The Debate: Could Anything Change Your Mind?

 

WASHINGTON, DC - SEPTEMBER 17: US Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton speaks at the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Phoenix Awards Dinner, at the Washington Convention Center, Spetember 17, 2016 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

The first Trump-Clinton debate is getting a lot of hype. Typical lede: “What may turn out to be the most important ninety minutes in America’s political history will unfold Monday night.”

That’s a stretch. The evidence for the centrality of debates to election outcomes isn’t all that overwhelming. The Washington Monthly has a good summary of the research into this question:

The small or nonexistent movement in voters’ preferences is evident when comparing the polls before and after each debate or during the debate season as a whole. Political lore often glosses over or even ignores the polling data. Even those who do pay attention to polls often fail to separate real changes from random blips due to sampling error. A more careful study by political scientist James Stimson finds little evidence of game changers in the presidential campaigns between 1960 and 2000. Stimson writes, “There is no case where we can trace a substantial shift to the debates.” At best, debates provide a “nudge” in very close elections like 1960,1980, or 2000. A even more comprehensive study, by political scientists Robert Erikson and Christopher Wlezien, which includes every publicly available poll from the presidential elections between 1952 and 2008, comes to a similar conclusion: excluding the 1976 election, which saw Carter’s lead drop steadily throughout the fall, “the best prediction from the debates is the initial verdict before the debates.” In other words, in the average election year, you can accurately predict where the race will stand after the debates by knowing the state of the race before the debates. Erikson and Wlezien conclude that evidence of debate effects is “fragile.”

Many Ricochet members feel quite strongly that nothing — ever — could persuade them to vote for Trump or Clinton. I doubt even a single person here is apt to change this view after watching the debate.

But let’s pretend. You’re allowed any act of imagination here, so long as it doesn’t violate the laws of physics. Is there anything either of the candidates could say, in the course of 90 minutes, that would change your mind?

Imagine your job is to prep the candidate for this debate. For the sake of the thought experiment, forget about shoring up the base’s support and persuade undecided voters. The only goal is to persuade voters just like you to change their minds. What would you advise the candidate to say? How would you have the candidate prepare? (If your answer is, “There is absolutely nothing whatsoever that either of them could say to change my mind,” do you plan to watch the debate? If so, why?)

Now change the exercise slightly and pretend you’re prepping the candidate with the goal of persuading undecided voters. These people:

They tend to be more younger than older.

They are less likely to identify with either of the two parties.

And they strongly dislike both major-party candidates.

They are 2016’s undecided voters — or at least those who tell pollsters they won’t choose between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Sometimes they say they won’t vote for either candidate. Other times, they say they will vote for another candidate when offered only Trump and Clinton, or they will choose Gary Johnson or Jill Stein when pollsters prompt with those names. Or sometimes they say they won’t vote at all.

Even as Clinton builds a consistent lead in the weeks following the national party conventions, this bloc of voters — which usually ranges between 8 and 20 percent of voters — could still tip the scales in November.

What do you think is apt to win them around? How would you advise the candidates to prepare?

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 79 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Reality TV pabulum.  As if a disorderly mob of two politicians needed a “moderator”.  I say put the two (any two) in a room for one hour, with one microphone, and one camera, and broadcast it live.

    • #1
  2. genferei Member
    genferei
    @genferei

    The debates are all about journalists pretending they aren’t just entertainers.

    As to the second hypothetical, perhaps underlining support for over the counter birth control, a late conversion to ending the War on Drugs, and the decriminalisation of copyright breach: that is Sex, Drugs and Rock’n’Roll.

    • #2
  3. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    No.  Words don’t mean anything to either of them.  We must watch what they’ve done and who they have around them.  That makes the decision a little easier.  Hillary is simply beyond a reasonable risk.

    • #3
  4. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Anybody who has given it a shred of thought has already selected one, or the other, or neither.  The debate is elite moron theater for the lowest moron denominator.

    • #4
  5. tigerlily Member
    tigerlily
    @tigerlily

    No. Who cares what two congenital liars have to say about the issues of the day.

    • #5
  6. Brian Wolf Inactive
    Brian Wolf
    @BrianWolf

    As an act of imagination?  If I saw Trump come into the Debate with a humble attitude, he made clear by his answers that he had really began to study policy and listen to Conservative advisors and showed a toughness of character and discipline when goaded by Clinton I could begin to rethink my nevertrump position.  I don’t think I will see any of these things however.

