I Know This Is Hard... But Think Like A "Low Information Voter"... Who Won Tonight ???

[WillyT]

It's only the first debate tonight, but I don't think it will move the electorate in any significant way.

Gawd I hope I'm wrong!

:shrug:

[sfwriter]

1. That's what I told my wife... For teh uninformed, McCain was a home run...

[KittyWampus]

13. Not according to the CNN response lines. Obama won Independents. Game over

[matt819]

34. Be careful with your terms

There's a difference, I think, between independents and low information voters. You could be both, I suppose. The distinction is between low information voters and intelligent voters. I would suggest that among low information voters, McCain was a slam dunk. He talked tough, he talked fight, he talked black and white. That's about as far as low information voters can take it. But for thoughtful voters, for voters who might have lived through elections when both candidates were reasonably intelligent, then McCain was frightfully awful. And I think we're going to see thoughtful independents lean to Obama - those people who understand nuance. Even some intelligent republicans might begin to think twice.

[GhostofRichardRorty]

57. Low Info Seekers are Not All Stupid

I object to this rather elitist equation of low information seekers and non-intelligent voters. There are a lot of folks out there who are just too busy making a living and tending to their families to follow politics very carefully. Or think about your typical 19-year-old college student. These are folks who are not stupid, but do not happen to invest their time and energy into seeking political information. I realize that is foreign to DUers, who by definition are high information seekers, but that does not make all Low Info Seekers dumb.

[sfwriter]

63. I'm thinking of the ones who take time to listen to right wing sources...

They can rail against lipstick and tell you Palin has more experience, and they LOVED McCain last night. They will also say they are independents, but they have no sources outside what is presented to them, and here in SW MO that is right-wing talking points. They aren't actually right-wing. Issue by issue, they agree with Obama, but that isn't what they know about him.

I have to live with them all around me. I don't have the luxury of being elitist and inventing political intelligence for them that simply isn't there.

[MH1]

65. Good point, but I object to your use of the word "elitist"

Not everything that evidences a lack of full consideration of all possible circumstances = elitist.

"Elitist" is probably one of the most overused political pejoratives around. Funny that it is most often slung by people who actually tend to fit the definition (Bushes, McCains) and their supporters.

But back to your point, I think it is true - and we liberals should think about this - that "low information voters" include voters who just don't have the time (or don't take the time) to run down good information about political issues and candidates. This problem is magnified by the utter bullshit that is promulgated by the mainstream media. The challenge for progressives is to get relevant facts delivered to these passive voters, even when the voters aren't seeking and maybe not even receptive to it.

[ContinentalOp]

68. Good point. And a lot of low-information voters are not aware of what's going on

simply because they get their news from faulty sources like the nightly news. Or they say they get their news from the newspaper, which means they subscribe to the newspaper, skim the headlines then head for the sports page.

But yeah, these people are mostly not stupid and seeing Obama and McCain side by side finally should wake a lot of people up to what we already know about Obama.

[tekisui]

71. Willful Ignorange, in most cases.

They choose not to invest the time in anything outside their immediate lives. I am not criticizing them, MOST people don't think about politics most of the time.

Of course they aren't stupid, but they are willfully ignorant.

[Skip Intro]

2. Gee, let me think like a useful idiot...

:eyes:

[WillyT]

44. Useful Idiots Make Up A Significant Part Of The Electorate !!!

Just sayin...

:shrug:

[RoccoR5955]

3. a low info voter would have found the whole thing boring.

[Marsala]

19. Heck, high info voters probably found it a bit boring.

I was certainly getting impatient by the end.

[Erin Elizabeth]

26. Yep. I'm a political junkie and found my attention wandering.

[Chan790]

37. I fell asleep.

n/m

[Starlight]

35. Yep. Anyone who isn't particularly interested in politics would be bored silly by the whole thing.

[FreakinDJ]

4. Struggling to make the payments

hands down Obama

He talked directly to Americans

[Phoonzang]

5. I really don't think it made a difference. It was a tie.

Which means Obama wins strategically.

[musicblind]

6. The one you are told to think won.

[holiday]

Obama should have nailed McCain more BUT he did look at

America, he did look at McCain.

