Posted on 09/30/2012 5:12:25 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A continuing theme I've been hearing on the political gabfests on cable news this week is that not only are the current polling numbers sketchy at best, they don’t really matter all that much because... wait until the debates! That seems to be the expected pivot point in the home stretch of the race, and analysts from both sides are playing the expectations game and declaring how vital it will be for Romney to "make his mark" or for Obama to "avoid a game changing slip-up." But assuming that one of them doesn't come out at the podium and announce that they are either a serial killer or that they've discovered a cure for cancer, (with proof) will the debates really move the needle for either of them?
Miranda Green thinks not.
A 2008 Gallup study found that between 1960 and 2004, there were only two years where debates made a difference in actual votes. Instead, the most common outcome of the presidential debates is a slight popularity bump. But that bump doesn’t necessarily translate into votes.
“They sometimes have a short-term effect, a bounce in response to the debates, but at the end of the day there often is not much of an effect,” says Robert Erikson, author of The Timeline of Presidential Elections.
Data from the Gallup study also saw no direct correlation between the winner of each debate and the winner of the presidency. The 2004 Kerry vs. Bush debate was cited as an example. Kerry was considered the victor of all three showdowns, but still lost the election.
Not to read too much into Ms. Green’s personal preferences here, but it seems to me that those who feel their preferred candidate is ahead (rightly or wrongly) might be more inclined to think the debates won’t matter. But even with that said, it seems to me as if there is still a strong possibility that these shows may not produce much in the way of heat. If the candidates have been coached to play it too safe to avoid any potential damage, we may be treated to nothing more than stilted reruns of portions of their stump speeches in response to questions.
But if either of them – perhaps more likely for Romney – feel like they need a breakout moment, they might take a more aggressive tack. There are already rumors flying about Mitt preparing some “zingers” for the President, leading to much amusement on Twitter over the weekend. That can go two ways, of course. If the delivery is off or it’s perceived as more mean than funny, off the mark, etc. then it could turn into a campaign advertisement which won’t help matters at all. But if he delivers something that comes off along the lines of, “I knew Jack Kennedy, and you, Senator, are no Jack Kennedy” then I still think the debates could light a fire at just the right time.
Will anyone be watching? This chart shows how TV audiences generally declined by media share for a quarter of a century after hitting a high water mark for Reagan vs Carter. But that trend turned around in 2008 with significant increases in viewership for Obama vs McCain, and the Republican primary debates scored well above expected levels. I continue to maintain my belief that summer numbers reflect mostly the “preaching to the choir” crowds, and there will always be a significant number of people who don’t watch news channels 24/7 and are yet open to seeing something unexpected which changes or makes up their mind in the final weeks.
I doubt if ill watch it. My mind was long ago made up and what’s more, the sound and sight of The One makes me want to hurl chunks. Maybe I’ll go up to the Legion for some Wii bowling that night.
Romney has always done better in the debates during the primaries. I think he’ll really shine.
How is it possible that we have almost the exact same scenario as in 2008? Because the so-called GOP-e is also an extension of America's fifth column and the "enemy within."
How can America's future be hanging on Mitt Romney and his clueless campaign? How can America possibly survive if somehow, unbelievably, Obama gets in there for another four years? If Obama does get in, we'll probably soon forget about Obama because we'll too busy fighting the U.N's Agenda 21 and the NWO takeover.
Reagan's "Morning in America" has too quickly become Obama's "Midnight in America" (and the world).
That's the bad news. The good news if you're a believer in Jesus Christ, is that this will surely hasten Jesus' return for His own before the end of the world when God judges the world. We will be spared the horrors of God's wrath that will be poured out on the earth. And seven years later, we'll return in triumph with Jesus who, as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, will rule the earth as the Prince of Peace. He'll do it right and show that what man could only do for a couple of hundred years every so often throughout the history of mans fairly miserable record, He will do for a thousand years. Can't wait. Be ready - He's coming soon.
No.
Obama can’t lose and Romney can’t win.
Debates can be useful in stalling Obama’s upward momentum. It is the carpet bombing negative ads and the GOTV that will reverse the momentum back to Romney.
I’d be willing to wager Obama cancels his debate.
Or he finds some way to do it remotely or with a substitute, like maybe the Obama animatronic figure at Walt Disneyworld?
I think his empty chair already debated Clint Eastwood - and lost soundly!
I have to agree with the article. I’ve seen debates boost candidates and sink candidates, but those are rare. Typically, people see what they want to see in debates.
I remember thinking I lived on Mars when Lloyd Bensten mopped the floor with Quayle. I was active in the Bush campaign at a local level at the time, and couldn’t believe how many other volunteers were blinded to his pathetic performance.
Over time, I’ve come to realize that’s how the vast majority of voters see debates. A candidate says one or two things they agree with, so they instantly internalize a feeling of victory.
RE: I remember thinking I lived on Mars when Lloyd Bensten mopped the floor with Quayle
Still, the Bush/Quayle combo won anyway.
That debate, including the unforgettable Bensen line: “I knew Kennedy, and Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy”, did not amount to a hill of beans in the end.
Romney needs to go all out, gloves off, hard-core. No politeness, no nice, no sweetness. Just plain, hard facts. The Obama campaign is ready to annihilate him, so why even attempt to be ‘nice?’
If he stays steady, and genuinely challenges Obama on his record, it will be fascinating TV. No teleprompter for Obama, so he won’t do well.
I think it could be a game-changer for Romney.
For example how come nobody has brought up obummer's claim that it's OK to lie as a candidate?
Uh, no.
I’m in for $5 and a decimal point!! I’m fully prepared for a comma, if need be!
That's the quandary we find ourselves in. I just wish we would've been raptured before having to watch our country destroyed. Hopefully, we'll be able to hold on to most of our freedoms until He calls us home. Come Quickly, Lord Jesus!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.