Ten Miles Square


October 05, 2012 8:50 AM How Much Will the Debate Shift the Polls? Here’s One Calculation

By John Sides

In my snap predictions last night, I was wrong about one thing: the post-debate insta-polls definitely suggest that most debate viewers believed Romney won: CNN had it 67-25.  A second poll of uncommitted voters conducted by CBS and Knowledge Networks scored in 46-22 for Romney.  (My second prediction—that the media would reach the same conclusion—turned out better.) One caveat is that insta-poll results don’t necessarily correlate with debate bumps in the polls, as Harry Enten shows.  But still: these results obviously aren’t what Obama wanted.

My ultimate prediction was that Obama’s lead in the polls—now about four points—would narrow by about 1 point.  Does that still seem reasonable?  Here’s another take.  The political scientist Joe Cera looked at the first debate in 2000—one that appears to have moved the polls, as I noted in my piece.  Using a large panel of respondents interviewed before and after the debate, he shows that Bush gained about 3 points, all of which were taken from the pool of undecided voters.  The undecideds shrank from 12% to 9%. 2000 is a useful comparison because roughly similar fractions of people thought Bush had won—57%—as thought Romney won (57% is about what you get averaging the CBS and CNN polls above—with the caveat that they were sampling from different populations).

So let’s assume that the same fraction of undecided voters shift in Romney’s direction as shifted in Bush’s direction.  In 2000, that was 25% of undecideds (3/12=.25).  In 2012, the proportion of undecideds is about 5%.  So 25% of 5% is 1.25 points—about what I predicted last night.  It could end up being a bit more, if you think that Obama has been out-performing the fundamentals of the race, and thus we were due for a course correction.

But if that estimate proves correct—or at least close to it—then as Drew Linzer points out, that’s not enough.  Romney needs to run the table in the subsequent debates, and enjoy favorable news coverage besides (i.e., no more 47% videos).  I tend to doubt that Romney can win the other debates by this same margin.  One of the reasons that the candidates typically fight to a draw in the debates as a whole is that they can often rebound from bad performances with better performances—e.g., Reagan in the second debate of 1984.  We will see.

[Cross-posted at The Monkey Cage]

John Sides is an associate professor of political science at George Washington University.


  • Robert Capuzzi on October 05, 2012 9:42 AM:

    I too have given much thought to how this debate may change the race, and have come to the conclusion that it won't make any significant difference. This because of self reflection and an examination of why I have not changed my own mind. Of course, I was disappointed in Obama's performance, who wouldn't be? But when I go back to the debate issues and how Romney presented a 180 degree turn on his positions and was insistent on denying the factual basis of his policy, what was left for the president to do, but to be in a defensive position....on the facts. What would the debate have been like if Obama had engaged Romney? We would have seen Obama constantly calling Romney a :"liar" and misrepresenter of his stated positions, which by the way has been the Romney campaign all along. The Etch a Sketch was brought out instead of a teleprompter. No, the truth will have to be outed on a different day.
    But primarily, this race is a battle between an unknown, Romney, and a known, Obama. I believe I know Obama, and Romney, especially in this debate has proven that we can never know Romney,or how he will govern in office. This debate has only confirmed that. If it scares me; I just can imagine what the right wing is thinking now.

  • smartalek on October 05, 2012 4:34 PM:

    "I just can imagine what the right wing is thinking now."

    I see no evidence that they can "think."
    I see evidence only that they can feel, and can act.
    But those are very different from thought -- a process of active engagement with facts and reality, using processes of observation, analysis, logic, prediction, experimentation, assessment, and critical self-correction.
    Rats and other lower life forms can feel and respond; "thinking," properly defined, may be beyond their capacities.

  • jewel on October 14, 2012 7:25 AM:

    Down Load Free Election App

    Pureview's Election 2012 is a crowdsourced non-partisan iphone app that compares the two presidential candidates using actual videos of them talking about the important issues. www.PureViewApp.com
    Download the free PureView Election 2012 App for iPhone

  • KarkAwark on November 01, 2012 10:36 PM:

    So far, fourteen states and the District of Columbia have allowed by globally as well as in the United States of America. http://vapemonster.com Select the date and write it down along with every of for card adverse more carcinogens than tobacco smoke.