Obama wins debate

Well, yeah, I would say that. Both campaigns are claiming victory too. So why do I say Obama won?

It’s not as simple as who was on the offensive most, as some (generally Republican) commentators think. McCain was on the offensive more, and Obama missed some opportunities to push substantive points. Often, however, the lasting effect comes from the almost subliminal — subliminable if you’re the President — messages picked up by the watchers from the body language and general demeanour of the debaters.

There is evidence that voters perceived Obama as winning. In a CNN poll of more than 500 US voters (4.5% margin of error), a large majority (51% to 38%) of Americans say Obama was the victor (“Who did the best job in the debate?”). He was also considered better able to handle the economy (58% to 37%) and Iraq (52% to 47%).

Further, a CBS poll of undecided voters who watched the debate found 40% thought Obama won, 22% thought McCain and 38% thought it a tie. Of those  uncommitted voters polled, 46% said their opinion of Obama got better tonight, and 32% said their opinion of McCain got better. Like the CNN poll, 68% voters thought Obama would make the right decision about the economy, to 41% for McCain. But 48% thought Obama would make the right decisions about Iraq to 56% for McCain.

If this judgement holds up in the other polls (and given the margins I can’t see why it shouldn’t) then this is a major victory for Obama. Those who thought it a fairly even contest may be influenced by the poll findings and the overall judgement come out in Obama’s favour.

At another level it’s a clear victory for Obama. He is ahead in the polls and arguably only needed to put up a good showing and avoid gaffes. But his major hurdle in this election is the lingering doubts some democrats and independents have about his readiness. He looked presidential. Very presidential. Best of all, he held his own with an experienced adversary who was playing on his own turf — foreign affairs.

Readiness was the main line of Republican attack, and it failed. Miserably. McCain even managed to anagonise the unaligned “independent” voters in one focus group by being so patronising.

Remember, debates have only a very small immediate effect, unless there is a major “sound-bite” blunder. Neither candidate blundered. but McCain needed to win, gave it all he had, and Obama walked away looking presidential. Something he needs to do.

Updates:

Steve Pierson at the Standard is a little harsh on McCain, who came into his own on foreign affairs. But Steve’s not too far off the mark.

Oh, and can one of the righties explain how the likelihood of a new terrorist attack could be “much less than the day after 9/11?” Since there wasn’t a terrorist attack on the day after 9/11, the possibility of an attack on that day must be zero…

Another focus group, of 45 undecideds in Missouri (heavily weighted with 2004 Bush voters), reacted along similar lines to the polls and focus group described above.

And a USA Today/Gallup Poll found that 46% of people who watched the debate say Obama did a better job than McCain; 34% said McCain did better.

Also 53% of a SurveyUSA poll of 693 Californian debate watchers thought Obama won compared to 30% for McCain. Of these, Republicans said 2:1 McCain won , Democrats said 8:1 Obama won and independents were split:

“California debate watchers say Obama understands Iraq better, Obama understands Iran better, Obama understands Russia better. Debate watchers trust Obama materially more on the economy, thought Obama looked materially more presidential, and by 2:1 thought McCain looked more tired.”

Advertisement

Tags: John McCain, Obama, US elections