The Curve
Watching the mismatch between the complicated and mildly pro-Palin sentiments of the pundits on television and the poll results — people thought Biden was better — is interesting. It’s almost as if ordinary people don’t grade these things on a complicated “expectations” curve. When someone shows up and seems slightly dimwitted they don’t think to themselves “well, she’s not quite as dumb as I thought — what a triumph!” They think, “wow, she seems slightly dimwitted.”
UPDATE: Commenter younglady says:
Punits assume the average vote is dumber than we really are. They assume we’ll be taken in by her folksiness and winks, but we’ve learned a lesson from the last 8 years, a president with down home folksiness and charm without intellectual heft is dangerous for the America.
Or perhaps it’s just that the pundits aren’t as smart as they think.
51 Responses to “The Curve”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:06 am
The pundits grade on a curve. Nobody I know does. It’s just one more way political discussion in the mainstream is absurd.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:07 am
Beating the spread does not always translate into a win.
Normal Americans understand this. Many pundits do not.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:11 am
The CNN HD feed was good mainly for the pundit scoring as compared to the instant reactions of undecided Ohio voters by gender. There was actually a lot to like in what the undecideds were reacting to, and it was very different from the pundits. In particular it looked like Biden did a lot better among women, who really weren’t buying what Palin seemed to be selling.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:17 am
Punits assume the average vote is dumber than we really are. They assume we’ll be taken in by her folksiness and winks, but we’ve learned a lesson from the last 8 years, a president with down home folksiness and charm without intellectual heft is dangerous for the America.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:18 am
The fact that most pundits thought McCain won his debate and Palin won hers when, in fact, they lost, will somehow be turned into evidence of a liberal media conspiracy by early next week, I predict.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:19 am
The standards for her were obscenely low, and by those she succeeded magnificently, but I have to say that on repeated viewings of clips from the debate as they get replayed and dissected endlessly, the Palin clips do not weather well. In the heat of the moment it was easy to buy her scripted, memorized patter, but like a crappy special effect in a movie, you might be fooled by it the first time, but the 2nd time you see it you wonder how on earth you didnt notice how obvious and amateurish it was. If you watch this clip (the “toxic mess on MAIN ST affecting WALL ST blooper)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHw311nGdpw
It is so obvious that she spent the last two weeks cramming and memorizing and repeating. Its like she’s rushing to get it all out, and get it all right, and every once in a while you see her hit a memorized groove and suddenly she’s
talking more calmly and confidently, and then, whoops, back off track and she’s stringing together words until she can get back in a sweet spot. And that only becomes more and more obvious the more times you watch it.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:21 am
Just one more example in a long line of the bizarre nature of our political press. Instead of putting undecided or regular voters on screen and asking them what they think, the pundits tell us what they are going to think. Maybe there is some substance to the right’s obsessive railing against the MSM filter.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:22 am
In some ways, the fact that she didn’t lapse into the drivel-mode that Katie Couric teased out of her actually makes Biden’s win more devastating. It became clear that Biden wasn’t winning because he was debating a lightweight, but because he was debating with better arguments.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:26 am
Exactly, this is why the expectations game is nonsense. They are running for the same job! Anyone who cares about the (vice) presidency should have the same expectations for both of them. Just like any other job interview.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:34 am
Ever since Rupert Murdoch and Jack Welch forged the modern communications model — TV news is a corporate asset — TV pundits are paid to think and speak Republican. Bloggers (and most commenters) seem to think that pundits can be hectored or shamed back into the William Paley model, but it just ain’t gonna happen. The TV pundits (except on Fox or Keith Olbermann) won’t just come out and campaign for somebody, but they’re going to lean Republican because their checks depend upon it.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:36 am
Now I have no idea whatsoever what you are allowed and not allowed to say since moving to the Center for American Progress.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:37 am
Will be interesting the see if the pundits desperate attempt to find Palin the winner will become CW, like it did in 2000 when Gore cleaned up in the post-debate polls, but a week later was deemed the “loser”.