    Nothing could make me vote for Hillary beyond admission of her repentance and conversion to Christianity that had given her new purpose to transform the Democrats into a pro-life party.  Something like that would get me to vote for her anything less than that and the Queen Crone of Crime will never get my vote.

    As a practical political question.  I think Trump has to come across as controlled but clever.  Insult Hillary and goad her but don’t be over the top and show that he is not so easy to goad.  The subtle come back to a Hillary goad could do Trump a world of good.  Bringing up her corruption and email scandals as much as possible will benefit him.

    Also I think he needs to show just barely enough policy chops to seem plausible to a low information voter.  He doesn’t really have to have the policy chops but he must seem like he does.  If Hillary makes him look totally clueless about big issues I think that is bad for him.

    What does Hillary have to do to win?  I don’t care I want her to lose.  She deserves to win nothing.  But as an exercise in politics I will give this answer.  Hillary needs to provoke Trump to anger especially if she can use his ignorance of policy as her goad.  The angrier that Trump gets on stage the more it will be to the benefit of Hillary.  People unsure about Trump, I think, are unsure if he is ready to President and are concerned that he can’t quite control his emotions.  Anything that Hillary does to feed that narrative is to her advantage.

    • #6
  7. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    No.

    But I think Trump could get me to make a modest contribution if, when Hillary acts hurt or outraged, he turns to her and says, “Did that sting, Madam Secretary? You might want to put some ice on that.”

    • #7
  8. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Ball Diamond Ball:Anybody who has given it a shred of thought has already selected one, or the other, or neither. The debate is elite moron theater for the lowest moron denominator.

    I feel that is unfair. I am sure there are actually many people (just not on this site) who actually haven’t given this election or these candidates much thought and for whom this debate will be the first real hard look they give these candidates. To them I’m sure this thing will be useful in the original way it was intended. For those of us who have been watching this train wreck for over a year well…at this point (speaking for myself) it is really more about the curiosity of seeing how it all plays out.

    Now I watched all of the Republican debates and the first Democratic one and posted reviews on all of them. I plan to do the same with these as well. So for me I guess I feel a sort of professional obligation to watch. As to what could happen to change my mind to vote for one of these people? I honestly can’t say, but if it happens I will let you all know.

    • #8
  9. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    If donald trump promised to set up a lottery to select babies so that he could drink their blood because “the jews shouldn’t be the only ones who get to enjoy the sweet sweet baby wine” then I could see myself pulling the lever for Hillary.  Anything short of that and trump is clearly superior.

    • #9
  10. Fred Houstan Member
    Fred Houstan
    @FredHoustan

    I love this game! The following would be a game changer for me, coming from Hillary’s lips;

    “In preparing for this debate, I’ve had that road to Damascus radical conversion, where I now see that I have been fully and repugnantly wrong in my unbridled and aggressive support for the termination of nascent life and my unclear support for natural end-of-life. Count me among America’s teaming Pro-Life movement and their fight for “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

    That’s all it would take, and then I could vote positively, if not enthusiastically, this November.

    • #10
  11. She Member
    She
    @She

    I doubt that the debate will change many minds.  But I’m not sure that it has to, in order to have an impact on the election.

    I believe that, barring something like a sudden faceplant straight into the lectern by one or the other of them, the winner will be the candidate who speaks the least: Trump, because that gives him less opportunity to say something stupid or ignorant (in all senses of the word), and Hillary, because the more she says, and the more people hear and see her, the less they like her.

    So, if I’m Hillary, I keeping my answers short, and try to goad Trump into over-the-top and uncontrolled reaction when he’s on the clock.  If I’m Trump, I’m keeping my answers short, trying to get Hillary to show off her ‘policy’ chops and ‘experience,’ and at every opportunity I get, I’m looking straight at the camera and saying, “Look at her record folks.  It doesn’t matter how many details and facts she knows, just look at the trail of destruction she’s left in her wake for the last 30 years.  Here’s an example.  Next question?”

    I don’t know how many more people will vote for Trump as a result of the debate.  The best outcome for him may be that some of the wobblers decide they can’t, in good conscience, cast a vote for Hillary.  The opposite is true for her.  And I guess we’ll see how much difference it makes, and set the stage for the second debate (which, in the past, has often proven more interesting than the first) by the end of the week.

    • #11
  12. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Valiuth: I am sure there are actually many people (just not on this site) who actually haven’t given this election or these candidates much thought

    Do you think? I can’t imagine that by this point, there are many Americans left who haven’t given it much thought. It seems so all-pervasive and inescapable. Has anyone come into contact in the past few months with someone who hasn’t given it much thought?

