Poll - Who won the first debate?

Debates rarely shift perceptions. As i showed in an earlier post, even every uncommitted voter who felt Obama won over McCain (the spread) that probably only translates to a 1% shift at most in the overall vote. And considering that it probably doesn't have that kind of impact, let's say only a 1/3 of people who thought obama won - mccain who won, multiplied by the 20% uncommitted and the fraction of the elctorate who saw the debate (on a friday night no less)....and you're talking a fraction of one percent.

Historically debates rarely make a difference. Only when elections are basically tied or end up too close to call can they be judged to be impactful (1960 and 2000).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110674/Presidential-Debates-Rarely-GameChangers.aspx

 

This is the best post in the entire 8 pages of this thread.

As far as T_J's comments, take every "McCain" in there, and switch it with "Obama", and vice verse, and you are spot on. That post really shows your cluelessness or just blind head-over-heels affection towards McCain. I'm not sure yet.

 

Sweet Lou:

Do you still think that McCain will definitely win and that there's nothing Obama can do to change it since nothing will happen between now and the election?

 

Except most polls show this election is practically tied. As a few others have pointed out that this debate could play out like the 1980 debate where Reagan needed to come out looking presidential. In this one Obama certainly did and I think whether people think he won or lost he held his own he looked presidential. That might make enough of a difference to sway things his way.

 

Not sure if they show a tie anymore.

Rasmussen has Obama +6, Gallup +8, Research2000 +7 -- and the gaps were even wider in the first day of post-debate polling yesterday. I think he's really starting to get the separation.

 

actually, it's been the opposite!

the freshman senator JFK vs. the incument VP-Nixon debate; Nixon's poor showing lost the election

the incumbent Jimmy Carter vs. Reagan; Reagan widen the gap.

Gore, after winning the debates against W, narrowed the gap quite a bit

so did Kerry in 2004,

 

Wasn't foreign policy supposed to be McCain's strong point and Obama's weak point? So if McCain wasn't the clear cut winner on his strong point, then how is that not a win for Obama?

 

mccain had a couple of strong moments, on russia (as compared to obama) and the point about sitting down with iran when he mockingly said what if they tell you they want to wipe Israel off the map. but that was it to me, the rest was about even.

 

I'll admit... that one was over my head. I didn't get it then, and I don't get it now.

Care to enlighten me, since it appealed to you.

 

obama is willing to sit down with iran without preconditions. The leader of iran, mahmoud ahmadinejad, has been alleged to say he wants to wipe israel of the map.

so mccain, said what if you're in a meeting with ahmadinejad and he says this, what are you going to say, "no you're not". that was pretty good

 

Well, I didn't think it appealed to you because you thought it was bad. Why was that good?

 

it was funny, and he made a fair point, I agree with obama overall but what do you expect to accomplish meeting with a leader who says something like that.

 

All right, I guess I'll just have to chalk it up to my obamagoggles, because I don't see what is wrong with telling someone no to their face.


And Obama had made the point, meeting with Iran doesn't mean meeting with Ahmadinejad.

 

I think that goes to my point that the debate helped to completely quash the post RNC bounce that McCain got but also showed that Obama could hold his own and is benefiting now in the polls.

 

as for as obama strong points, he kept making the point that mccain is more of the same but mccain one particular time tried to distance himself from bush as far as the last eight years are concerned and obama nailed the 90% voting in line with bush on him. oh yeah, when mccain said he was the most liberal senator and obama said because he always is against bush. that was pretty good.

obama also nailed him on trying to take credit for iraq on the surge when mccain advocated all the policies of the first five years that made it a big mess. that was perfect, something he should have been saying for a while.

also, i wish obama would have taken him to task on the spending freeze. that was just way out of left field stupid

 

The RNC bounce was already dead and gone before the debate. If anything, the financial bailout mess is what quashed McCain's mo. Obama was up +5/+6 in Gallup/Rasmussen before the debate factored in. Today it was +8/+6 but it will be next Tuesday or Wednesday before we know the debate's full effect on the daily polls.

Then on Thursday we have the VP debate, which could influence voters more than usual.

 

Considering less people actually watched this debate compared to Bush-Kerry's first debate, I think more people will be paying attention to the next debate. Debate #2 is the gamebreaker for Obama. If he wins that second one, it's over for McCain. If McCain as I said, gets a personality or gather a sense of likeability, then he lives to see another day in debate #3.

 

You're right I think the RNC bounce had already faded. That said I still think this debate has helped Obama more than McCain. I don't think it is a game breaker but I think it helped show that Obama could appear presidential and stand on an equal footing with McCain. In no way do I think McCain did terrible but McCain's a good debater and did very well in the Primary debate while Obama didn't do that great in the primary debates. So for him to hold his own I think was a victory for Obama.

 

Like McCain said, by meeting face to face with a leader of a country that is not an ally, especially Iran, you give a sense of credibility to what that leader is saying. You also potentially set yourself up for a propaganda platform that the leader of Iran could use to get more support from his people to destroy Israel.