Carville was good on CNN this morning, basically calling out John Roberts for going along with this Alice in Wonderland scenario instead of the actual polls and audience meters that CNN used.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:37 am
That, and Palin looked like a complete baffoon to me throughout. Read the transcript, she was horrific.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:42 am
She winked. What was that about? It drove me nuts. This is not a beauty pageant. She isn’t running for Ms. America she is running for vice president of the United States. She was all fluff and never could go beyond her talking points which she was reading from notecards. Terrible. I know I am biased but most independent voters saw it this way too. I just think that Palin was an awful choice which clearly puts McCain’s judgement into serious question.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:43 am
Most of the pundits are so out of touch with middle-class working Americans that they assume Palin’s faux folksiness plays well with “ordinary people.” Also, the pundits tend to focus on tactics and style, again assuming that we mere voters have no interest in the substance of what the candidates are saying – and don’t even notice when Palin totally ignores a question to regurgitate her talking points. I’d argue that both the pundits and Palin insult our intelligence with their glib cynicism. I watched the last third of the debate a second time on CNN, paying close attention to the lines tracking reactions of CNN’s panel of undecided voters. Interestingly, the lines either went down or stayed flat when Palin was tossing around Hockey Moms, Joe Six-Pack, you betcha!, etc. In contrast, the lines soared when Biden was serious, substantive and passionate.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:47 am
Honestly, I can’t even figure out why the pundits considered her debate performance to be any better than the Couric interview. She managed to maintain her self-confidence and avoid any deer-in-the-headlights moments, but many of her answers were pure gibberish. Just read the transcript. On paper, Biden wins by the mercy rule.
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:54 am
It’s true that the media overplays the expectations game. It’s also the case that, on the merits, Palin didn’t do well last night. brooklymatt is right, Palin floundered quite a bit, and her answers are not going to play well as soundbites. Here’s an excerpt I picked pretty much at random:
What constituency is going to be pleased by this incoherent waffling? Setting aside the fact that Palin has a tendency to babble, I can’t really imagine conservatives, liberals, or independents nodding along in agreement to this response.
The point is not that she flubbed this particular question. She was just weak all around, in a way that reinforces the impression many voters already have of her.
It’s harder for me to gauge her performance on the likability front (because, basically, I find her mannerisms incredibly grating), but I suspect she underperformed in this area as well. She has a tendency to overdo her tics, which makes them seem canned. How many times did she wink at the camera last night? Maybe — maybe — doing that once would have helped to humanize her. Five times? It’s a gimmick. It’s staler than the word “maverick.”
The real surprise was that Biden did a decent job on the likability front. It was actually pretty moving when he choked up over his son, and it was hard not to notice the way Palin skipped right past this moment without registering any reaction whatsoever.
Ultimately, this debate just isn’t going to matter much. But whatever the pundits say, I suspect it was a decisive win for Obama-Biden.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:07 am
She managed to maintain her self-confidence and avoid any deer-in-the-headlights moments, but many of her answers were pure gibberish.
I think there were a few deer-in-the-headlight moments, myself – did she really want to use Dick Cheney as a model of the Vice President?
But really I think the story of this debate was that the Republicans hammered the moderator for at least one day, and ended up working the ref so hard that Palin was able to talk about whatever she wanted. Lehrer would’ve embarrassed Palin on multiple occasions just by forcing her to answer questions.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:11 am
Darn right, “M”… I betcha those giddy conservatives won’t read the transcript, cuz seeing what she actually said would sober them right up; say it ain’t so…..
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:22 am
Or perhaps it’s just that the pundits aren’t as smart as they think.
Truer words were never written.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:23 am
I guess to my relief, I was quite wrong about the debate. I actually expected a much better performance from Sarah Palin. While I personally did not like her convention speech, it was obviously well received by its audience and equally well received by the punditocracy. It helped elevate her and it helped elevate McCain’s campaign into a brief election lead. Her speech was great (in the sense it was great) because of its bite, wit and edge. I really expected her to bring that to the table yesterday. Instead, her attacks and antics seemed hollow and forced. She was clearly reading from prepared notes. She never once showed up Biden or Obama. An apparent “hold your own” was insufficient.
Sure, it was all about expectations, but people who expected the glaring “I’ll have to get back to ya’s” of the Gibson/Couric interviews were just so off base. How could she ever be that bad. Truly, she has given good debate performances in Alaska, and as I just said, she gave a very powerful speech in St. Paul. True expectations would have been that she returned to that level. She did not, and thus, it was a big loss for her and the campaign last night.