    • #12
  13. Gaius Inactive
    Gaius
    @Gaius

    Simple self awareness on Clinton’s part would go along way. If I thought that were a possibility I might actually watch the thing.

    • #13
  14. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    No. I’ll be watching for the entertainment value, which is a horrible thing to say, but it’s true. Being a good debater says nothing about how a person will govern the country. They’ve laid out enough of their cards for me to make my decision. I’ve made up my mind.

    • #14
  15. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    They’re also saying it may be the most viewed event in US TV history, which means it will have to beat several Superbowls and get over 115 million people. I just don’t see that happening.

    • #15
  16. Doug Watt Member
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    For reasons of brevity I won’t delve into the reasons that we have two candidates that are poster children for the Lesser of Two Evils.

    I will probably vote for Mr. Trump because Arizona is in play in this election cycle. If I was still in Oregon where a Republican vote for President has no meaning I would leave my ballot unmarked for President and then cast votes for Republicans running in races for other offices. In the past Arizona electoral votes have gone to the Republican candidate for President. That may not happen this time.

    What happens on the debate stage will not change my mind. Much has been made of a new tactic to place invited guests in the front row to either distract one candidate or the other. I would suggest Mr. Trump place a priest holding a crucifix in the front row. I suspect Ms. Clinton’s medical episode at the 9/11 memorial event was brought on by the widow of a Catholic firefighter or police officer that was wearing a crucifix.

    • #16
  17. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.: I doubt even a single person here is apt to change this view after watching the debate.

    I will probably watch the debates for the first time I can remember. It is Trump’s opportunity to earn my vote, so it could definitely change my vote.

    • #17
  18. Umbra Fractus Inactive
    Umbra Fractus
    @UmbraFractus

    As much as I feel the need for a shower after saying this, Donald Trump is much like Ronald Reagan in this debate. The primary thing he needs to do is come across as not crazy. It won’t be nearly as easy for Trump as it was for Reagan, but it has to be done. He needs a flashing sign on his podium that says, “Don’t feed the troll!” because that’s what Hillary is going to try to do, bait him into flying off the handle and playing into the thin-skinned-and-crazy image the Dems want the people to see.

    • #18
  19. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    There is no chance whatsoever of my voting for that crypto-communist murderess, Hillary Clinton.

    • #19
  20. Fred Houstan Member
    Fred Houstan
    @FredHoustan

    Mike LaRoche: There is no chance whatsoever of my voting for that crypto-communist murderess, Hillary Clinton.

    I was given to the fantastic whims at @claire‘s suggestion. Dramatic change of hearts of happen, though rare and always unbelievably so. My comment was an indulgence in nothing less then this unlikely scenario.

    • #20
  21. Eric Hines Inactive
    Eric Hines
    @EricHines

    Two small observations.  One goes directly to your posit: since Hillary Clinton is so fundamentally a liar and generally dishonest, there is nothing she can say that’s believable.  From that, there’s nothing she can say that would change my mind away from my current choice.

    The second is the role that the “moderators” are being pushed into playing: a Candy Crowley-type fact asserter.  To the extent the “moderators” surrender their own integrity to the point of doing that, there will be nothing in the entire debate that will be believable, from a “moderator” or Clinton perspective.

    None of that makes Trump default  believable, of course; it only makes Clinton look relatively better or worse than she does when she’s campaigning.

    But yes, I intend to watch all three debates.  I want to see if Clinton can last that long (has she been resting up this last week, or so, for the debate?  If so, what does that suggest about her health?  Has she, instead, actually been cramming for this debate over the last week, or so?  If so, of what is she so terrified that might happen in the debate?), and the debates are an important part of our political fabric.

    Eric Hines

    • #21
  22. Michael Collins Member
    Michael Collins
    @MichaelCollins

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.: But let’s pretend. You’re allowed any act of imagination here, so long as it doesn’t violate the laws of physics. Is there anything either of the candidates could say, in the course of 90 minutes, that would change your mind?

    If one of them said, “If elected, my first official act will be to resign the office, thus allowing my vice-president to succeed to the presidency.”

    • #22
  23. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    No, imagination comes up with nothing would occur that would make me support the Hildabeast.

    The re-election of our cypher anti-American president in 2012 convinced me the Democrat party and its allies and enablers are too far beyond hope of recovery. Since I too live in a majority Democrat stronghold, a state that has not gone for a GOP presidential candidate since 1984, to vote for Trump is to spit into the wind.

