That's because the GOP ironically understood the science behind debates; the human response to debates is incredibly illogical. Harvard did a study and they found that debates does not have any significant effect on any group in terms of who they vote for.Â
You aren't going to change people's vote through a debate, they'll think their guy won.
So what use is it? Jazzing up your own base. You go up there with a big performance and try to convince your base that the other guy is the big bad wolf. You're not trying to convert votes You're trying to get 100% voter turnout from your own base. And for that who wins and loses doesnt matter, they'll think you won regardlessÂ
ETA people are bringing up Biden and I don't feel like responding individually. 2 things. 1. They are talking about under normal circumstances debates don't flip votes. Obviously you could imagine an extreme circumstance that would for example if your rode in nude on a donkey and flipped the audience the bird that would probably do it.Â
Biden's debate changed things because it made him seem off (or however you would like to term it). It had nothing to do with the debate itself the same effect would have been had if his own ad made him seem impaired or an interview etc. So I'm not really sure it's fair to say the debate convinced people of that, it was a whole separate thing.Â
I’ll disagree about the efficacy of debates. Case in point, Biden exhausted from actually doing his job and not napping and golfing all day, put in one of the worst debate appearances I can think of.
Even his supporters saw how tired and how he had lost his vitality and ability to speak forcefully with conviction. That said, he wasn’t a dementia patient but he was old and tired.
That debate shone a light on him that caused many of his supporters to look differently at him. Ultimately it cumulatively resulted in his withdrawal from the presidential race.
So in just 2024 we can point to an example of debates changing supporters minds.
You make a good point but draw the wrong conclusion.
A terrible debate performance absolutely can reduce the turn out of your side or even convert some against you.
But the conclusion the populist right draws from this is not to show up. When you combine the high cost of a terrible performance, with the low value of a great performance (as per the comment you replied to) the logical decision for a cynical actor is to simply not show up. At least if the candidate is lackluster.
97
u/Resident_Trash5605 1d ago edited 1d ago
That's because the GOP ironically understood the science behind debates; the human response to debates is incredibly illogical. Harvard did a study and they found that debates does not have any significant effect on any group in terms of who they vote for.Â
You aren't going to change people's vote through a debate, they'll think their guy won.
So what use is it? Jazzing up your own base. You go up there with a big performance and try to convince your base that the other guy is the big bad wolf. You're not trying to convert votes You're trying to get 100% voter turnout from your own base. And for that who wins and loses doesnt matter, they'll think you won regardlessÂ
ETA people are bringing up Biden and I don't feel like responding individually. 2 things. 1. They are talking about under normal circumstances debates don't flip votes. Obviously you could imagine an extreme circumstance that would for example if your rode in nude on a donkey and flipped the audience the bird that would probably do it.Â