The existence of Sarah Palin is a drag on McCain (in many ways that I do not need to innumerate). Last night, her goal should have been to be an asset. To gain McCain voters. At best breaking even means she is still losing voters for McCain. Look at the CBS poll (I believe its CBS it could be CNN); the numbers related to her being qualified barely moved. A majority still believe her unqualified. If you cannot get beyond the fundamental bar of being perceived as being qualified for the presidency, well you aint looking good.
As with the Friday debate, the period after the debate will make things more apparent. A lot of commentators have picked on her inability to react to Biden’s emotion. This will under-cut her perceived strength as being the common man in the race (so to speak). Her endless gaffes, misstatements, non-answers, and outright lies will also be replayed. The debates are won or lost on the spin, and she will easily lose the spin.
My expectation was that she would be confident. She would hit in ways that were hard to respond. She would do good enough that the pundits would say she gave a jolt to a floundering campaign. I’m glad to be wrong here.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:37 am
I think the pundits only talk about style and expectations and curves because they don’t know the details well enough to be able to speak intelligently about the policy differences. They became political journos to talk about horse races and campaign tactics and sex scandals, not to read all that boring policy crap about tax rates and bankruptcy loopholes!
It’s not just that the pundits don’t think we would understand; it’s that they couldn’t fact-check or analyze one of these responses if they wanted to, so they’re left to go on and on in broad strokes about “expectations” and “appearing presidential.”
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:46 am
“Thank you! Thank you very much, thank you! First of all, let me say how happy I am to be your nominee for the United States Senate! [ applause ] You know.. thank you.. I don’t really understand your Congress, or your system of checks and balances.. because, as I said during the campaign – I’m just a caveman! I fell on some ice, and later got thawed out by scientists. But there is one thing I do know – we must do everything in our power to lower the Capital Gains Tax. Thank you!”
—Cirroc, the Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:54 am
Here’s an especially egregious example of mainstream punditry from Ruben Navarrette. His scoring of the debate gives the edge to Palin and he scrupulously avoids saying one single word about anything of substance that may have occurred.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 am
“Grading on a curve” only obtains when there’s some stress on the group that makes the curve a requirement, like depressed economic status or deadly natural catastrophe.
The only pertinent analogy that I can see is that of a job interview or an audition. As a professional performer, I have endured HUNDREDS of auditions. Some I’ve booked, most I’ve lost out on. I can well attest that I have NEVER been evaluated according to some kind of forgiving curve. If there is the remotest chance that somebody else is preferable in the job, I am back out on the street with no pat on the shoulder and no apologies. And that is as it ought to be.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:05 am
Yeah, except for the mouthbreathers that fat Frankie Luntz put together. How pathetic. Must have been desparate to keep their jobs at “Budweiser Headquarters”. And in this Bush/McCain economy, who could blame them?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVWMb-rJVuc
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:06 am
i caught a little bit of brokaw talking afterwards (he thought palin was great and loved the “say it aint’ so joe” and “doggone its”) and it occurred to me that the reason tv pundits/newscasters might think she did well in the debate is that the perform-in-front-camera skill is a skill that these people (t.v. pundits) cultivate, know, and appreciate and despite palin’s many weaknessess, she definitely knows how to work a tv camera.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:08 am
“Your world frightens and confuses me! Sometimes the honking horns of your traffic make me want to get out of my BMW.. and run off into the hills, or wherever.. Sometimes when I get a message on my fax machine, I wonder: “Did little demons get inside and type it?” I don’t know! My primitive mind can’t grasp these concepts.”
—Cirroc, the Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 am
First of all, she sounded incoherent, especially in soundbites (as someone else pointed out.)
Second, after Joe Biden told his story of his dead wife, she just went on about what a Maverick John McCain was. That made her seem extremely UNlikable.
Third, we don’t all live in a revival of Oklahoma! Most of us are not cornier than Kansas in August. This is real life, 2008, and we’ve already had eight years of Aw-shucksin’ from the fella you’d rather have a beer with than talk policy. That shtick (as we city folk say) has worn thin.
Fourth, the answer to every question is not turning it back to your record as governor of Alaska, FYI who cares.
Fifth, you want to take over the SENATE, too??? Creepy!
