Princeton Election Consortium

A first draft of electoral history. Since 2004

In the eye of a hurricane there is quiet: Clinton/Trump debate thread

September 26th, 2016, 8:15pm by Sam Wang


A few days ago, the state-poll-based Meta-Analysis reached an extreme value of Clinton +1.4%. It has turned around, and today went to Clinton +2.4%. I don’t know if this turnaround will continue…but note that this is a pre-debate bounce.

Get your panic on.

 

 

 

9:01pm: On C-SPAN, sepulchral silence. No commentators. I love it!!

9:15pm: Fact-checking in real time at the Washington Post.

9:24pm: Someone send a search party to find Lester Holt. Oh, there he is.

10:15pm: NBC fact-checking.

10:22pm: I HAVE A WINNING TEMPERAMENT.

11:30pm: Rudy Giuliani, Dana Perino, and Brit Hume think Trump lost, which pretty much settles it. And then we have this fine example of pundit expectations foolishness:

In the end, Lester Holt ended up moderating, fact-checking, enforcing at least some of the rules, and letting the candidates have their say. Pretty impressive.

Good night.

Tags: 2016 Election · President

13 Comments so far ↓

  • Leading Edge Boomer

    JABBERTRUMPY (Apologies to Lewis Carroll)

    Beware the JabberTrump, my girl!

    The names that bite, the lies that catch!
    
Beware the Cuckoo Birds, and shun

    The frumious Right-Wing Batch!

    She took her Factual Sword to mind
    Long time the Orange foe she sought
    So rested she by the Tumtum tree,

    And stood awhile in thought.

    And, as in uffish thought she stood,

    The JabberTrump, with eyes of flame,
    
Came whiffling through the tulgey wood,

    And Tweeted as it came!

    One, two! One, two! And through and through

    The Factual Blade went snicker-snack!
    
She left it dead, and with its head

    It went galumphing back.

    And, hast thou slain the JabberTrump?
    
Come to my arms, my beamish girl!
    
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

    She smiled, as did the world.


  • br

    Wow, just, wow… Trump invoking Reaganism twice in the first 15 minutes, including during his opening statement. Hillary announced she is live-fact-checking claims on her site and Trump went ballistic, cutting off the moderator. Look, I am sure I am biased, and I’m sure many are the opposite bias, but tonight I was trying to look at it like an undecided and Trump is just not looking good at all… At one point, Trump interrupted Clinton’s dedicated 2 minutes and they did actually restart the timer (watching the clock both debaters had their eyes on). Grilling Trump about releasing his taxes, he doesn’t address it directly at all, tried to move it to “when Secretary Clinton releases her 35k emails…” but the moderator brought it back immediately. Clinton calls Trump out for the Casino-opening-related tax releases, paying $0 federal, Trump cuts her off instantly “that makes me smart”, Clinton immediately mentions how that’s $0 for military, $0 for vets… just a master move. Then Trump plugs stop-and-frisk while insisting we need to enforce law & order, all while the topic was about improving police relations. Moderator reminds Trump it was ruled unconstitutional and he then argues this is the fault of the court system.

    Call me a sucker for enjoying this debate I suppose, let’s watch the meta-margin regress back to mean. After this, I feel a bit safer avoiding the drama and focusing on down-ticket races, as I should have been doing all along according to PEC :-)

  • Greg Gross

    You may have seen some of the analysts/pundits/political junkies who said that watching the debate with the sound turned off showed who looked more presidential – an alleged barometer for who wins the presidency. Well, I watched the debate at a relative’s house (I was dog-sitting!) The audio on TV turned out to be slightly out-of -sync with the video. (Like an old voiced-over Godzilla film.) It somehow made it easier to watch their demeanor AND still get the substance of their arguments. The demeanor could be viewed, and the substance followed shortly behind.

    Purely on demeanor: HRC looked far more collected and comfortable. Donald pursed his lips a lot and nodded and had a forced “I am really clever and wise” look on his face. HRC looked in control. Donald looked cross. So I think HRC wins the demeanor test.

    As to substance, I think HRC won also. A bit policy wonky, but no distaster on her part.

  • Allan

    That was brutal and I don’t mean for Clinton.

  • Jaymes Winn

    That literally could not have gone better for Clinton, short of Trump using a misogynistic slur. I’m pretty confident that this election is over.

    • Matt McIrvin

      I don’t know that it’s over–Trump could, for instance, still bail on the remaining debates and confine himself to highly controlled appearances for the next five weeks, and the media would continue to peck away at Clinton once they got bored. That would give him a fighting chance, since the race is close now and any damage done to him here would fade in two or three weeks with no followup.

      I suspect that’s why John Podesta was openly speculating about the chances that Trump will bail on the next debates–he’s calling him a chicken, basically, baiting him to stay in it.

  • Matt McIrvin

    I can’t watch these things any more. But it sounds like a bloodbath.

    • SpecialNewb

      For which candidate?

    • Jaymes Winn

      Trump. It was the worst debate performance I’ve ever seen.

      In the first 1/3 he was rowdy, a bit disrespectful, but not _too_ terrible. Then as it went on he completely unraveled.

  • Jason Bennett

    It seems that the win probability didn’t shift along with the margin change, though?

  • MAT

    I was noticing this earlier as well as the EC shift. Anything in particular driving the change?