How Obama's new big lead in a major poll (ABC-WaPo 52-43) will change debate "analysis"

[featherman]

Who's winning and who's losing according to the polls shapes the thinking of all the talk show analysts and pundits to a frightening degree.

Where before they were writing their pre-debate scripts about how "Obama must show emotion... he's too cool and reserved... not connecting" they are now busily rewriting about how "the American people trust Obama because he's cool under fire... McCain's too angry and erratic". Etc, etc.

This will be quite amusing post-debate Friday night, I think.

[TheDonkey]

1. We must be careful with the MSM. This landslide poll may be a trap for polls after the first debate

ie. the primary where talking heads can then ring their hands about why Obama can't "close the deal" if he drops in the polls to a say 5 point lead.

[curious one]

3. Agreed, polls are very unreliable and meaningless. A friend knows a pollster and according

to the pollster, the criteria that being used in polls are from last election and those criteria does not work and can't be applied to this election.

[FightingIrish]

2. There is so much at stake that I almost don't want to watch it.

Only my hope that McCain's head will explode on national television will draw me to the telecast. I've seen enough of McCain to know that it is certainly possible.

[featherman]

5. We have a mixed marriage on debates: I NEVER watch them... too painful and creepy

While my spouse can't get enough.

I'm far more interested in the spin and chatter about "how they did" afterward. I'll always remember the first Gore-Bush debate which Gore clearly won on every measurable level and the instant polling confirmed this around the country. However by the time the analysts and pundits got done with "stuffy, arrogant, sneering, etc" the polling moved to "regular guy Bush won easily" within two days.

So what really counts in debates: how the candidates actually perform or how the media TELLS the low information, feelings voter how they did?

[Arugula Latte]

7. I'm at the point where I can barely stand to watch anything political on TV ...

I can only take in information through the Internet, where it's less "raw" and gets me less upset.

[Merlot]

12. Me too. Yelling at the TV is not doing me any good.

Plus on Internet I can avoid talking heads.

[doc03]

4. What will be the subject of the first debate? Oh and judging

by McCain's behaviour the last couple weeks if Obama can push the right buttons he may totally flip out. That's what I want to see one of his famous temper tantrums on world wide TV.

[featherman]

6. That would certainly be ideal... a long shot but a great hope. He'll likely be medicated

to some degree to avoid that type of cataclysmic blowup while functional enough to handle the questions. I imagine there will be an expensive medical staff on hand to judge the correct balance.

[doc03]

8. What would happen if McCain just goes stark raving

mad? Could the Republicans replace him at this late date or could Palin move up? Actually the other day I heard her say the Palin/McCain Administration, I am sure the fundies would rather have her on top.

[FrenchieCat]

9. Not going to happen. McCain will use humor, as he has been put on notice

to keep the lid on his anger.

He will be all smiles and one liners.

watch.

[featherman]

10. The "winner" will be determined by whose writers came up with the best zingers

What is remembered years later: "Where's the beef", "There you go again" "I knew Jack Kennedy and...", etc.

And the media clap their little hands at this clever candidate as if these zingers were not carefully scripted in the back rooms by writers who put them on note cards and tell the candidate to drop them at the appropriate minute.

In zinger writing, McCain's staff has a likely edge. Most GOP policies are one liners that could fit on bumper stickers anyway.

[amborin]

11. are dems prepared?

to start to shape public opinion, starting right when the debates start?

we can't just leave it to the MSM

[TheKentuckian]

13. I have only a 3% belief that McHoover blows a gasket

but I'm not thinking that is exactly what Obama has in mind, when he's discussing temperament and I think what needed to come out already did. McCain is plain old not cut out for the job. Intellect is a part of the equation but its truly about personality he has no compass, he is rash, he's not a big picture guy, he's will o the wind, he does not inspire, he can be taken with a gimmick but doesn't seek out new knowledge and truths, he'll say anything, he's a gambler, and he flat out isn't a leader.

I think this out there. It would be cool to have a cartoonish game ender, if such a thing exists, but I think everyone with a brain knows it without shaming the old man any further. Some may insist on not facing reality but the Republicans have to accept that they gave us a ticket without a potential President. This isn't even political, though the Republicans absolutely must respect the country and the office more-Dubya, McHoover, Dick Palin, and friggin Dan Quayle within a 20 year period is showing a blatant disregard for the process and the country.

Of all the candidates, McCain was the least suited to hold the office (probably less so than even Danny boy, even) but he was the most electable, so he had it wrapped up in February and had long been coasting. This is a game to them and Republicans need to sit in the corner until they wish to make some attempt to act responsibly.

[Imagevision]

14. (ABC-WaPo 52-43) will change McCain's debate performance - 2 b sure!

[amborin]

15. we need to attack McCain on his alleged strengths....

one poll shows citizens think mccain is stronger on national security than Obama

we can't let them think this

we must show them mccain is WEAK on national security

all the more important considering some possible October surprise