Sixth, Cokie Roberts sounded like a moron when she laughed at Joe Biden for saying “Bosniaks.” Not only is Bosniak a proper term for referring to Bosnian Muslims, but a. she as a news person should know that, and b. she should assume from his history of action on this very topic that he might know what he’s talking about. She looked like a very classless fool.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:36 am
“Aw-shucksin’ from the fella you’d rather have a beer with than talk policy. That shtick (as we city folk say) has worn thin.”
Might i add that Clinton and Bush both could pull this off effectively because of the southern lilt to their respective voices. She sounds more like someone auditioning for a community theater version of “Fargo”.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:42 am
sorry, Alexandra: you’ve got yer Rogers & Hammerstein songbook confused. “cornier than Kansas in August” invokes Nellie Forbush and South Pacific.
October 3rd, 2008 at 11:52 am
“And I don’t want to argue about the causes. What I want to argue about is, how are we going to get there to positively affect the impacts?”
Where’s Olsen Johnson when we need him?
As far as affecting the impacts positively: If you don’t (want to) know what the causes are, how can you affect the impacts? Give everyone a new pair of Oakleys and a portable AC unit? Of course, the PortAC might generate a tiny bit of waste heat, so … provide even-bigger PortACs when the time comes!
Plus, clean water is overrated. “Pre-owned” water will cool you just as well, even if it might taste a little funny.
October 3rd, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Aw-shucksin’ from the fella you’d rather have a beer with than talk policy.
Sneer all you want, but I sleep well knowing we have a Harvard MBA in the White House during these difficult times.
October 3rd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Younglady, did you know that Matt would quote you, and thus preemptively put a typo in just to fit with his MO?
October 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
I’d just like to note that among the most obnoxious “folksy” comments that Palin makes can be seen when she refers to “Joe Six-Pack”. What the fuck does that even mean? I also hate the term “lunch bucket” when referring to blue collar voters. Who the fuck uses a lunch bucket? Lunchbag, lunchbox–fine, ok. Lunch bucket? Who decided that people who use lunch buckets make up a specific segment of voters? I for one, as a proud member of the brown paper lunch bag voting block, feel overlooked and offended.
October 3rd, 2008 at 4:39 pm
“Joe Six-Pack” is the opposite of “John Twelve-House”
October 3rd, 2008 at 5:25 pm
brooklynmatt’s right. On repeat listening, most of Palin’s answers divide betwee ‘book report where I memorised the Cliff’s Notes’ and ‘book report when I didn’t read the book’.
If they’re only shopping Palin to Wingnut 550-AM from now on, then you’re going to see lots of repeats of those answers, and they will age like SFX.
October 3rd, 2008 at 5:59 pm
What is wrong with our Press??? They have no backbone or real opinions anymore… either that or they just always want these races to be close so they do whatever they can to keep one side from going down as far in the polls as they SHOULD.
Very annoying. Beating bottom level expectations does not = overall success.
October 3rd, 2008 at 6:03 pm
The fact that Bush was voted in twice and McCain/Palin are polling double digits shows a great number of voters are, in fact, stupid.
October 3rd, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Or maybe Matt will someday learn that because he’s a kid out of college by four years that maybe he’s really NOT a “pundit”.
Maybe he’ll learn that the “pundits” and the MSM and most importantly the interests that control them have a vested interest in seeing McCain-Palin win rather than Obama.
Naah. Wishful thinking. Matt will just go back to snarking Palin, the easy target.
October 4th, 2008 at 3:13 am
Expectations?!! Hell, if she’d come rolling onstage in a wheelchair and wearing a football helmet, but managed to avoid rubbing excrement into her hair, she’d have beaten expections after that Katie Couric interview.
December 8th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Mark Bender 7 articles Trey Bradley 344 articles Samantha Bunten 4 articles L.J. Burgess 21 articles Nino Colla 160 articles John Fennelly 150 articles Zander Freund 43 articles Alex Geshwind 16 articles Adam Huczel 5 articles Cassie Kolias
January 19th, 2009 at 12:00 am
laptop battery
laptop batteries
March 1st, 2009 at 5:46 am
viagra
Incredible site!
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:17 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 11th, 2009 at 4:43 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:17 am
tramadol
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:29 am
buy viagra online
Great site. Good info
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:14 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 6:19 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right viagra
April 16th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
Greeting. Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.
I am from Herzegovina and too bad know English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: “Com has thousands of users looking to purchase and sell airline.”
THX 8), Alda.