I think he wasn't expecting McCain to be so harsh and was thrown off

[Starlight]

36. McCain did come across as rude, nasty and snarky. I don't think that helped him at all.

[napi21]

7. For the uninformed voter, it made no difference at all! Nobody made any

gaffs or home runs.

[AZBlue]

8. I don't either. I think they both showed "pluses" for the LIVs and won't really change anything.

But...since Obama was ahead going into the debate, that's not all bad for him. Still, a win would have been much, much better.

[cbc5g]

9. Obama has to connect emotionally with people more

I think McCain will gain a few points from this debate. I love Obama's intelligence but it hurts him with low information or regular joe character voters.

[goodgd_yall]

29. The sob story McCain told might have won points with them

The one about being given the bracelet. But I'm thinking Obama's more energetic delivery and his looking at McCain may have won Obama points too. With low-information voters, I think body language carries a lot of weight, moreso than substance.

[Jennicut]

10. McLiar rambled on alot and was boring. I tuned him out at times.

Obama answered quickly and made his statements clearer.

[Starlight]

38. ITA. McCain's long, boring, rambling stories just emphasized his age issue.

[Lars39]

11. If low information voter is flat broke,

then Obama may have reached him.

[rucky]

12. If I were a low information voter,

I wouldn't have understood a word of that stuff.

[sandnsea]

14. They will watch news clips

So it all depends on how the media spins it, which is why it is important for everybody to weigh in.

[Epiphany4z]

15. Obama

McCain rambled on to long, looked disrespectfull and defensive..Obama I think did best when came out swinging a time or two..but he missed a lot of great points...McCains cave on torture, the earmarks McCain has done, a lot of his so called maverik stuff is ..he was against it before he was for it type stuff.

Obama didn't knock him out but he held his own and I think the fact checkers may have a few things to take up with McCain.

[Tesha]

16. For the LIV, McCain clearly won.

Obama didn't really call McCain on any of the shit that he
was peddling tonight.

"Sigh..."

Tesha

[Starlight]

39. I disagree.

[Tesha]

70. So on what basis do you disagree? (NT)

[Hansel]

17. McCain's big mistake: He kept reminding everyone that he's old

With Palin doing as bad as she has been, this was not a very good strategy. And the Dems need to exploit this.

[Jackeens]

18. It breaks my heart, but I think McCain won tonight.

[eyesroll]

20. Your question assumes "low information voters" watched the debate. By and large, they did not.

The "low information voter" will make his or her assumption on who won based on what the 11 pm news or their local talk radio or their city rag says. If at all.

[GhostofRichardRorty]

60. any evidence?

The LIV is often like those who only go to church on Easter & Christmas: They don't follow political news like DUers but they WILL vote and they WILL invest time watching at least some of the debates. To the extent that the LIV is influenced as much or more by personality than by issues, Obama did very well and McCain was offensive. Interpreting nonverbals does not require political knowledge.

[Connie_Corleone]

21. Tie.

[RichGirl]

22. I think Obama repeatedly...

...pointed out that he was looking out for the people. McCain never actually mentioned the hardships people were going through.

[Erin Elizabeth]

23. Am I racist?

If not I'd say Obama.

[Condem]

24. They were at high school football games ,tonight.

[amandabeech]

42. Excellent point.

A lot of voters don't care, and why should they?

There wasn't a lot of news being made, IMHO.

Neither candidate has his schtick going on the bailout, as was obvious with Lehrer's prompting.

Maybe the next debate will be watched more--more people may be feeling the economic problems--and both candidates, I hope, will have pertinent comments, unlike tonight.

[amandabeech]

46. It was discouraging.

Each candidate spoke to his base, and past the other, really.

Obama doesn't do history too well, particularly the Sixties and Vietnam--he never has--and these two historical events mean a lot to voters over the age of say 54. Obama could do a little outreach, especially in understanding how important peace with honor is to our military and veterans because they don't want to think of what they did as wrong and futile. He has to explain to them what the Sixties and Vietnam meant good and bad. He needs to bridge the gap, otherwise he gives away a lot losing a huge number of voters who have to get other it before they go without losing the new and affluent voters. I don't expect many here to understand what I'm talking about.

McCain has the mirror problem. He has to somehow speak to younger people, and he can do it by being real AND informed, just like Obama.

