Politics expert grind here.
There seems to be a lot of confusion around america, and even on this board, given how many dopes we have here, with regards to what "winning a presidential debate" actually means.
1. The purpose
Many view the debate on traditional academic lines. Who scores the best? Who made the most salient points? Who stayed on topic the most? Who gave the best retorts? Who lied the most or the least?
Many of you proles may be surprised to learn though that we aren't having an academic decathlon. The candidates aren't doing these debates to expand their intellectual horizons.
With regards to electoral politics, winning a debate can only be measured in one way, and one way only, and that is, which way did the needle move?
Who gained electorally, and who lost?
That is ultimately the only thing that matters.
It's also why 15 minutes after a debate, talk of who won and who lost is largely irrelevant unless you can successfully extrapolate how the performances will move the polls. And we can't really see that until a couple of days after the fact.
Which brings me to my next point,
2. What should we be looking for?
The next important factor is how can we successfully extrapolate a debate performance to predict meaningful change in the electorate.
I dont think this is as easy as people think it is, because people read into it with their own biases. For example, how many times this electoral season have pundits said that a comment trump made would irrevocably doom him only to be wrong?
That said, lets start with what is NOT relevant, and will NOT move the polls to any significant degree - nitty gritty policy wonk stuff.
Americans do not care about policy minutia. They dont have the attention span to remember who made the most 'points'. If you want to see who is really winning this debate, your best bet is to watch the debate with the sound on mute.
These debates are about looking 'Presidential.' They are about eye contact and confidence.
Go back to 2012 and see the biggest criticisms of obama in the first debate with Romney, which was universally perceived as an obama loss. Obama was averting his eyes, looking down, he looked meak, weak, hunched over. Romney was starring obama in the face and projected an aura of confidence - Presidential stature. These are the only things people remembered minutes after the debate, and they are the only things people remember now. No one was talking about who know what name or what country or what % the education budget was. These are never the things people take away from the debate.
3. Clinton v. Trump
Clinton has one goal tonight, and that is to make the 'dangerous donald' label stick. Donald will be hitler incarnate, he's going to nuke everybody, he loves putin, etc.
Many in the media have also talked about Clinton really talking about trying to get under Trump's skin, make him fluster, make him have a collasal gaff on the order of the kahn thing, or say something really racist, or come off as a pathetic failed business man.
Trumps task in my opinion is much easier. For one, many people have already assumed a clinton win. This ends up hurting clinton because she has to meet high expectations to be successful. Trump on the other hand pretty much just only has to stand pat. He has to not get flustered, stand up straight, and not spaz out too much. He can pick his spots and attack hillary with a few pointed barbs, but ultimately he just not have to trip over himself. The bar for trump is much lower, and he benefits from this.
This election also features much more undecideds than in past elections, and so trump has to deflect this scary monster trope and come off as affable and not as scary as the media has said he is. He needs to smile, be friendly, (not mean) and give people the opportunity to take a second look.
4. Media Reaction
The media is in the tank for hillary. That is just a fact. One only needs to see the articles over the weekend that have come out from the L.A. Times, The Wash. Post, the Nytimes, looking to undermine trump before the debate. The Wa. Post said that the issue of trump needing to be defeated is "beyond debate" - even though nearly 50% of the country may be voting for him, the mass media simply can't get out of their bubble and perceive trump as legitimate in any way shape or form.
As such, the media views this as their great calling. They have abandoned all pretense of being fair and neutral, they see it as their personal "duty to save the republic" (as one commentator mentioned on morning joe on msnbc this morning).
I promise you, the "Clinton won" headlines have already been written and are simply waiting to go live on their respective sites.
So how can we cut through the bullshit?
There are two types of "clinton won" headlines we may see tonight, one would suggest an actual win, and the other would suggest merely wishful thinking or propaganda on the part of the media.
Headline Type One:
"Clinton routs Trump in debate, came off as policy expert"
"Trump exposed as not as well informed on x-country, x-policy"
"Here is the amount of times Trump lied during the debate"
"Trump demonstrates lack of basic knowledge on these important issues"
"Trump flipped flop on X, Y, Z, and can't be trusted"
Any of the headlines of the above type suggest a trump win. Remember our stated goals above, and what voters remember. Americans largely do not care about policy details. This is theater. If the headlines are about how trump didn't know a certain fact or how clinton was an expert on facts, then Trump either stands neutral or had a definitive win.
Headline Type Two:
"Trump clearly shaken"
"Clinton knocks trump off the podium"
"Trump flustered"
"Trump baited"
"Trump said this massively offensive thing" (This one is debatable because the media is usually wrong on what is actually offensive"
"Hillary comes off as poised, friendly, presidential"
"Trump fails to rattle hillary"
If we see any of THESE above headlines, focusing on the theater and performance and how trump failed at it, then this can be read as a much more successful debate for hillary clinton. This is what clintonistas actually want to see.
Conclusion
The above is a snapshot, and regardless of what the pundits say, talk is cheap. The way to see who actually won the debate is to see which way the needle moves. Some of what I posted above may help us to see the truth to those ends, though it's not all inclusive.
In the rare event the media declares it a tie, the tie goes to trump, given he currently has momentum on his side, and clinton needs to slow that down.
I hope I have successfully educated you morons.
