressional elections into a no win year.
I’m suspicious of polls, period. But the leftward shift of FNC is real as it tries to moderate for the sake of audience share. Didn’t Murdoch state as much just a few days ago?
I find there to be a direct, inverse correlation between their shift Left and my available time for their content. They built their audience by being not-MFM, and now they’re going to gravitate to the MFM side of the spectrum? OK, fine. Do it without me. I now have, for example, The Other McCain et al. to fill my head with Tea Party angst. Which is nice.
A statist is a statist. And Romney’s a statist. I’m done holding my nose and voting where Karl Rove tells us to.
True, but this tracks with that supposed “outlier” Zogby poll yesterday as well. So there’s a trend showing a three horse race. At the very least, it demonstrates the media’s been wrong to dismiss other candidates as they have. Interestingly, it also shows Newt gaining ground…
Why? That’s part of who Cain is. He’s not a politician. He says what he thinks and means what he says. He may not always be right, but that’s not going to hurt him in the Primary season.
If Romney gets the nomination whether he wins or loses the presidential race or not, the base goes elsewhere. No more settling.
It will hurt him in bringing over people from the Perry camp. Just pointing out that you should never make statements like this even if that is how you feel. He will gone after Iowa anyway.
I think there is something wrong with their sampling or something they tend to being the outlier alot when compared to other polls RCP uses.
Check out that hockey stick of a graph for Herman Cain.
Yep…Perry has been governor for 11 years…it is not a lick better.
Some may try to apologize for him and say that the Federal government is solely responsible for the problem, however, there are things he could have done.
1) He should have not killed the sanctury cities bill
2) He should have in fact argued for a tough sanctuary cities bill with some actual bite to it (the one he had killed…was as tough as a new kitten)
3) Should not have promoted and signed into law a bill that gives an educational subsidy to adult illegal aliens to go to college.
4) Should not have gotten friendly with La Raza
5) Should have supported the Arizona immigration bill
6) Should have promoted a bill tougher than Arizona’s illegal alien bill
I will not vote for Romney, Perry, or Huntsman.
Sorry…call me what you want. I will vote for all the other positions on the ballet and write in a 3rd party candidate.
Also, I live in Texas….so….no harm anyway 🙂
Cain is his own man. If that is how he feels, who are you to judge?
I take strong issue with the thought that you just HAVE to vote for somebody. That is the trouble with our political system today.
If she runs I will have pie. To celebrate.
Not only is the fence not a panacea, I think the fence could do more harm than good. I know it would because they can reduce the amount of personnel on the border, and you can bet they will. “The fence has reduced our need for personnel” is what they will say, and by the time as much of a year has gone by the damn fence might as well not be there either.
Wait a minute, not so fast. You say you wouldn’t vote for any one of those three gentlemen, well, what about all three of them combined into one, otherwise known as Chris Christie?
Eminent domain? For all the ranch property and the herds, not to mention the cost of taking viable grazing lands out of production? Why, the cost of the fence alone wasn’t enough money wasted?
[…] LATEST FOX NEWS POLL: Mitt Romney 23% Rick Perry 19% Herman Cain 17% : The Other McCain Palin did not mean to put down Herman Cain with that “flavor of the week” phrase. She’s actually a huge fan of Cain. (And I’ll delete the hell out of any commenter who goes there, IYKWIMAITYD.) […]
That would surely be an argument made, but I’m coming at it from the POV of a nation with leadership that believe in actual and not the illusion of secure borders. If it’s understood that we as a people do not believe in sovereignty and refuse to appoint others of like mind, then there’s no solution… ever. The premise is that security and control is desired. Is the premise true? That is the real question.
Yes. For all of the loss of property and herds, it’s a necessary trade-off. And the cost of a force-multiplying fence – even if non-contiguous in select spots because personnel is substituted and more practical – is not bankrupting given the competing costs of not defending it. There will be costs either way. A sovereign nation that values security and rule of law can readily absorb this comparatively inexpensive investment.
If you think the judges McCain or Romney or Perry would appoint would be comparable to the judges Obama appoints, and see no problem giving him 2-3 more seats on SCOTUS and 300 more lower federal court appointments, you have to be delusional.
A statist may be a statist, but a blithering idiot is still an idiot.
Yeah there is: you are settling for Obama if you do that.
And you will have been part and parcel in his reelection. If you can live with that, fine. But unless you change your screen name in shame, I promise to remind you every single day from November 7th, 2012 to January 20, 2017.
La Raza is Mexican supremacist group. Basically agents of a foreign power similar to the German Bund movements in the late thirties.
