You beat me to it. Not too many people on this board who saw the Nixon/Kennedy debate which was decisive. I think the spin machines will only have their candidate winning no matter what their performance, but those who actually watch live will be impacted one way or another. The election is very close and will be won or lost tonight. The other debates won't matter as much as this one.
In the Nixon/Kennedy years, the polls also regular shifted 10-20 points during the party conventions. We're no longer living in that world - 90% of voters have been committed for months, and 95%+ of voters are set by now. Barring one candidate doing something outrageously stupid, the polls in a week are going to look virtually the same as the polls today.
He wasn't really behind prior to that: http://www.tnr.com/blog/electionate/107171/exploding-the-reagan-1980-comeback-myth#
A_3PO, there are a lot of undecided, uneducated (about the candidates, and god knows what else, tha chumps) morons out there who could be influenced by the debates. A gaff, some witty repartee, who knows? I've seen it all, starting in 1960, when the sweat pouring off the noggin of Tricky Dick, next to a very cool Jack Kennedy, made the difference. At least one debate, usually all of them, in every presidential election for the last billion years, or so it seems to me. I was very lucky that my parents were interested in politics, with a professor as my father, and a highly intelligent mother that encouraged our interest. Hell, I became a political junkie during that 1960 debate, and have been one ever since. Of course, it took a few years to figure out how crafty my folks were. After years as an independent, I finally realized that one party reflected my beliefs far more than the other party, and that I needed to get involved instead of complaining on the way to the voting booth. The biggest thing I learned was to take nothing for granted.
Sam, what private polls showed mattered to the campaigns, but what the media was reporting showed Carter with a lead. That's what the public knew, and that's what they reacted to. The Reagan "debate win" (I thought he lost them) gave Reagan a public credibility that lead to an "inevitable" victory. He was seen as the front runner, post debates, and things went downhill fast from there for Carter. People forget just how askance huge numbers of voters looked at Reagan. An actor as president? Who is he kidding? Those debates changed that perception, and Carter was ripe for defeat anyway.
So the public who actually supported Reagan according to most non-outlier polls, switched to supporting to Reagan after his debate win, from Reagan. YOu can read the whole article or just look at this graph to stop believing in the whole "last minute comeback" myth.
Check this out: It's true that Gallup's final pre-debate poll showed a sinking Carter up by 3 percent—but a few days later its polling gave Reagan a 3 percent edge before Election Day. http://www.thenation.com/blog/17023...olls-did-not-show-carter-beating-reagan-1980# I never said Carter was ahead by much, pre-debate, but Gallup showed him ahead by 3%, pre-debate. Gallup was easily, IMO, the poll people paid the most attention to back then. Yes, I've seen many of the same articles saying what you're saying now. Looking back, it's easy to say that Reagan had a lead pre-debate, but the general public, in the main, thought Carter was still in it. I thought he was running on fumes anyway, didn't vote for him in the primaries, ever, and thought he was a huge disappointment as president, even with my low expectations, but I also thought he would be the better president at the time, and haven't changed my mind. Reagan was the beginning of where we are today politicially, and that is not a compliment. He also wouldn't be given directions to the bathroom by today's Republican Party, regardless of the sucking up they do to the guy's legacy.
Very sad, but true. It makes my heart ache. Looking forward to hearing your opinion and those of the pundits. Those 1980 poll charts are spectacular. I mean that sincerely.
I would be curious to hear specifically the ways Obama is better than Carter and Reagan is better than Romney, especially since Romney has never been President.
the repugly's great masterstroke was tying coldwar antagonism into carte blanche rape of the american middle class. SOCIALISM would be good for the middle and lower classes but they are too ****ing stupid to get it. poor bastards would rather play the lottery than cooperate with their fellow americans.
I'm just really curious, basso. Where are you getting this confidence from, anyways? I hope Romney wins ( though I frankly am not going to bother to vote because I live in DC right now),but I have little to no optimism right now that he will. He still hasn't managed to quell the 'he's a flip flopper" whining, and he frankly is not exactly the most charming person.
Lol, the whole basis of the Reagan myth as initially noted was one series of outlier Gallup polls that didn't match other external or internal polls. A graphic of that outlier doesn't really change that. I can paint a similar mythology around any Democratic victor using Rasmussen reports. It doesn't make it true though.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/A5g9c_mhcxk?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
