2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumI think Nitt's so-called 'win' at the first debate is already old news
Last edited Sat Oct 6, 2012, 07:36 PM - Edit history (1)
What are people talking about now?
* The lower unemployment numbers (repukes are furious because that was one of nitt's key arguments and now...pfftt!)
* The President experienced no drop in his approval ratings (post debate)
* Big Bird/PBS
At least, that's how it looks to me.
Indpndnt
(2,391 posts)And how nobody believes it for a minute.
ailsagirl
(22,897 posts)BenzoDia
(1,010 posts)I saw the Gallup, Rammussen, and Ask America or whatever it's called. Anything else?
ailsagirl
(22,897 posts)Whatever polls are featured on Big Ed's program (on a regular basis), Hard Ball, and The Last Word. Sorry their names escape me. I confess that I usually get my poll info that way, as opposed to looking up each one.
Rasmussen, I dismiss. But I did hear that some polls had Obama up considerably after the debate. I'd have to backtrack on DU to get the specific info.
Why do you ask?
regnaD kciN
(26,044 posts)...have shown a significant swing towards Romney. Many of them are from polling houses with questionable impartiality and methodology, but they're still there. Until we get polls from more generally-reliable firms in those states or nationally, the current results are all we have to go on. Immediately rejecting them out-of-hand because we don't like their results is unskewedpolls behavior on a major scale.
To respond to the OP, I agree that the debate is now "old news" and unlikely to drive any cycles. To truly measure the full effect it might have had while it was top of the headlines, though, we'll have to wait for more state polling, plus for all the trackers to be only including post-debate data, which will take until Sunday morning (Rasmussen), Monday afternoon (Ipsos), and Thursday morning (Gallup).
BenzoDia
(1,010 posts)demgrrrll
(3,590 posts)than they really do. They did not anticipate the lower job numbers. Even if, as Axelrod says, the decision to leave out the 47% was not intentional it turned out well for the campaign and kept the issue on the front burner after the debate. All in all I think that the negatives are starting to outweigh the positives for Romney. It interests me that they always seem to shoot themselves in the foot when they are on a seeming uptick.
Doctor Jack
(3,072 posts)Typical after effects of a debate with an incumbent.
However, I do agree, I don't think Romney's team did enough to capitalize on their "win" from wednesday and it is already old news. More evidence that his win didn't change the fact that he is an incompetent candidate who is going to keep fucking up until november.
However, the full after effects probably haven't been felt yet. Don't be shocked if this race is tied for a few days or dare i say, Romney ahead?
It won't last though, so lets not freak, yes?
ailsagirl
(22,897 posts)The fact that the unemployment numbers fell below 8% carries more political clout for Obama than if he had 'won' the debate and the numbers still hovered around 8%. So he delivered on that crucial promise! Otherwise, had he just won the debate, rethugs would have said, "talk is cheap but the job numbers haven't improved," and crap like that. And it knocked Nitt on his butt because he was counting on another static jobs report. And I was very happy to see our guy sparkle at the huge campaign rallies the very next day!
JSK
(1,123 posts)spent waaaaaaaay too much time talking about it. I agree -- old news.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And then forgotten within the week.