Jedward: I’m not sure there is ever a viable unbiased measure of who wins a Political debate, and that even includes the voting booth.
mdefranc: There is a subtle qualification to be made, which I tried to state in my answer above: “winning/losing” must be defined as performances “exceeding/failing” prior expectations relevant to nomination probabilities. If one defines “winning/losing” that way, yes, there’s no better indicator than Intrade contract prices.
***Ok, it does appear to me that this is the best indicator for now. I have to admit that I’m disappointed with Duncan Hunter’s post-debate Intrade numbers. I think the expectation was high that he would break out. There’s a possibility that Matthews simply downshifted into laziness and followed the path of human nature, engaging in softball chit-chat with the candidate closest to him, as seen in this article. The result was that the lucky dog closest to him got the best chance to pitch his message.
What debate? (analysis: Romney, McCain given preferential treatment)
RenewAmerica.us ^ | May 7, 2007 | RenewAmerica staff
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1829913/posts
The reason for such blatant favoritism and ineptitude? Moderator Chris Matthews. Matthews carried on a running dialogue with Romney throughout the evening—in part because Romney was positioned right next to Matthews, a bit of good fortune Romney took full advantage of.
Matthews was curt, abrupt, and oblivious to others down the line, while he repeatedly deferred to Romney. Since the debate was whatever Matthews defined it to be—with no apparent rules, format, or attempt at even-handedness—this meant his virtual sidekick, Romney, had an obvious advantage.
Good morning Kevmo. Yes, I think mdefranc did a good job in defending the credibility of the numbers giving the qualification.
Matthews was curt, abrupt, and oblivious to others down the line, while he repeatedly deferred to Romney. Since the debate was whatever Matthews defined it to be—with no apparent rules, format, or attempt at even-handedness—this meant his virtual sidekick, Romney, had an obvious advantage.
I agree with that analysis.