Early Ratings Show Huge Increase for VP Debate

It looks like last night's VP debate will be a ratings winner:

In the very preliminary ratings returns, Thursday's debate between Alaska governor Sarah Palin and Delaware senator Joe Biden is looking like strong performer.

The four broadcast networks airing last night's debate totaled a 28.1 overnight meter-market household rating.

That's 33% higher than last week's morning-after returns for Friday's presidential debate, which scored a collective 21.4 rating among the major networks.

These are early numbers and subject to change. Due to a Nielsen processing delay, they do not include six major markets, including Los Angeles (which was low for Friday's debate and could drag down the average), as well as Miami, Houston, San Diego, Denver and Las Vegas. Making a firm judgment at this point about the debate's popularity is a bit like calling the presidency on election night with Florida and Ohio still unreported. Still, things look positive, with cable network sources reporting that their early numbers show gains from Friday too. In a few hours we'll have more clarity as Nielsen will announce an official household rating that includes broadcast and cable networks for the 56 major markets. Later, we'll have total viewers and demos.

I'll update this post later when more complete numbers come in.

The Debate Commission made a huge mistake by scheduling the first presidential debate on a Friday night in the Fall. I, along with millions of other Americans, was attending a high school football game that night. It was not a smart move by the Commission and I think we'll see higher ratings in the upcoming two debates.

UPDATE: The ratings were even better than first thought:

UPDATED: Thursday's debate between Alaska governor Sarah Palin and Delaware senator Joe Biden proved prognosticators correct and scored extremely high viewership.

Last night's debate totaled a 45.0 overnight meter-market household rating, according to Nielsen

That's 42% higher than Friday's presidential debate between John McCain and Barack Obama, which scored a collective 31.6 rating among the broadcast and cable networks.

It's also a stunning 60% higher than the 2004 debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. In fact, the figure surpasses any presidential debate since 1992's second bout between Bill Clinton, Ross Perot and George Bush.

The ratings will likely decrease slightly when Nielsen releases total national viewers later today. If it stays above 43.6, it will mean Thursday night was the highest-rated vp debate in TV history, surpassing 1984's most-watched record holder between George Bush and Geraldine Ferrarro.

Obama Winning Support Among Those Who Haven't Been Paying Attention

For those of us who have been immersed in the political campaign for nearly 2 years it's hard to imagine that there are millions of Americans who are just now starting to pay attention. Those people missed the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the connections to unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayres and con man Tony Rezko, the "bitter clingers" comments and many other things that make Obama so unpalatable as our next president. The Obama those people saw during the debate on Friday night is not the Obama the rest of us know. Mark Ambinder has more:

The first presidential debate was watched by tens of millions of people who were seeing the candidates discuss their views for the first time.

Both campaigns know that the most get-able voters at this point are the ones who are highly engaged with the race but tend to base their views on the highest, loudest levels of information.

The people most likely to move the poll numbers one way or another haven't been tuning into the 30 or so primary debates we've had; low information voters were the most relevant audience Friday night.

There was something Pat Buchanan said that night that is at once blindingly obvious and yet very important; Obama's debate performance placed him solidly in the American political mainstream.

Think of the "bitter" comment, his middle name, the flag pin, the Chicago connections. Low information voters wouldn't be out of line if they had a pretty strong impression of Obama formed by these attributes.

The sober performance and the congeniality towards McCain worked so well because so many people expected to see someone dangerous. Obama, in the debate, just did not read as an Ayres-Wright Chicago Elite Radical. Even the throwaway line: "we'd lower everybody's taxes if we could" quietly undercuts the notion of old-school liberalism.

It's possible that this weird racial/ideological caricature was priced into our (campaigns, media) debate expectations, and with Obama coming off as a sensible, middle of the road senator actually did him a world of good as far as the reassurance of sensibility.

The shame of all of this is that the election could end up being decided by people who were either too disinterested or too stupid to pay attention to the election and the candidates up until now.

The Uncommitted Voters Can Certainly Relate to Obama

The sight that bothered me the most in the commentary on the debate was the Frank Luntz focus group of "uncommitted" voters. More of them moved toward Obama than McCain, and the reasons given ran along the lines of "he cares". CBS had a similar poll showing movement towards the Obamessiah. The notion that the election may be decided by a bunch of wishy-washy people driven by the winds of emotion is just plain frightening.

