Presidential Debates!

[Z]

So I missed the first ones. :\ But according to a poll on The Drudge Report (http://www.drudgereport.com), McCain actually won it :shock:

Poll Question:
WHO WON THE FIRST PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?

MCCAIN - 68% 285,956
OBAMA - 30% 126,832
NEITHER - 3% 10,842

Did anyone watch? What did you think?

The presidential hopefuls are scheduled to debate twice more, at Belmont University in Nashville on Oct. 7 and at Hofstra University in Hempsted, N.Y., on Oct. 15.

[Gio Takahashi]

I have it recorded and only watched part of it.

[chefTENGU]

I only caught the tail end of it.

From what I saw, McCain sounded like a broken record.

[Arainach]

More proof that Drudge is bullshit; every other poll I've seen has gone something like the following:

Among Republicans: McCain 90%, Obama 10%
Among Democrats: McCain 5%, Obama 95%
Among Independents: McCain 31%, Obama 68%

Hell, McCain couldn't even bring himself to make eye contact with Obama through the entire thing. There's no way he won. Hell, he couldn't even stay within the realm of truth half the time.

[Arainach]

Sources for my claims:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26/politics/horserace/entry4482028.shtml
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/presidentialdebates/3092194/US-presidential-debate-Early-polls-give-Barack-Obama-slender-victory.html
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/09/27/Poll_Obama_won_presidential_debate/UPI-20721222512164/

[Z]

Drudge just now took down the poll after 420,000+ voted with a consistent 68 - 30% in favor of McCain. Like I said, I can't judge for myself because I missed it. However, I can't imagine Drudge tipped the scale. His whole site is about linking to other sites so I can't imagine he has an agenda. I think there was even a study that says if he has any type of slant, it was more of a liberal slant than conservative (I'll try to find that study tomorrow)

[Z]

btw, 2 of the 3 the polls you showed are based on uncommitted voters, and none of the polls you showed surpassed 600 votes.

[Arainach]

Drudge just now took down the poll after 420,000+ voted with a consistent 68 - 30% in favor of Obama. Like I said, I can't judge for myself because I missed it. However, I can't imagine Drudge tipped the scale. His whole site is about linking to other sites so I can't imagine he has an agenda. I think there was even a study that says if he has any type of slant, it was more of a liberal slant than conservative (I'll try to find that study tomorrow)Wait, it was a poll on his site? Of COURSE 68% said McCain. I don't know a single liberal that reads Drudge, while it's the preferred source of all of my chainmail-sending conservative relatives. His particular brand of hate-filled sludge is popular among their type.btw, 2 of the 3 the polls you showed are based on uncommitted voters, and none of the polls you showed surpassed 600 votes.However, both of them were conducted scientifically, which an online poll is anything but and which an online poll on a slanted site is anything but.

[Z]

I found that study quicker than I thought:

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist
By
Meg Sullivan
| 12/14/2005 5:36:31 PM

While the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal is conservative, the newspaper's news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times. The Drudge Report may have a right-wing reputation, but it leans left. Coverage by public television and radio is conservative compared to the rest of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.

Full story @ link

[Arainach]

I might point out that even if that study's conclusions are taken as fact, it's still claiming to talk about article content, not views of readership. I could address its various flaws (such as using the ADA measure, which is inherently flawed, but I digress....), but see no point since that article is still irrelevant to my earlier claim that the readers, ergo voters of Drudge are overwhelmingly conservative.

[Z]

I'll concede to that. I won't concede to your general argument being correct but I'll concede to the fact that neither one of us knows the political agendas associated with Drudge's viewers.

EDIT: Aww. You edited. :( Concession revoked, hehe. You have no evidence, other than assumption, as to the political slants of the viewers. I can admit that much. You should be able to, also.

[Gio Takahashi]

doesn't surprise me, the first 30 minutes I watched, Obama seemed to be a real winner.

[deathofcheese]

Didn't watch it. Mom and dad got popcorn and drinks while they watched it on Fox News. I asked dad an unassuming question about it afterward and he said it seemed like it was a genuine, not-too-slanted debate. I specifically told him not to give me his impression on who won, because regardless of how either did, his answer would be McCain.

[chefTENGU]

It seemed to me that McCain spent a lot of his time trying to interrupt Obama (and even talking over him and the moderator), but to some extent, both candidates were guilty of it.

Looking back on it, you could really see Obama's frustration, while McCain just sort of looked helpless.

But like I said, I only caught the tail end of it. I doubt either one could have been declared a winner.

[Arainach]

USA Today/Gallup (http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=5902766&page=1) has it as 46/34 Obama (52/35 when the question was who has the better solution to the country's problems).