Both of these guys have barely moved in a year, and both seem to me as dividers, not because they set out to do so, but because they simply can't comprehend how the other half thinks.

We need an FDR. Neither one of these guys is it, although I'm so disgusted and afraid that I'm even willing to be surprised by McCain if he should get into office. (Don't worry, I'm voting for the big O).

When I look forward to the next 4 years, I'm thinking 1929-1933--the Hoover years. Hoover wasn't a bad guy, but he simply wasn't up to the job and to going beyond what divided the country and devising something new. Sorry Obama fans, I don't see Barack as that guy now.

I hope that I feel better by the end of the second presidential debate, but I'm not holding my breath. I'll just hold my nose and vote Obama.

[goodgd_yall]

25. Obama may have won with them just for his demeanor

He was more animated and directed some of his remarks to McCain whereas McCain avoided looking at Obama. Maybe that body language turned people off.

[Teaser]

27. the Phillies

.

[jberryhill]

47. Did they? Cool! /nt

[intheflow]

28. I think they'll think McCain won.

He didn't break down into an incoherent rage and he didn't visibly shit or piss his pants. That's good enough for the LIV.

[Clio the Leo]

30. The low information voter wont care about the issues....

.... they'll be more moved by body language. Which Obama OWNED.

[Blue Diadem]

31. I'm not sure a low information voter would watch the debate. n/t

[Avalux]

32. They'll think McCain won because he was "tough" and "told stories".

Doesn't matter to them that he was wrong and even rambled incoherently at times; they don't know any better.

[Starlight]

40. Nah. He sounded like a boring, senile old grandpa with his rambling stories about the old days.

[MissDeeds]

33. I don't think it will move the electorate either

In my opinion, Obama needs to address a glaring issue. He needs to strike back forcefully at the "Senator Obama doesn't understand..." BS. That is an attempt to diminish BO and drive home the "lack of experience" nonsense. Obama should respond "I understand completely and fully. I understand that you, Senator McCain, are wrong for the following reasons..."

[olkaz]

41. If I'm a low-information voter, John McCain won.

Because he's white.

[Okie4Obama]

43. My mom is a "low information voter"

...and she commented a lot on how McCain refused to look Obama in the eye. That usually means someone is lying.

[jberryhill]

45. I called my pet LIV and he said

"It was boring"

[Strawman]

48. Depends when they tuned in and for how long

At the beginning Obama was literally killing McCain on the economy and McCain had no coherent defense. Obama's simple message about the unregulated free-market and trickle down economics being totally discredited by the current crisis was really clear, persuasive and to the point.

Foreign policy is probably a draw. I think the spin about the surge working has been effective and your average low information voter probably wants to believe it and that we can "win." Obama was at his best when he broadened his critique to the entire decision to go to war, tied it into the economic problems we face, and the entire trade-off argument with Afghanistan.

I almost wonder if McCain seemed to be performing ok on foreign policy just because he was so terrible on the economy.

The overall feeling was that to the "undecided" low info voter, Obama had McCain on the ropes on the economy early on, McCain scored some points with the Ahmadinejad and surge stuff.

I don't think too many minds were changed. Had this been a domestic policy debate, Obama could have knocked him out tonight. To use the hackneyed boxing analogy, Obama scored some knockdowns early, then they kind of tied each other up alot.

It's so hard to project myself into the mind of that kind of voter. Who knows what one thing they will latch onto as most salient or how they will interpret the candidates' messages. If its all based on affect, I'd guess that Obama definitely wins on the economy and McCain probably wins on foreign policy for these voters.

[wildeyed]

49. I gave up on that a long time ago.

But if likability is important then Obama won hands down.

[FVZA_Colonel]

50. If "low info" voters didn't like Gore's sighs and eye rolls, then there's no way

they could have liked McCain's slouches, downcast glances, smirks, and outright lack of respect for Obama.

[leeroysphitz]

51. Leher won.

Hey, you said think like a low info voter and he seemed VERY presidential. Also I'd like to have a beer (or ten) with him.

[stillcool]

52. I'd be afraid of the angry old dude...

[Digit]

53. Obama, because he looked more presidential...

McCain was clenching his jaw in anger and refused to even LOOK at Obama.

Very petty.

