[usconservative]

Debate performance seldom if ever changes minds or votes.

In Walker's case, it certainly would be damn' good if they did because Warnock is evil.

[sauropod]

He is indeed.

Unfortunately, I live in the Jaime Raskin State so I can’t vote for him.

[Right_Wing_Madman]

Debate performance seldom if ever changes minds or votes.

I would argue the opposite. Nixon probably lost the 1960 election because most people thought Kennedy won the debate. Gore lost a very close election against Bush because his debate performance was terrible. I thought Trump's awful debate against Biden cost him re-election.

[Bruce Campbells Chin]

the biggest impact comes when one candidate has been portrayed as an extremist or otherwise backlisted by the media, but comes across as relatively normal in the debate. That was basically what happened with Reagan/Carter, and it may have happened with Walker.

[pfflier]

Debate performance seldom if ever changes minds or votes.

A good debate performance probably won't do much. A bad performance certainly will hurt in most cases.

A lot of us remember algore's plastic mannequin makeup and his heavy sighing costing him.

We also remember Reagan's "There you go again" helping him.

All said and done, most debates aren't even debates. Usually the candidates repeat, ad nauseum, their stock talking points regardless of the question. IMO most debates are beauty contests for the moderators. They are pushing their images more than the issues. The PBS presstitutes are the worst at that.

[carcraft]

I have a Republican friend thought Walker was to dumb to get elected and he was refusing to vote for Walker until he saw the debate. Warnock was shifty, danced around booby trap questions. Walker seemed much more honest. Warnock tried to claim his church trying to evict people was a lie and an attempt to smear Martin Luther King’s church. Walker shot back, “ I have read the papers”. It was clear Walker did his home work. Warnock was caught flat footed.