[chefTENGU]

I wonder how the Vice Presidential debates will shape up. Palin has no idea what she's talking about, and Biden is looking more and more like a democratic Dan Quayle.

[Bloodcinder]

Does this thread have something to do with infants? [Face of scratches head at thread title.]

[Gio Takahashi]

I've been wondering why the title seemed off. Fixed!

[Arainach]

Biden is looking more and more like a democratic Dan Quayle.....whhaaaaa??????

Do explain. PALIN looks like Dan Quayle. Inexperienced, evasive, with several glaring mistakes/offenses previously in life. Whereas Biden looks like someone who knows what he's talking about, has his shit together, and is probably more qualified to be President than any of the other 3 people in the race.

[chefTENGU]

His comments about Roosevelt addressing the nation on television after the 1929 stock market crash are cause for some concern. Also, he might have made a gaffe by referring to a shotgun as a "baretta."

Although I'm willing to bet that he knows how to spell "potato."

[Arainach]

Seriously, if this nation places more value on knowing what a shotgun is than not censoring books and actually having foreign policy experience, than screw it, it deserves to go to shit and it's not worth trying to save.

[chefTENGU]

Oh, I'm not trying to rag on him (too hard). I just think the VP debate will be more entertaining than the McCain/Obama bickering correctionfest.

[Z]

VP debate is tonight. I expect Palin to get Palwned.

[Gio Takahashi]

Fondly looking forward to that.

I was talking to someone about the election as I was registering to change my address so I could vote in Tampa. We were talking about the debates and when Biden vs Palin came out, it was funny as we were like "Oh damn, Palin's going to get OWNEd" and we high fived. I love how we're treating this debate as the big game.

[Arainach]

As further proof of my claim of bias on the part of Drudge readership (I'm truly depressed at the state of humanity that I have to prove this rather than it being inherently obvious):

Focus groups from all networks - CBS, CNN, Fox - agree that Biden won the debate. Yet the Drudge Poll Results: Palin 73%, Biden 26%. That's rather damning evidence in favor of heavy conservative bias right there.

[chefTENGU]

Honestly, how can anyone like that woman as a candidate? She got on stage and spoke to America for an hour and a half, using small words like we're a country of children.

She didn't bring anything interesting or new to the debate, just the same tiresome rhetoric. I really hope the last two Presidential debates are more interesting, but I'm not holding out much hope.

[RonDo]

And this presidential debate prevents House, Fringe, and NCIS from showing. Come on. Screw the debates, show something at least somewhat interesting.

I believe the economy in recent weeks has dictated who will be the next president.

[Z]

I think House will still show at 7 PM and the debate will start at 8 PM (CST)

[RonDo]

I think House will still show at 7 PM and the debate will start at 8 PM (CST)

But instead of a new episode to lead into Fringe (ratings spillover), they are holding off on a new episode and putting up a repeat. It is showing..but since I've seen it, not gonna watch.

[Arainach]

With all due respect, electing the President of the US is a whole fuckton more important than a fucking TV show.

[Bloodcinder]

Honestly, how can anyone like that woman as a candidate?
I certainly like her as a person more than any of the other three (Obama, McCain, and Biden). And for some people less astute than I, that's enough to outweigh candidacy concerns.

With all due respect, electing the President of the US is a whole fuckton more important than a fucking TV show.
I don't think anybody said anything about skipping the voting booth in November to watch House.

[Gio Takahashi]

With all due respect, electing the President of the US is a whole fuckton more important than a fucking TV show.

Pretty sure they were joking.

[Bloodcinder]

I don't think they were joking.

[Z]

We weren't joking.

It's one month before the election. Who hasn't made up their mind, yet? Ary, by you being upset by people actually daring not to watch the debate, are you conceding to the idea that McCain could say something in the next few weeks that could completely change your mind about his policies and even your vote?

Kinda doubt it.

As BC intelligently pointed out, my growing apathy for these debates has nothing to do with whether or not I will be in the voting booth in November. It also doesn't mean that I won't read through the transcript later, as I have done in the past, or that I will shut myself off from the news. It just means at 7 PM I'm gonna watch House and at 8PM, if I am so inclined, I will watch the debate. And if I don't, I can't imagine reading a transcript later will have adverse effects on my voting ability.

[Seegtease]

I don't think anybody said anything about skipping the voting booth in November to watch House.

Shit, voting is going to interfere with House? Shit.