Scott Ott of Scrappleface voices that concern quite nicely in this piece:

(2008-09-27) — In the wake of the first presidential debate between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, a CBS news poll of uncommitted voters shows that those who can’t make up their minds find more in common with Sen. Obama.

“People tend to gravitate toward the candidate who seems most like them,” said an unnamed pollster at CBS. “And we’re starting to see a shift, at least a tentative one, among those who have difficulty making decisions. To the uncommitted, Obama looks like a fellow traveler.”

About 39 percent of the respondents in the CBS-Knowledge Networks poll, who remain undecided after nearly two years of presidential campaigning, said they thought Sen. Obama won the debate, compared with 24 percent who picked Sen. McCain as the winner, and 37 percent who just couldn’t decide.

“Obama hit the right notes for these people,” the pollster said. “The way he cocks his head to the side as if perplexed, his frequent interjection of non-verbal sounds, and his ability to speak for long stretches without definitively declaring what he believes…all of this appeals to the uncommitted.”

On the other hand, the lower percentage who thought Sen. McCain won reflects the fact that “the uncommitted just can’t relate to people who know what they believe and don’t hesitate to say it.”

“Of course,” the pollster added, “Sen. McCain could also benefit from the fact that uncommitted voters will spend most, if not all, of election day trying to decide whether to go to the polls.”

Nice work, Scott! You put my frustrations into words perfectly.

At Best, A Draw or a Slight Nod to McCain

Although the comments on the blog and on Facebook tended to show McCain with a sizeable win in the debate, much of what I'm reading, along with the comments from Charles Krauthammer (whom I respect) would indicate that at best the debate was probably a draw, or maybe a slight win for McCain. There were no knockout blows or memorable lines beyond the immediate moment.

It seems that if you favored McCain before, you thought he prevailed. If you favored Obama, you thought he won.

I watched the focus group that Frank Luntz runs on Fox and was surprised to hear how many of his "independents" moved toward Obama because "he cares". Cry me a river. However maudlin that sounds, it's scary to think how easy the independents can be swayed.

I'm afraid this election is not going to be determined by real issues, but by emotional reactions to the pablum spewed by Obama.

Laura, who contributed quite ably to the comments on the debate open thread post has a different view of the event:

When I listened to the TV pundits following tonight's debate, I had to wonder if gentlemen like Charles Krauthammer, Fred Barnes, and Dick Morris had just watched the same debate I watched. They all declared the evening free of interesting soundbites and felt that Obama won or tied (and, in tying, won by exceeding expectations).

Although Senator McCain started out slowly and I think could have answered some questions better -- and more conservatively -- he was authoritative, knowledgeable, humorous, and pleasant.

Senator Obama was petulant, rude, whiny ("I have a bracelet too"), and clearly outclassed in terms of knowledge and experience.

Only one man on the stage was Presidential, and that man was Senator McCain.

I have to defer to those who actually watched. My opinion is based on responses from others who watched.

McCain is already out with an instant ad:

Both sides probably learned a few things about how to proceed in the next debate in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile, the two VP candidates will go at it next Thursday night.

Mississippi Debate Open Thread

While I'm at the high school football game and can't watch the debate, here's your opportunity to help me out by posting your comments on the debate as it goes along. I'll be reading along via my cellphone email from the football stadium. Have at it.

The debate starts at 6pm PDT and can be found on Fox News (and some liberal networks).

My name is Rick Moore and I approve this message.

UPDATE: Thanks to those of you who commented and kept me informed. Between those comments and stuff I could read in responses on Facebook, I got a pretty good idea of how things went.

Debate Watchers Needed

It looks like the debate will go on as planned tonight and I need some help. Normally I would watch and comment along as it goes, but tonight is the first home football game for the Mission Viejo High School Diablos and it's also Senior Parent Night for the band kids (that's for parents of high school seniors, not high school seniors who are parents). Consequently, at the time the debate will be starting I'll be walking onto the football field to be introduced to the home throng along with my wife and son.

Since I can't watch and comment, I'm looking for a few of you who can. I want to know what's going on with the debate, and you can help me by writing your comments on a special post I'll put up around 5pm. Although I can't see the debate, I can read your comments via email on my phone. That way I can enjoy the football game and festivities, and still monitor what's going on in Mississippi.

All you need to do is watch and add your comments to the Debate Open Thread that I'll put up later. I hope it's lively.