In addition, McCain did not look well. The left side of his face was droopy and not only did his left eye keep closing, the left side of his mouth did not move as much as the right. I think he tried to compensate for the droopy eye by keeping his eyebrows raised as much as possible, which made him appear more defensive.

I also believe people are looking for hope. Hope that things will improve for their families and the country. McCain did not convey hope.

Superficial, maybe...but you asked for low info voters, and that is my take on how they perceived the 1st debate.

[GhostofRichardRorty]

54. Low Info Voters will favor Obama based on the debate

Two reasons: First, Low info seekers are the most likely to be influence by personality perceptions. McCain was a jerk, Obama Presidential in his manner. The lack of eye contact thing was SO huge as to be a distraction. That is not going to play well. Second, on CNN they had real-time reactions by "Independents" that showed they were paying attention and liked *some* things they heard from both candidates, but showed far more negative dips with McCain than Obama. That makes sense, especially b/c the 2006 election shows a lot of voters pissed about Iraq, which is where McCain scored the worst with the Independent voters.

[nam78_two]

55. McCain already has most of the low-information voters

:shrug:
We never had them and probably never will-I mean even on our best years, any given Republican is going to get at least 25% of the vote.
The low-information voters-they are the ones who still think Bush is doing an awesome job (the 20% or so that always approve of the job he is doing-well ok except for the 1% of those who are super-rich, cynical, nihilistic assholes who only care about their own tax-cuts.)

[BklnDem75]

56. If they're watching the debate, then they know who won.

Doesn't matter if they're low information voters or not. If they're looking at this debate, a lot of questions were already answered. Obama made his case on why he's more qualified. Now if you meant ignorant voter, I doubt they took the time to watch the debates. Their mind was already made up.

[casus belli]

58. Low information voters aren't undecided and they're mostly for McCain

So, what difference do they make?

[Ilsa]

59. FUX News viewers overwhelmingly said McCain won. You can't

get viewers with much lower information than that, or you'd have to call them neanderthals.

[lonestarnot]

61. Not according to undecideds being polled! Look again!

:applause:

[eilen]

62. Obama. He spoke up for them, the nurses, teachers and cops. nt

[seabeyond]

64. barracks voice caught and held attention. i found i focused out when mccain talked

it was well into the debate when i told hubby, whenever mccain talks, the tone and quietness of his voice lulls, bored and i tune out, then i was noticing obama talk, strong clear i immediately heard again.

then i started focusing to catch what mccain said

i am just saying, i am kinda normal and wasnt cause i favored obama, was just happening

maybe it happened to others

[TwoBears]

66. My step-son

who is a low-information voter only because he hates politics, watched the debate last night because there wasn't anything else on. I just spoke to him about it and he said he didn't like the fact that McCain wouldn't look at Obama. He also said that McCain was cocky and he didn't like that he kept saying that he had gone to all these places and knew all these people and that he could do it all because of his experience. My step-son said it sounded to him like McCain wouldn't listen to anyone because he's already got his mind made up and anyone who doesn't agree with him is wrong.

He also said that he felt McCain never talked directly to "him," but that Obama did several times. Could be the whole refusal to look into the camera problem that McCain had last night. Hee.

[OmahaBlueDog]

67. Hypothesis: A lot of the L I Vs aren't going to vote this time

...and I think the surge in new registrants are Obama supporters.

It just seems like outward signs of enthusiasm for the election are lacking in the general public. In '04, Bush/Cheney and Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers were ubiquitous, and yard signs were common. I just saw my first McCain/Palin sticker yesterday; and I've seen few McSame stickers. I see more Obama '08 stickers, but I haven't seen any Obama/Biden stickers. I just spoke with a friend in NorCal, and he says he's noted the same thing. Moe yard signs arearound for the congressional and local races than thepresidential contest.

Obama voters (dems and progressive indys) are fired up; single issue voters will always do their thing; and certainly McSame has his share of supporters with varying degrees of enthusiasm. However, my sense is that those who don't follow politics closely won't show, and overall, I think that's bad news for McSame. I think McSame was/is counting on those voters to gravitate to him as a known-quantity, and had gambled that the LIVs would relate very well to Sarah Palin.

[Orsino]

69. Low-information voters didn't watch.

Their minds are already made up, if they care at all.

[adamuu]

72. Hard? try impossible. I've long ago given up trying to get in their heads. n/t