# The second presidential debate: 10/16/2012 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [October 16, 2012, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847 "2012-10-16T04:35:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Tarwater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9de0a6/32.png) [@Tarwater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tarwater)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/41 "2012-10-16T23:05:13Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Nope. Americans are pretty evenly split between R-D-I. It’s not just R-D. Yes, and what’s your point, exactly? That’s really only a refutation of my argument if the polls are limited to two options, or you’re assuming “Independent” is a coherent political party, and neither one of those are true. Only one poll identifies the political composition of their sample, which is CNN. Shockingly, they polled more Republicans, and SHOCKINGLY, Ryan came across as the winner of the debate in that poll. If you watched the manic post-debate babbling that was CNN and ABC’s coverage, you would’ve seen that among their small, in-studio samples, there was a clear division among those who thought Biden won and those who thought Ryan won, and that division clearly broke along party lines. > [@](#): > > That’s nice, but it’s still just a tiny portion of the debate audience. CNN gives undecideds as 10%. I’m not going to let 10% of the audience decide who won. Well, then, who \*are \*you going to let decide who won? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/42 "2012-10-16T23:08:21Z")
> [@Tarwater](#): > > Yes, and what’s your point, exactly? > > That’s really only a refutation of my argument if the polls are limited to two options, or you’re assuming “Independent” is a coherent political party, and neither one of those are true. Only one poll identifies the political composition of their sample, which is CNN. Shockingly, they polled more Republicans, and SHOCKINGLY, Ryan came across as the winner of the debate in that poll. > > If you watched the manic post-debate babbling that was CNN and ABC’s coverage, you would’ve seen that among their small, in-studio samples, there was a clear division among those who thought Biden won and those who thought Ryan won, and that division clearly broke along party lines. You claimed polling would fall on party lines. But lots of people aren’t affiliated with either party. And if your thesis is correct, why didn’t the polling break that way for the Obama/Romney debate? > [@](#): > > Well, then, who \*are \*you going to let decide who won? All of us. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/43 "2012-10-16T23:13:13Z")
Winning or losing a debate is not a real thing, I hope we all realize. Winning or losing an election is. (I realize real debates, like High School debate, does have winners and losers, with scores and everything. But Presidential debates, not so much) ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/44 "2012-10-16T23:29:06Z")
I really hope to see: That’s simply not true. A, Band C cites state … On xx date you said, yy date you said and today you’re saying… Which is your true position? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/45 "2012-10-16T23:31:23Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > Winning or losing a debate is not a real thing, I hope we all realize. Winning or losing an election is. > > (I realize real debates, like High School debate, does have winners and losers, with scores and everything. But Presidential debates, not so much) Winning a debate is a real thing. It may not lead to winning an election, but neither does winning the Iowa caucus or the NH primary. ---
**Author:** ![Tarwater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9de0a6/32.png) [@Tarwater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tarwater)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/46 "2012-10-16T23:31:34Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You claimed polling would fall on party lines. But lots of people aren’t affiliated with either party. And if your thesis is correct, why didn’t the polling break that way for the Obama/Romney debate? The unaffiliated voters don’t belong to a party. They’re unaffiliated. If all the Republicans said Ryan won and all the Democrats said Biden won, it doesn’t matter how the unaffiliated voter chooses to answer the poll. They could all say Biden won, or they could all say Ryan won, and I still think it would be fair to say that the poll broke evenly along party lines. You’re saying that a tie is a meaningful way of describing the debate, and I’m saying it isn’t, because in the case of this debate, both parties thought their candidate won. I don’t think that’s an objective way to measure who came out ahead, and I don’t think it’s a fair assessment, that given both their performances, they both came out equally. I provided evidence toward that end. The ABC poll said that undecided voters gave the debate to Biden. Whether that evidence is convincing, I don’t know. I don’t believe it’s a super reliable measurement, but I think it’s as close as you’re going to get to having an objective assessment of who won. It’s not entirely accurate to say that this phenomenon is absent in the polls that followed the first presidential debate. If you look at the Oct. 3rd Gallup poll, which categorizes the respondents by their political party, you’ll see that nearly forty percent of Democrats polled thought that Obama won. That’s absurd. Obama clearly didn’t win. He didn’t even come close. But out of loyalty for their candidate, forty percent of responding Democrats said that Obama did better than Romney. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/47 "2012-10-16T23:57:36Z")
> [@Tarwater](#): > > That’s absurd. Obama clearly didn’t win. He didn’t even come close. But out of loyalty for their candidate, forty percent of responding Democrats said that Obama did better than Romney. I think that is a bit misleading. They simply agree with Obama on the issues, and dislike Romney and therefore thought more highly of what Obama had to say. It’s loyalty to their beliefs not the candidate. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/48 "2012-10-17T00:15:57Z")
