|
demondeac is Ross Smith, Director of Debate at Wake Forest University and founder of DebateScoop.org
Tune in by 9:00 p.m. Eastern on your TV, participate via many means on the internet, and/or the liveblog with me and other debate geeks at debateScoop and elsewhere for tonight's opening salvo in the debate series leading up to the November general election. The University of Mississippi is the host site, all networks will carry the debate, and Jim Lehrer of PBS is the moderator.
Below the fold we will dive into a number of weeds for people who, like me, study and care about debates.
But even if you are not into the details, several items are worth noting.
First, McCain's Ploy (no debate unless bailout deal) has been exposed for what it is, most damningly by the internet ad declaring him the debate victor that he was running well before he announced he would debate at all.
Second, the economy and the "bailout" is likely to be the first topic tonight even though this was originally billed as a foreign policy and national security debate.
Third, the CW ("common wisdom") while often close enough to accurate on debates (it's circular -- since the media both defines CW and has the biggest influence on perceptions it's hard to throw CW off track), is way off base in one important respect: without exception I have read, even from people who should know better, that Obama needs to be concise and pithy and that nuance will get him in trouble. Sound familiar? The problem with that analysis is that it ignores the very first item every debate coach and debater considers: format. Tonight's format allows extended discussion and does not confine the debaters to ninety, sixty, or thirty second fragmented answers. The CW is based on the early primary debates when up to ten candidates at a time were vying for time and the formats were devised to account for the multiple candidates and multiple questions. Tonight's format has nine segments of ten minutes each and the candidate who best uses that format boosts their chances to "win" (more about what that means below).
Below the fold, let's delve more deeply into all of the variables that might influence tonight's debating and its effect.
|
Format.
Let's start by fleshing out the format details. The candidates will be standing for the ninety minutes at podiums angled to face one another just a few feet apart. Jim Lehrer will be seated facing them as questioner. Though it's overemphasized by pundits and other debate posers, the proximity may allow easier camera angles that show both the speaker and the opponent in the frame. No sighing, looking at the watch, etc. Duh. Doubtful the candidates repeat obvious physical gaffes from the past. Prediction: you will see Obama writing notes ( good move, even if only for show: keeps him from looking bored or rolling his eyes; conveys concern).
The more important format factor is that there will be the nine segments of nine minutes each. Each segment begins with a question by the moderator. The debaters will alternate going first. Each has two minutes for an opening answer to each question and the remaining five minutes really is a free-for-all. Using this timing format may well be decisive if one campaign is prepared for it and the other is not. Since the McCain campaign employs an actual debate coach who thinks about these factors, there is no excuse from their end.
So, how to take best advantage? First, realize that the two minute opening is not crucial. Candidates might be tempted to use all of the time allotted, but in each segment it's the candidate who gets the last word or moves the narrative to their favored terrain who will win. Primacy (first thing people hear) and recency (last thing they hear) trump all else. There's no reason to speak for two minutes at the beginning of a segment. Better to add time to the more crucial rebuttals. Whoever goes first should say the minimum (that's where Obama does need to be pithy). The second speaker should reply and then shift the debate to their most favorable ground. From there, it's all about where the debate ends.
Notes: Obama did MUCH better with this kind of format in his last primary debates, especially in Ohio, against Hillary Clinton. Pundits who blather about his "nuance" are not accounting for format. Obama seems to be a good counter puncher. McCain will not run out of things to say, but needs to avoid sounding repetitive or scripted.
Expectations, the pundits favorite word.
Yes, expectations are the staring point for who won. Obama has a head start or a handicap depending on your perspective: polling shows more people expect him to win. If you really care about forming your own expectations I recommend the video compilation from TPM that has highlights of both candidates' performances. But as far as an expectations game beyond the polling, it's not about winners and losers, or good debaters versus bad. The expectations have more to do with age, experience, knowledge, eloquence, or other more precise subsets of debate expectations. Expectations will be the most overused meme of them all in a year when we do not have George W. Bush to kick around.
That said, there is a VERY important dynamic related to expectations when you get out of the weeds and up to the proverbial 30,000 feet: Obama is in position to seal the deal. Every political scientist who studies this stuff says that the state of the economy and the unpopularity of the incumbent president and party makes this a near slam dunk for Obama. Obama leads in polling. But people are still uncertain about "the rookie." If Obama looks and sounds wise, experienced, and trustworthy in these debates he exceeds the expectations, not of the pundits or partisans, but of the all important undecided voter. Their primary question, given that most want "change" and feel unease, is whether or not they can feel reassured by Obama.
Themes.
Reassurance versus fear, tough versus smart, fighter versus transcender. These themes will be woven through all of the answers and will accumulate into an impression in viewers' minds as well as fodder for the media narrative. "Bipartisan." "Change." "Country First Maverick." "POW." "Bush's third term." It's not clear any of these can break through. Looks like a bit of a stalemate when it come to the undecided voters. But what we, the high information folks need to understand, is that repetition of the (to us) stale themes is crucial when it comes to pushing the low information and undecided voter into a lean/support mindset. If there is news from this debate in the themes category it might just be nothing more than a bright, shiny object.
Mediated versus unmediated reactions.
Yes, sixty million plus will likely see this debate on their TV or online. Nearly double the number who saw the convention acceptance speeches. Some have asserted that given the high interest this year, 100 million might watch (on a Friday night?). But many more will read newspaper articles, see blips on TV about the debates, hear from their friends, or look online for reactions.
The media is the first target of the debaters. McCain is in bad shape with the media. He played them and teased them by "suspending" his campaign. He and his running mate limit press access and his campaign has been running against the media (in the tradition of GOP base populism of at least four decades). McCain is unlikely to get a break.
The media has even been friendly to Obama in the expectations game, playing up his stuttering and "nuanced" answers from the early primary debates. Were I the McCain coach I would urge him to relax and just stick to the issues. He would seem plain enough to the undecided voter he is seeking and might get the media to say his experience and calm under pressure rose to the occasion. If coaching Obama I would say about the same thing. Try needling McCain only when you can back it up. Otherwise, just "rise above it."
Who will win? Check back after 48 hours of media reaction. If you want to fill out your own ballot, Judd Legum says judge for yourself (not that helpful), and if you want an easier ballot, try this one by Timothy O'Donnell, Director of Debate at Mary Washington University.
The Questions Game.
The candidates must anticipate them to prep and we all love to criticize them post hoc. Remember: nine segments. At least one on the financial situation. Motre than enought that a president should be multitasking. Here are more than eight others that, if excluded, people will howl about:
- Iran (Russia dropped out of multilateral sanctions talks this week).
- Iraq.
- North Korea (while no one was looking they moved to restart nuc plant this week).
- Darfur (the undecided Evangelicals and the youth care a lot).
- Latin America (Russian bombers pay a visit and the Latino vote is huge).
- Global poverty (Clinton Global Initiative, One Campaign, Bono).
- Global Warming (extinction risks matter? energy?)
- NATO expansion and Georgia.
- Middle East (Syria amassed 10,000 troops on the Lebanon border this week).
- Terrorism. ("Transcendent" issue in the GOP primaries, last week attacks on U.S. embassy and in Pakistan).
- Afghanistan (see much of above).
What's a candidate to do? CONNECT these concerns and raise them even when the questioner does not. Debaters call that the "link" debate. WEIGH the issues -- what's more important. That's the "impact" debate. FRAME it all in a big picture, and you might just win the NARRATIVE that the MEDIA will use to persuade the public that you get the WIN. |