[Arainach]

CBS (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/07/politics/horserace/entry4508356.shtml) : Obama won by 13%

CNN (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/07/cnn-poll-obama-won-the-night/) : Obama won by 24%

MediaCurves (http://mediacurves.com/) : Obama won by 18% among undecideds

SurveyUSA (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=55bbbb41-b3aa-4ab2-8d18-a5b97b95b6c4) : Obama won by 30% overall, by 21% among independents

[chefTENGU]

Frankly, I was disappointed with this one, although I don't really know why I expected otherwise. It was just like the first debate all over again:

McCain continued to spout the same stuff he's been saying over and over since his campaign began to heat up during the primaries, and Obama got so bogged down in correcting McCain's inaccuracies and distortions that he forgot to answer any of the questions that were put to him.

Neither one paid any attention to Tom Brokaw's repeated requests that they respect the time constraints they both agreed upon, either.

[Revery]

A question nags me about this last debate, guys. Did McCain actually say that he wanted to strip regulations on health insurers, or was I just imagining crazy talk?

[Z]

http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/president/debates/transcripts/second-presidential-debate.html


QUESTION: Senator, selling health care coverage in America as the marketable commodity has become a very profitable industry.
Do you believe health care should be treated as a commodity?

OBAMA: Well, you know, as I travel around the country, this is one of the single most frequently asked issues that I get, is the issue of health care. It is breaking family budgets. I can't tell you how many people I meet who don't have health insurance.

If you've got health insurance, most of you have seen your premiums double over the last eight years. And your co-payments and deductibles have gone up 30 percent just in the last year alone. If you're a small business, it's a crushing burden.

So one of the things that I have said from the start of this campaign is that we have a moral commitment as well as an economic imperative to do something about the health care crisis that so many families are facing.

So here's what I would do. If you've got health care already, and probably the majority of you do, then you can keep your plan if you are satisfied with it. You can keep your choice of doctor. We're going to work with your employer to lower the cost of your premiums by up to $2,500 a year.

And we're going to do it by investing in prevention. We're going to do it by making sure that we use information technology so that medical records are actually on computers instead of you filling forms out in triplicate when you go to the hospital. That will reduce medical errors and reduce costs.

If you don't have health insurance, you're going to be able to buy the same kind of insurance that Senator McCain and I enjoy as federal employees. Because there's a huge pool, we can drop the costs. And nobody will be excluded for pre-existing conditions, which is a huge problem.

Now, Senator McCain has a different kind of approach. He says that he's going to give you a $5,000 tax credit. What he doesn't tell you is that he is going to tax your employer-based health care benefits for the first time ever.

So what one hand giveth, the other hand taketh away. He would also strip away the ability of states to provide some of the regulations on insurance companies to make sure you're not excluded for pre-existing conditions or your mammograms are covered or your maternity is covered. And that is fundamentally the wrong way to go.

In fact, just today business organizations like the United States Chamber of Commerce, which generally are pretty supportive of Republicans, said that this would lead to the unraveling of the employer-based health care system.

That, I don't think, is the kind of change that we need. We've got to have somebody who is fighting for patients and making sure that you get decent, affordable health care. And that's something that I'm committed to doing as president.

BROKAW: Senator McCain?

MCCAIN: Well, thank you for the question. You really identified one of the really major challenges that America faces. Co-payments go up, costs go up, skyrocketing costs, which make people less and less able to afford health insurance in America.

And we need to do all of the things that are necessary to make it more efficient. Let's put health records online, that will reduce medical errors, as they call them. Let's have community health centers. Let's have walk-in clinics. Let's do a lot of things to impose efficiencies.

But what is at stake here in this health care issue is the fundamental difference between myself and Senator Obama. As you notice, he starts talking about government. He starts saying, government will do this and government will do that, and then government will, and he'll impose mandates.

If you're a small business person and you don't insure your employees, Senator Obama will fine you. Will fine you. That's remarkable. If you're a parent and you're struggling to get health insurance for your children, Senator Obama will fine you.

I want to give every American a $5,000 refundable tax credit. They can take it anywhere, across state lines. Why not? Don't we go across state lines when we purchase other things in America? Of course it's OK to go across state lines because in Arizona they may offer a better plan that suits you best than it does here in Tennessee.

And if you do the math, those people who have employer-based health benefits, if you put the tax on it and you have what's left over and you add $5,000 that you're going to get as a refundable tax credit, do the math, 95 percent of the American people will have increased funds to go out and buy the insurance of their choice and to shop around and to get -- all of those people will be covered except for those who have these gold-plated Cadillac kinds of policies.

You know, like hair transplants, I might need one of those myself. But the point is that we have got to give people choice in America and not mandate things on them and give them the ability. Every parent I know would acquire health insurance for their children if they could.
Obviously small business people want to give their employees health insurance. Of course they all want to do that. We've got to give them the wherewithal to do it. We can do it by giving them, as a start, a $5,000 refundable tax credit to go around and get the health insurance policy of their choice.

