maybe, I still don’t think it made all that much of a difference in the end. It happned at the same time that the economy tanked and the markets collapsed and company after company went under, while McCain simultaneously imploded by suspending his campaign and then unsuspending it and talking about he was going to ride to the rescue in DC only to have it blow up in his face, and he had that poor first debate. Also, Bush was on TV all the time after being out of the news for a while. Lastly Obama’s massive spending advantage really began to kick in by the end of September and going into October.
So, as part of a perfect storm of other bad news it hurt, but in and of itself I doubt it changed anything. If she hadn’t given any interview or did the interview and nothing was said about it, I doubt the totals on Nov 4 would have been any different.
Unfortunately there’s really no way to test it’s impact apart from all te other stuff that happened. But I doubt it changed many minds. It probably reinforced those who were already voting for Obama but I doubt too many folks were voting McCain up to that moment and then switched because of that.
The editing was pretty bad. If you read the transcript it comes across as a fine interview. The only bad part was the reading question and I admit that was a bad moment but no one decides to not vote for a ticket because someone fails to mention Time magazine or the NYT in a TV interview. And her answer was perfectly understandable. It happens all the time when you meet someone knew on a date or a job interview or work and you strike up a converstaion and they’ll ask you “so what are your favorite movies” or “what bands/music do you like”. And you answer “Oh, I have a bunch. I like all different kinds. It’s hard to pick one off the top of my head. etc...” That’s basically what happened. She just came backstage from speaking before thousands, all amped up, and is asked what periodicals she reads on foreign affairs? In that situation, it’s totally understandable to give a generic catch-all reply like she did, say you read all the leading ones, the stuff that comes in the office, the papers in the office, etc...
But it looked bad and it was replayed endlessly. If Obama or Biden had given the same answer it proabbly would have been edited out before air and would never have been replayed.
The bottom line though is that the economy decided the election and no interview realy mattered. If the DOW was around 11K through Sept/Oct instead of 8K and unemployment stayed constant instead of jumping through the roof, McCain likely wins. Simple as that. And in 2012 if things look like they did under Carter no one will care about some interview and Obama will be tossed out, just like any other incumbent with a bad economy is.
I agree with your analysis. As for the interview, the secret is in the cutting. It makes or breaks a film. You can make a good actor look bad, or vice-versa. What amazes me is how Obama can get away with what he does when he is “live.” He is windy, never giving a concise answer to anything. I know that JFK was not as great with the press as people think, but he knew how to throw a verbal punch, and when he went on and on about stuff, you could see in his face that he knew it and that he was about to stop talking when he was ahead. But Obama loves to hear himself talk and you can “see” much of it is mindless. and he doesn’t care that it is.