Longtime Republican pollster and focus group guru Frank Luntz takes to the NYT opinion pages to explain “How to Win a Presidential Debate.” The essay is nonpartisan and the key takeaway, while frustrating to the sort of people who read and comment on (much less write!) political blogs, strikes me as unassailable.
If you’re a typical American voter in any party, allow me to let you in on a little secret: What matters most to you in a presidential debate probably isn’t the same thing that gets the most attention from the candidates, the campaigns and their allies in the immediate aftermath of those big televised showdowns.
[…]
[M]inuscule moments, verbal miscues and misremembering little details can matter so much in the spin room and to partisan pundits afterward. Yet those things often have little to no discernible impact on the opinions of many people watching at home.
[…]
As the first scheduled debate between President Biden and Mr. Trump unfolds this Thursday, the key moments that will have the greatest impact on the remaining undecided voters are those in which the candidates attack each other in defining ways or undermine the political case that each wants to present to Americans. Viewers will quickly decide whether the accusations are fair and the responses effective. From Ronald Reagan’s “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” in 1980 to Barack Obama emphasizing hope and change in 2008 to Mr. Trump telling Mrs. Clinton in 2016 that she would “be in jail” if he won, I think those key debate moments made a meaningful difference in shaping the opinions of undecided or wavering voters who related to what they heard; I certainly saw it in my focus groups and public opinion research. These moments mattered more than any candidate flub or gaffe.
[…]
At the risk of offending every high school debate coach in America, many voters respond to style more than substance. The well-delivered quip lingers longer than the litany of facts, and the visual often trumps the verbal. It’s not just that the electorate tends to be drawn more to younger and more attractive candidates (like Mr. Obama, Mr. Clinton and John F. Kennedy) or to those with more commanding stage presence (which Mr. Reagan had over Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale, and George H.W. Bush had over Michael Dukakis). While the 2016 and 2020 debates featuring Mr. Trump certainly upended our collective expectations about what exactly is presidential, listening to the voters describe each debate and their gut impressions of the candidates is more instructive about the eventual election winner than getting swept up in spin and punditry.
[…]
Yes, policy solutions definitely matter in presidential debates. But personality, relatability and dignity matter more.
And it’s not just the candidate’s personal performance that leaves an impression. Sometimes forces that are less visible, like the debate rules, play a major role in determining the outcome. The length of time given to respond to questions from the moderator can reward or punish candidates, depending on their individual styles and ability to communicate succinctly. Nothing draws the ire of the average voter more than candidates speaking beyond their allotted time, my focus groups have shown. While most professional debate observers ignore candidates who run long, voters punish them mercilessly.
[…]
In the end, it’s not the facts, the policies or even the one-upmanship that Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump offer in the debate that matters. It’s how they make voters feel. [emphases mine throughout]
Most of the elided evidence is anecdotal, and it’s quite probable that at least some of the takeaways are dubious. But the core point, that it’s about feelings rather than policies and ideas is almost certainly right.
Granting that it supports my strongly preferred outcome in the race, I think all of this redounds to President Biden’s benefit. Whatever shortfalls he may have as a politician, a lack of empathy is not among them. I’m not sure Trump cares about his own children, much less the average Joe. While Biden can certainly be a jerk on occasion, it’s Trump’s default setting. And Biden is geometrically more disciplined, so he’s much more likely to adhere to the debate rules.
On the down side, while he’s not above weird embellishments, Biden is more or less grounded in reality. Trump has no concern in the slightest for facts. Indeed, he probably doesn’t even know what they are! That may well benefit him in this context.