It's looking more like Obama said it and McCain didn't deny it, unless I missed something.

[Arainach]

Debate 3: McCain looked like a creepy, desperate old man. That moderator, however, was ungodly awesome. No one else should ever be allowed to moderate a presidential/VP debate until he dies.

CBS (scientific): (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/15/politics/horserace/entry4525171.shtml?tag=centerColumn;centerColumnCo ntent) 53% Obama / 22% McCain
MSNBC (unscientific): (http://www.polls.newsvine.com/_question/2008/10/15/2003100-who-won-the-debate) 84.9% Obama, 12% McCain
CNN Analysts: (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/15/debate.reportcard/index.html) Obama kicked ass

[Bloodcinder]

CBS (scientific): 53% Obama / 22% McCain
MSNBC (unscientific): 84.9% Obama, 12% McCain
CNN Analysts: Obama kicked ass
LORF. That wording is priceless.

[Arainach]

CNN Viewers (http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/15/debate.poll/index.html): Obama 58 McCain 31
For some stupid reason Fox is taking forever to publish their viewer poll, which I actually wasted time voting in since I was at the bar while the debate was on and that's the channel they were tuned to.

[Z]

The Fox results were very similar to the Drudge results for what that's worth. Now it's just the waiting game until November to see who actually votes. If the liberals would get off their asses this year, they might get a candidate in office. (I think Bush even won the popular vote in the last election which is just a testament to how many liberals are simply apathetic or lazy in their decision not to vote). I think Obama's candidacy might be able to get the people out there and registered (though it's too late to register at this point) but predicted liberal voter turnout has obviously been wrong before so we will see (Remember the MTV Generation's Vote or Die campaign that pledged to get all the young adults out there? Epic fail).

[Arainach]

You left FOX news out. McCain was winning by 80 something percent. All those polls usually mean is that Democrats are watching CNN and MSNBC, and Republicans are watching FOX. I don't know about CBS.Where's the link to the Fox poll? As far as I can tell they haven't posted it yet.

Also, 80% would imply a voluntary-response viewer poll, which is unscientific like the MSNBC one I quoted. Both the CNN and CBS polls were conducted on a random sample of people who watched the poll regardless of network and done scientifically, and have nothing at all to do with viewer bias.

[Z]

All those polls are based on the idea that they are polling uncommitted voters mere weeks before an election. Who the heck is uncommitted just a couple of weeks before the election? lawl.

For that matter, if someone is uncommitted, they either don't understand the issues or don't have any personal values (otherwise they would see them more reflected in one candidate or the other). If they don't understand the issues, how well can they judge a debate?

This is all, of course, assuming they didn't just flat out lie about being an uncommitted voter for an easy gig.

(That is not to say unscientific polls are more accurate. It is more to say that all polls are inherently inaccurate except the one that actually counts in November)

[Arainach]

The CBS one was of undecided voters; the CNN was of voters in general.

[Z]

CNN wasn't a poll. It was an analysis.

EDIT: Unless your counting the unscientific poll latched onto it.

[Arainach]

Look below that post.

Oh, and Fox's Focus Group (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/10/16/0817/8564/604/631988) went to Obama, not McCain.

Christ, do people even read anymore? I explain why I didn't include a fox link, littlegirl forgets it. I explain what polls are scientific and what aren't, people ignore that too. Then they don't even care enough to read what polls are of who. *headdesk*

[Z]

You always get so wound up for little to no reason when it comes to politics.

My bad, I missed that other post. To add to the "Do people even read anymore" question...

From the CNN link with the poll article:
The audience for the debate poll appeared to be a bit more Democratic -- and a bit more Republican -- than the U.S. population as a whole. Forty percent of debate watchers in the survey were Democrats and 30 percent Republicans.The article also never says they polled voters, just debate watchers.

It also never said it was done scientifically.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll was conducted by telephone Wednesday night, with 620 adult Americans who watched the debate questioned.

[Arainach]

Generally, when asking their opinion of who won a debate, it's best to poll debate watchers. Just saying.

Also, a larger portion of the registered voting base is Democratic right now, so that's not a problem. Plus, if 40/30 voted along party lines, that would give a poll result of 57-43, a mere 14 point swing. The CNN poll had a 27-point difference, which is huge.

[Z]

My point is, a poll is a poll is a poll. If polls could predict elections, we'd be under President Gore or President Kerry now.

[Sunflower]

Sorry Arianarch, I had viewers polls in my head for some reason even though you wrote scientific.

I think the best part of this election was at the dinner tonight. It's nice to hear both parties just laughing about everything for once.