you assume most people actually watch political news coverage :)
no, not really.
I think the article gets that right: a number watch the debates, the vast majority of those were never in play anyway (they are just junkies, or D’s, or like freepers, they were supporting a candidate and hoping to see their candidate do well). But those that watch the debate are exceptionally vocal. Their loudmouths drive the news coverage, which in turn, drives money and other opinion leader stuff.
THEN...a few months down the road, the votes are cast by tens of millions in the primary, state by state.
The problem for Perry is that the game is real NOW. It is not the final game of gathering votes. But it is part of it, and an important part of it.
And his performance made it more likely that Christie, and because of that, that Palin will get in.
If both of those happen NEXT week, Perry is going to lose all press for two weeks or so, and thus will have to start retailing in order to undo the debate damage.
All of that happens in the context of those who watch coverage, and then finally, after New Year’s Day, the rest of the primary electorate will start watching.
By then, the field will be set, and the damage from the debate will either be long forgotten, or ....will have proven fatal.
(Personally...I just want to beat obama.....)