I think that Professor Schaff's reading of the debate was right, and it seems to be reflected in the media. McCain was weak on the economy, but won most of the rest of the debate. Jon thinks that McCain was so damaged by the first fifteen minutes that he lost the election right there. But then Jon always thinks McCain has just lost the election.
I don't think that first fifteen minutes was all that important, but I agree in general with the conclusion. Debates are influence the race only in so far as they leave a lasting impression on the voters. The candidates are very fearful of making a gaffe, but the only mistakes that amount to authentic gaffes are those that affirm or undermine the view that the voters already have of the candidates. When Reagan made fun of Walter Mondale's "youth and inexperience," in 1984, he neutralized voters concerns over his age. When Michael Dukakis fudged a death penalty question in 1988, he affirmed the voter's view that he was milk toast.
Judged by those criteria, the debate was a wash. Both men looked like authentic presidential material. Maybe McCain came out ahead overall, but that wasn't enough. Obama has been steadily gaining in the polls of late. McCain needed a clean win, and he didn't get it. Obama just need to show, and he did that. A tie or a close decision goes to the candidate with the best Real Clear Politics numbers, and that's Obama.
Just right now I am not sure how McCain pulls this one out.
Recent Comments