Yes, I realize you’ve seen one or both of these numbers elsewhere, but I don’t care. I want in on this bloggy Fun Bunch celebration too, damn it.

Mitt Romney holds a slight edge over Barack Obama — 49% to 47% — in Gallup’s initial “likely voter” estimate, encompassing interviews from Oct. 2-8. Preferences tilt the opposite way among registered voters, 49% vs. 46% in Obama’s favor…

At this point, Romney voters are somewhat more likely to respond that they will definitely vote, that they have thought a lot about the election, and that they are more familiar with where people in their local area vote. These attitudes indicate that Romney at this juncture will benefit from higher turnout on Election Day among his supporters than will Obama. These patterns could change closer to Election Day as more voters become engaged or if Republicans’ or Democrats’ enthusiasm for voting is altered by campaign events.

Key footnote: According to Gallup, after losing his five-point lead last week, Obama’s back out to a five-point lead in their daily tracker over the past 36 hours. That’s the first — and so far only — data I’ve seen suggesting that Romney’s bounce might not be durable, and even that could turn back around if Ryan cements Mitt’s Denver thrashing of O with another clear win on Thursday. As things stand right now, though, thanks to Gallup, Rasmussen, and yesterday’s Pew blockbuster, Romney’s up nearly half a point in the RCP poll of polls, the first time he’s led since October of last year. In fact, if you rely on lefty site TPM’s poll tracker, the lead’s bigger than that: Romney 48.3, Obama 45.8 in the national popular vote, which somehow translates into 270 electoral votes for Obama and 206 for Romney in their EV model. The reason for that discrepancy, I think, is that there are a bunch of new national polls out that capture Romney’s post-debate surge but not as many state polls, so the EV number is based on old info. Rest assured that if Romney wins the popular vote by 2.5 points, he’s getting to 270 too.

One more taste of schadenfreudean goodness, this time from Greg Sargent:

Democratic pollster Stan Greenberg is not known for flinching from delivering bad news to Democratic politicians, and his new diagnosis of Obama’s slippage in the polls is no exception.

Greenberg told me in an interview that his new research persuaded him that Mitt Romney beat Obama in the debate for a simple reason. Unmarried women — a critical piece of Obama’s coalition — did not hear Obama telling him how they would make their lives better. By contrast, they did hear Romney telling them he’d improve their lives…

“They heard nothing there that was relevant to them,” Greenberg says. “They were not hearing about issues or problems or things that Obama would do that affect their lives.”

They spent the better part of a year pushing “war on women” garbage at unmarried women, and this is where they’re at. Greenberg’s suggestion to Team O: Hammer Romney’s “47 percent” remarks at every opportunity. Obama’s response: You already know.