37
   

The Presidential Debates!

 
 
Cliff Hanger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 06:29 am
@sozobe,
Thanks for posting this-- yep, I approve of Jim Lehrer. An added approval for Bob Schieffer. I've heard him interview on Face The Nation and he really asks the pointed questions. He usually doesn't get the answer, but he keeps on it until time runs out.

I think Gwen Ifill will be good. You know why? Because Charlie Gibson, who did a pretty good job during Palin's interview by sticking to his guns, looked a little bit off-kilter by her aggressiveness. Gibson blinked a lot. Did you pick up on that?

I'm telling you, Sarah Palin is a tank with eyes.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 07:26 am
Article on the historical impact of debates on Presidential elections
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_VW8l01J93zY/SNj8Bs2NS9I/AAAAAAAAAOc/R1KvQc-6lmg/s1600-h/debatetable1.png
Quote:
These data suggest that the norm is for very little swing in candidate support following debates. Across all thirteen presidential debates the average absolute change in candidate support was 1 percentage point. There are a few notable exceptions, of course. Two that stand out are the second debate in 1992, following which George H.W. Bush lost 2 points, and first debate of 2004, after which George W. bush lost 2.26 points. Other debates with above average ( but still small) vote shifts are the first debate in 1996 and the second debates in 1988 and 2000. Each of these debates has its own story, and I'm sure we can all think of anecdotes to explain the bumps and wiggles. Although the analysis is terribly outdated by now, the debate model from Do Campaigns Matter? came to the profound conclusion that the candidate viewed as having won the debate generally gets a small bump (I told you it was profound).
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  4  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 07:45 am
Interview with Lehrer before the debate for those interested.
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 08:32 am
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:

Actually, what disappoints me is how the debates were taken from the oversight of the League of Women Voters and rolled into a committee of repubs and dems.

Why? Ross Perot. This occurred in 1998, after the two parties decided a third party candidate might pose a danger to the status quo.

Wikipedia has a nice entry re this for anyone interested. In part, the LWV stated "The League of Women Voters is withdrawing sponsorship of the presidential debates...because the demands of the two campaign organizations would perpetrate a fraud on the American voter. It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and answers to tough questions. The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public. "

I'm not necessarily a third party guy, but this condition on the debates has just about eliminated a viable third party candidate in the future, and I think we're poorer for it...


I completely agree. Even if a third party candidate never had a real chance of winning, they can force the other two candidates to address issues that they otherwise would not. The League of Women Voters gave us good debates, now we have a dog and pony show.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 08:51 am
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
Obama will present his "soak the rich" platform as always.


A Lone Voice. You want to see 'group think'. Here's Mr Group Think himself.

Predictably, a liberal will instantly shift the issue to some sort of personal attack , rather than address the topic.
kickycan
 
  4  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 08:58 am
@Brandon9000,
Predictably, Brandon will ignore all the people on the board who make a valid point, seek out something that he considers a personal attack, and then use that to paint every liberal as unwilling to debate the issues, rather than address the topic.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 09:03 am
@engineer,
Thanks, engineer.

I agree with what people are saying about the LoWV -- hopefully Lehrer will do a better job than Russert et al though. (Not to reignite the "don't speak ill of the dead" debate, but Russert was the first one who came to mind as a BAD moderator in the primaries...)

This is interesting:

Quote:
"It's the first time that things have been really loosened up -- where the candidates can direct questions to each other. There will be a question that goes to both of them, and they'll have two minutes each to answer. But then, there's five minutes that is wide open afterward -- for them to speak to each other, or me, the moderator, to ask follow-ups, then go to another question, etc.. And there will be nine segments like over almost 90 minutes."


The first time the candidates can direct questions to each other? Really?
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 09:49 am
@George,
George wrote:

No matter what, each question will be ignored and the candidate will answer the
question he wanted to be asked.

No matter what, everyone will try to score the performances rather than learn
anything from what was said.

No matter what, each side's supporters will award an overwhelming victory to
their man.

No matter what, no one will change his or her mind.


A spot on analysis.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:04 pm
@McGentrix,
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/breaking_mccain_campaign_suspe.php

McCain begs off of Friday's debate. I can't believe he would make such a bone-headed move.

Obama should show up and debate an empty podium.

Cycloptichorn
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:08 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
O

M

G


No way!!

Seems like things are inconclusive as of now...

But wow, if he really cancels the debate...!
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:08 pm
McCain steps up and sets politics aside in an effort to address the bail out crap.

Country 1st!

MCCAIN SAYS HE'LL SUSPEND CAMPAIGN TO DEAL WITH FINANCIAL CRISIS, CALLS ON OBAMA TO DO SAME; CALLS FOR POSTPONEMENT OF DEBATE
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:39 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I wouldn't call it bone-headed. He's got a different angle.
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:42 pm
@FreeDuck,
What's your take on it, FreeDuck?
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:44 pm
@FreeDuck,
Yeah, I know - it's the 'instant leadership' gambit.

But it will fail, spectacularly, for McCain is neither

A - knowledgable enough about the subject to actually lead, or

B - involved in any of the committees debating the bill.

What exactly is he going to DO? It's the same as the hurricane thing earlier this year. It doesn't do any good to stand around looking presidential, if you can't show what you actually did.

Cycloptichorn
H2O MAN
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:45 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
What will Obama DO?
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:52 pm
@H2O MAN,
He'll show up for the debate. Obama didn't put himself forward as the expert to solve this crisis - McCain has.

Cycloptichorn
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 01:56 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Obama has put himself forward as the go-to-guy for economics...
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 02:15 pm
@engineer,
Hey engineer. If it's not said often enough, you're an awesome contributer to A2K. You express your opinions with great articulation and poise and are much nicer to people than someone like myself in the face of ignorance.

Thanks for posting here.
K
O
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  3  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 02:30 pm
@sozobe,
I think he's posturing. I think he figured out the "look like a leader" thing that Obama has going for him and this is one-upmanship. Obama made a call to him, he saw an opportunity. Can't let Obama get credit for it, got to come out first. I think it will work for about a day or two.
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Wed 24 Sep, 2008 02:32 pm
@FreeDuck,
OK, yeah, that's about my take on it too. I'm not sure if it will work at all, tho...

Harry Reid:

Quote:
"This is a critical time for our country. While I appreciate that both candidates have signaled their willingness to help, Congress and the Administration have a process in place to reach a solution to this unprecedented financial crisis.

"I understand that the candidates are putting together a joint statement at Senator Obama's suggestion. But it would not be helpful at this time to have them come back during these negotiations and risk injecting presidential politics into this process or distract important talks about the future of our nation's economy. If that changes, we will call upon them. We need leadership; not a campaign photo op.

"If there were ever a time for both candidates to hold a debate before the American people about this serious challenge, it is now."


http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/harry_reid_the_debate_must_go.php
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/21/2019 at 10:23:07