Why Friday's Debate May Hobble the GOP

Nate at 538.com has come up with interesting reasons why Friday's debate emphasizing McCain's alleged strength -- security and foreign affairs -- may prove a minus for the Republican candidate.

In The Debates: Somebody's Wrong, he states:

The first debate usually gets better ratings than the last debate. In the eight campaigns since 1960 in which there were multiple Presidential debates, the first debate had 60.7 million viewers on average, and the last had 56.3. This year, however, the first debate is on a Friday, which is moderately unusual. There were also Friday debates in 2004 and 1976, and two out of the four debates in 1960 were on a Friday. In each case, these were the lowest-rated debates of the cycle. So I'd expect this to be a wash.

Then there's the question of momentum versus expectations-setting. Clearly, it would benefit McCain to have a jolt of momentum right now -- he's had a rough week. And foreign policy presents him with the better opportunity to do that. On the other hand, let's recall 2004, when George W. Bush was completely awful in the first debate (which did produce some momentum for John Kerry) but then only somewhat awful in the second and third debates -- which the press was happy to call comebacks and wins for him since the first debate had so lowered their expectations.

If Obama does badly in the foreign policy debate, he'll get maybe 30 cents on the dollar back in terms of lowered expectations for the next two debates. On the other hand, if the foreign policy debate were the last debate, there would be no more debates left, and so Obama would have nowhere to cash in that change.

When push comes to shove, the equilibrium of this campaign favors Barack Obama by a couple of points. McCain's goal is to knock the campaign off equilibrium for just long enough that one of these periods coincides with November 4. It would be easier for him to do that if the foreign policy debate, in which Obama is more likely to stumble, were held last. Conversely, a bad performance on Friday would leave Obama with two debates and 40 days to recover, and a media that will probably be happy to help him along. So, I'm giving Steve Schmidt an error on this one. Somewhat true to form, it's a decision focused on winning McCain the battle rather than the war.

Of course, if Barack smacks McCain on getting into Iraq, on the relation between Iraq/Bush and our economic meltdown, and on his temperament, he may well turn out to be the winner.

To see some ways this might happen, please see How Barack Obama Can Win The First Debate.

Comments

[DeeDeeDaGumby]

Does this mean to imply folks will be out and about since its a Friday nite? Well as for me and my family we are staying home for a while it seems. Ya see these guys Benny, Hank and some other Cox , well they seem to be trying to get not only my Friday nite out cash, but also my lunch money, my kids lunch money and on and on. So I will be home and I will be paying attention. I hope someone finds something to say worth hearing.

[EducatedTexan]

LET RALPH NADER DEBATE!
We need real change and a real CHOICE!
NADER/GONZALEZ 2008

[wolfmason]

Why do people keep saying McCain has an advantage in a foreign policy debate? He has a PERCEIVED advantage because he spent 5 years in a cage in Vietnam (which I'm assuming did not have a set of world book encyclopedias, access to the internet, or regular White House policy briefings). In the past 8 years he's consistently shown the press that he is either wrong or dangerously wrong on matters of foreign policy, be it Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, or Spain (whom he seems to hate, for whatever reason). Saying that McCain has a better shot Friday at a foreign policy debate because he's been a part of more foreign policy decisions is like saying that Charles Barkley would have a better shot than Kobe Bryant in a one-on-one match Friday because Barkley has played in more games.

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

I fully agree. McCain is an artful actor -- though I think his abilities are fraying. If you have ever seen the older Charlie Chaplin you can see in McCain some of his look. His entire foreign policy stance in some respects anticipated the neocons since in 1974 he said essentially, As the President believes so we must go. I would love to see Barack ask him is the President is wrong, do you believe in obeying him?

[milo h minderbinder]

This story misinterprets the point that 538 makes.

The point isn't that this debate will hurt the GOP, it's that both sides agreed to switch foreign policy first and domestic last.

This debate could definitely help the GOP, it's the SWITCH that was the dumb idea for the GOP to agree to.

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Seems to me th e last sentence I quote from Nate Silver parses with the title. "Somewhat true to form, it's a decision focused on winning McCain the battle rather than the war." The selection of the order could hobble the GOP, for the reasons noted.

Not to mention the possibility that Barack could well equal of exceed McCain in assessments of the outcome.