    Still I may vote for him as the lesser of the two evils, keeping in mind a slim reed of hope: if Trump were to pull it off, then at least there’d be some chance to block Democrats and its allies and enablers from hundreds of appointive offices in the executive branch and the regulatory state for the next few years — not a bad thing, that.

    • #23
  24. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Valiuth: I am sure there are actually many people (just not on this site) who actually haven’t given this election or these candidates much thought

    Do you think? I can’t imagine that by this point, there are many Americans left who haven’t given it much thought. It seems so all-pervasive and inescapable. Has anyone come into contact in the past few months with someone who hasn’t given it much thought?

    I think it would be reasonable for someone to believe that, in a volatile year like this one, there’s no point in informing oneself too early – better to wait and see how it unfolds first before torturing one’s brain cells with information that might later be undermined anyhow. Rational ignorance.

    Especially for people who only feel the obligation to vote (if they even feel that) rather than persuade others, knowing how little their one vote is likely to do to change the electoral-college outcome might lead them to believe that torturing themselves for months in advance about the outcome just isn’t worth it.

    • #24
  25. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake: I think it would be reasonable for someone to believe

    Are you noticing a lot of “reasonable” pervading the American landscape right now?

    • #25
  26. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Michael Collins:

    If one of them said, “If elected, my first official act will be to resign the office, thus allowing my vice-president to succeed to the presidency.”

    You know, it is within both of their power to say that. And it would be remembered forever as a great and honorable act of patriotism. Yet it seems like an impossible fantasy that either of them would do what is just so obviously in our country’s best interests.

    • #26
  27. Sabrdance Member
    Sabrdance
    @Sabrdance

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Valiuth: I am sure there are actually many people (just not on this site) who actually haven’t given this election or these candidates much thought

    Do you think? I can’t imagine that by this point, there are many Americans left who haven’t given it much thought. It seems so all-pervasive and inescapable. Has anyone come into contact in the past few months with someone who hasn’t given it much thought?

    I have 72 of them in my classes.  I could arrange an introduction.

    • #27
  28. Michael Collins Member
    Michael Collins
    @MichaelCollins

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Michael Collins:

    If one of them said, “If elected, my first official act will be to resign the office, thus allowing my vice-president to succeed to the presidency.”

    You know, it is within both of their power to say that. And it would be remembered forever as a great and honorable act of patriotism. Yet it seems like an impossible fantasy that either of them would do what is just so obviously in our country’s best interests.

    Yes.  This time around I plan to do what I never thought I would do.  Vote for all the down ballot candidates, but leave the presidential portion of the ballot blank to protest having to make a choice between two unqualified candidates.   This time around we shouldn’t be asking the forward looking question “What will happen to the United States?”.  Instead we need to look to the past and ask “Why have we Americans, the proud heirs to Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, become such a banana republic lately?”   We had to make many poor choices over a prolonged period to bring us to this pass.  Why did we make them?  Looking toward the future is a form of irresponsible escapism.

    • #28
  29. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Valiuth: I am sure there are actually many people (just not on this site) who actually haven’t given this election or these candidates much thought

    Do you think? I can’t imagine that by this point, there are many Americans left who haven’t given it much thought. It seems so all-pervasive and inescapable. Has anyone come into contact in the past few months with someone who hasn’t given it much thought?

    Well I think for all of us here it seems hard to imagine. But consider the following example I know the Cubs are doing well, and by all indications are set to go to the World Series and win it. Hard not to know something about what is happening in baseball in the US, but I haven’t followed their season and I probably won’t sit down to watch a game until the World Series. So everyone in the US has heard of Clinton and Trump, they know there is an election and they probably have some general inclination towards one or the other, but I think many are only now starting to really look at the game being played to determine what is happening. I have a few friends that I know haven’t given this all much thought, of course the live in CA and are rather liberal in their inclinations so really they have no reason to bother.

    • #29
  30. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Member
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake
    @Midge

    Claire Berlinski, Ed.:

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake: I think it would be reasonable for someone to believe

    Are you noticing a lot of “reasonable” pervading the American landscape right now?

    Well, in fairness, “reasonable” often isn’t an attention-getting strategy.

    Brown ladybugs are now common in the US, brought over as pest-control. If I had to go into a field and compare the number of brown ladybugs to the number of red, I bet I’d undercount the brown ones.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.