> [@Tarwater](#): > > The unaffiliated voters don’t belong to a party. They’re unaffiliated. If all the Republicans said Ryan won and all the Democrats said Biden won, it doesn’t matter how the unaffiliated voter chooses to answer the poll. They could all say Biden won, or they could all say Ryan won, and I still think it would be fair to say that the poll broke evenly along party lines. > > You’re saying that a tie is a meaningful way of describing the debate, and I’m saying it isn’t, because in the case of this debate, both parties thought their candidate won. I don’t think that’s an objective way to measure who came out ahead, and I don’t think it’s a fair assessment, that given both their performances, they both came out equally. I provided evidence toward that end. The ABC poll said that undecided voters gave the debate to Biden. Whether that evidence is convincing, I don’t know. I don’t believe it’s a super reliable measurement, but I think it’s as close as you’re going to get to having an objective assessment of who won. It’s one way to say how won, but not the generally accepted way. > [@](#): > > It’s not entirely accurate to say that this phenomenon is absent in the polls that followed the first presidential debate. If you look at the Oct. 3rd Gallup poll, which categorizes the respondents by their political party, you’ll see that nearly forty percent of Democrats polled thought that Obama won. That’s absurd. Obama clearly didn’t win. He didn’t even come close. But out of loyalty for their candidate, forty percent of responding Democrats said that Obama did better than Romney. You’re assuming Romney won and saying the Obama supporters are biased. Maybe they were looking for something different than the ones who said he lost. I don’t think we can read their minds. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/49 "2012-10-17T00:17:27Z")
Obama lost the first debate, but the bump was 4 points instead of the typical 2 because the media virtually unanimously declared Romney the winner. That happened for three reasons: (1) Romney did better; (2) Liberals like MSNBC felt comfortable doing so for various reasons; and (3) a comeback story was narratively interesting. These factors will not coincide again. There’s a little of (3) for Obama tonight. But Fox News would never say Obama won, not matter what happens. So the reverse of (2) will not repeat. And the disparity will not be as bit on (1) was it was before. So I predict a rough tie, with no appreciable effects on the polls against the current trend. ---
**Author:** ![yorick73](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b5a626/32.png) [@yorick73](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yorick73)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/50 "2012-10-17T00:22:40Z")
> [@Nazarene](#): > > What fucking pussies. > > I hope Candy just ignores every word of this. > > Cutting off the mics of the questioners is especially chickenshit. I assume Crowley knew what she was getting herself into before she agreed to moderate the debate. I think it’s a dick move for her to try to inject herself into what was billed as a conversation between the presidential contenders and undecided voters. I guess her ego is bigger than the agreement between the candidates. ---
**Author:** ![not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/not_what_you_d_expect/32/3246_2.png) [@not\_what\_you\_d\_expect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/not_what_you_d_expect)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/51 "2012-10-17T00:35:06Z")
I have no predictions, but I’m nervous as hell. Which Romney will show up tonight? And did the President prepare for the correct one. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/52 "2012-10-17T00:37:44Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > What I want to see are questions on women’s issues (equal pay, contraception, abortion) and immigration. That reminds me of the other question I’d like asked, which is what they plan to do to clean up military culture, to get rid of the bad apples who do things like desecrate corpses or have rape victims diagnosed with “personality disorders” to get rid of them. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/53 "2012-10-17T00:55:30Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > So I predict a rough tie, with no appreciable effects on the polls against the current trend. Do you think Obama is going into this debate with the intention of getting a tie and then winning the final debate? And for those who scoff, ridiculous - remember, there is such a thing as trying too hard. Obama can always change his intention from tie to win _during the debate_; the opposite, from win to tie, is, obviously, much harder. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/54 "2012-10-17T00:56:28Z")
I do think he’s received wise counsel that he needs to not overreact tonight. He doesn’t need a home run. He needs a double. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/55 "2012-10-17T00:58:40Z")
Well, here we go. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/56 "2012-10-17T01:00:31Z")
Time for Obama and Romney to show. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/57 "2012-10-17T01:01:53Z")
Wheee! We’re off… ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/58 "2012-10-17T01:02:43Z")
Crowley seems intent on keeping the debate under tight control. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/59 "2012-10-17T01:03:12Z")
There they are. They seem prepared. Energetic in their step, smiling. ---
**Author:** ![asterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4da419/32.png) [@asterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asterion)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2012, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847/60 "2012-10-17T01:03:23Z")
I agree. He doesn’t have to swing for the fences, just enough to get the needed run in. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-second-presidential-debate-10-16-2012/637847.md?page=4)