Isn’t the border between Texas and Mexico the middle of the Rio Grande?
Christie isn’t running and wouldn’t get the nomination if he did. I don’t know that he’s to left of Romney but he is certainly to the well to the left of everyone else.
LOL!
I do think Christie would be better than Huntsman.
However, none of those 4 men are bad, just that they are fundamentally wrong on what the future of this nation should be.
That’s just it, a fence would provide an illusion of security, and little more. The only real solution isn’t practical. That would be repealing Posse Comitatus and militarizing the border. That would just take too long, but absent that option they can always hire ex-military into ICE and you have practically the same thing. They should put however many people it takes on the border, and give them permission to shoot to kill when necessary, which would be when they are attacked, or if someone tries to elude capture. It wouldn’t take long to get this under control, but they have to treat some of these people like an invading army, because essentially, when you are dealing with armed criminal gangs, that is what they are.
These aren’t just people coming over here to pick lettuce and change your bedding. Frankly, I don’t give a shit about them. I don’t want them to keep coming over here by the tens of thousands, but if they’ve been here a while and otherwise obeyed the laws, and worked whenever possible, I don’t have a problem with them becoming citizens over time, so long as our border is truly secured before we go down that road.
But many of these people, the ones we should be most concerned about, are drug smugglers and human traffickers, and they will kill you and not think once about it, let alone twice.
You are really tiresome at times.
#1 I didn’t say the base wouldn’t vote against Obama if Romney got the nomination, I’m saying that the conservatives would have to come to the conclusion that the GOP is irredeemable, necessitating another option going forward, though many would stay home as in 08.
#2 There is no shame in refusing to participate in a sham. Just because Trotsky opposed Stalin doesn’t make him a democrat. Conservatives have been forced to settle for what as often as not would have been a poor substitute in any case. Dole would not have been a better president than Clinton because he was an insider, compromising elitist. He wouldn’t have appointed conservative judges he’d have appointed moderate judges who often as not become liberals.
#3 Adobe Walls isn’t just a place in the Texas panhandle and there is no shame in standing for first principles nor is there honor in settling for another squish because we think that’s better than nothing. Nothing plus nothing is nothing. Putting forward the most conservative candidate we can is not shameful nor foolhardy, even if it leads to defeat. We have reached the point in this nation of the zero sum game but Bolshevism has already lost. Whether Obama wins or not the left has shot their wad and are headed for the dustbin of history. If we can’t elect a true conservative this cycle with the lefts failure plain for all to see then when can we.
If our fellow citizens are willing to consciously and deliberately vote to founder the ship of state on rocky shores it is entirely appropriate that the left be at the helm.
If catastrophe is an end it is also a beginning. While it could still be us, I believe it will be the left who meet their end, hands bound, blindfolded in front of Adobe Walls.
When multiple polls start showing the same directional shifts, it has a lot more meaning than one or two polls here and there. A lot of this is not Perry’s core support melting away – it’s those people who were sold a bill of goods about what a fabulous conservative warrior he was before he ever got in.
Perry IS a conservative, but he isn’t a “movement” guy like DeMint. Which is fine, because despite what we see on the internet, the “base” isn’t all movement conservatives either. Don’t believe me?
Well, since Reagan, we’ve nominated GHWB twice, Dole, W twice, and McCain. See any “movement conservatives” in there? In fact, every one of them picked a running mate to appease conservatives! Quayle, Kemp, Cheney, Palin.
Incidentally, Michael Reagan says if his Dad were running today, he would be “too moderate” for the conservatives of today.
The bad news for Perry isn’t the drop in initial support, that was bound to happen. The rise of Cain is Perry’s biggest challenge, because Cain is coming from his right. Not miles to the right, but enough to be a problem because, truth be told, Romney isn’t all that far to Perry’s left. That leaves him with a narrow audience between the two.
But how do you attack Cain without simultaneously pissing off cancer survivors and their families, conservatives, pizza lovers, capitalists, and Morgan Freeman?
Huntsman isn’t bad he’s just crazy he believes in AGW and thinks we must save the planet through Messianic Green Energy. So he’s not bad merely certifiable….still I don’t think I’d let him babysit my kids or lead my country.
I agree with you. As Mark Levin keeps saying, these polls only show that it’s still a wide open race. The myth that Romney is “the leading candidate” is pure crap. At this point, even Bachmann still has a shot. These folks have to hold up well for a very long time.
Two words: Anthony Kennedy
Sure, like the Internet will survive four more years of Obama.
If Obama wins, it won’t be because of Conservatives, that’s for sure.