Grind
Politics Genius
JustPlainPolitics
There seems to be a lot of confusion around america, and even on this board, given how many dopes we have here, with regards to what "winning a presidential debate" actually means.
1. The purpose
Many view the debate on traditional academic lines. Who scores the best? Who made the most salient points? Who stayed on topic the most? Who gave the best retorts? Who lied the most or the least?
Many of you proles may be surprised to learn though that we aren't having an academic decathlon. The candidates aren't doing these debates to expand their intellectual horizons.
With regards to electoral politics, winning a debate can only be measured in one way, and one way only, and that is, which way did the needle move?
Who gained electorally, and who lost?
That is ultimately the only thing that matters.
It's also why 15 minutes after a debate, talk of who won and who lost is largely irrelevant unless you can successfully extrapolate how the performances will move the polls. And we can't really see that until a couple of days after the fact.
Which brings me to my next point,
2. What should we be looking for?
The next important factor is how can we successfully extrapolate a debate performance to predict meaningful change in the electorate.
I dont think this is as easy as people think it is, because people read into it with their own biases. For example, how many times this electoral season have pundits said that a comment trump made would irrevocably doom him only to be wrong?
That said, lets start with what is NOT relevant, and will NOT move the polls to any significant degree - nitty gritty policy wonk stuff.
Americans do not care about policy minutia. They dont have the attention span to remember who made the most 'points'. If you want to see who is really winning this debate, your best bet is to watch the debate with the sound on mute.
These debates are about looking 'Presidential.' They are about eye contact and confidence.
Go back to 2012 and see the biggest criticisms of obama in the first debate with Romney, which was universally perceived as an obama loss. Obama was averting his eyes, looking down, he looked meak, weak, hunched over. Romney was starring obama in the face and projected an aura of confidence - Presidential stature. These are the only things people remembered minutes after the debate, and they are the only things people remember now. No one was talking about who know what name or what country or what % the education budget was. These are never the things people take away from the debate.
3. Clinton v. Trump
Clinton has one goal tonight, and that is to make the 'dangerous donald' label stick. Donald will be hitler incarnate, he's going to nuke everybody, he loves putin, etc.
Many in the media have also talked about Clinton really talking about trying to get under Trump's skin, make him fluster, make him have a collasal gaff on the order of the kahn thing, or say something really racist, or come off as a pathetic failed business man.
Trumps task in my opinion is much easier. For one, many people have already assumed a clinton win. This ends up hurting clinton because she has to meet high expectations to be successful. Trump on the other hand pretty much just only has to stand pat. He has to not get flustered, stand up straight, and not spaz out too much. He can pick his spots and attack hillary with a few pointed barbs, but ultimately he just not have to trip over himself. The bar for trump is much lower, and he benefits from this.
This election also features much more undecideds than in past elections, and so trump has to deflect this scary monster trope and come off as affable and not as scary as the media has said he is. He needs to smile, be friendly, (not mean) and give people the opportunity to take a second look.
4. Media Reaction
The media is in the tank for hillary. That is just a fact. One only needs to see the articles over the weekend that have come out from the L.A. Times, The Wash. Post, the Nytimes, looking to undermine trump before the debate. The Wa. Post said that the issue of trump needing to be defeated is "beyond debate" - even though nearly 50% of the country may be voting for him, the mass media simply can't get out of their bubble and perceive trump as legitimate in any way shape or form.
As such, the media views this as their great calling. They have abandoned all pretense of being fair and neutral, they see it as their personal "duty to save the republic" (as one commentator mentioned on morning joe on msnbc this morning).
I promise you, the "Clinton won" headlines have already been written and are simply waiting to go live on their respective sites.
So how can we cut through the bullshit?
There are two types of "clinton won" headlines we may see tonight, one would suggest an actual win, and the other would suggest merely wishful thinking or propaganda on the part of the media.
Headline Type One:
"Clinton routs Trump in debate, came off as policy expert"
"Trump exposed as not as well informed on x-country, x-policy"
"Here is the amount of times Trump lied during the debate"
"Trump demonstrates lack of basic knowledge on these important issues"
"Trump flipped flop on X, Y, Z, and can't be trusted"
Any of the headlines of the above type suggest a trump win. Remember our stated goals above, and what voters remember. Americans largely do not care about policy details. This is theater. If the headlines are about how trump didn't know a certain fact or how clinton was an expert on facts, then Trump either stands neutral or had a definitive win.
Headline Type Two:
"Trump clearly shaken"
"Clinton knocks trump off the podium"
"Trump flustered"
"Trump baited"
"Trump said this massively offensive thing" (This one is debatable because the media is usually wrong on what is actually offensive"
"Hillary comes off as poised, friendly, presidential"
"Trump fails to rattle hillary"
If we see any of THESE above headlines, focusing on the theater and performance and how trump failed at it, then this can be read as a much more successful debate for hillary clinton. This is what clintonistas actually want to see.
Conclusion
The above is a snapshot, and regardless of what the pundits say, talk is cheap. The way to see who actually won the debate is to see which way the needle moves. Some of what I posted above may help us to see the truth to those ends, though it's not all inclusive.
In the rare event the media declares it a tie, the tie goes to trump, given he currently has momentum on his side, and clinton needs to slow that down.
I hope I have successfully educated you morons.
Grind
Politics Genius
JustPlainPolitics
