McCain suspends campaign to go back to DC to work on bailout

[DaemonSeid]

the bid on the bailout bucket is up to $455.00

http://cgi.ebay.com/The-UNOFFICIAL-O...d=p3286.c0.m14

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

LOL. I don't know. But it often seems to me that the effect of people like Letterman can be undervalued in shaping public opinion, even if in subtle ways.

This is very true - and I think that McCain probably made a massive, massive misstep there. People like Letterman, who are viewed (rightly or wrongly) as objective and somewhat trustworthy just by nature of being there every night, carry massive credibility.

BTW, not sure I'm following on the kind of work firms pay you to perform every week. PR? Polling?

Check your PMs - we don't often work with polling firms or polling data, mostly because the major polls (Gallup excluded) use questionable methods (and there's more money in private-sector work). If you've ever heard Zogby speak, the dude's pretty big on himself and his 'unique' style.

However, the last 15 years have seen major strides in decision-making research - both sides use a variety of consultants, often separating the "image" consultants from the "message" guys, unless it's a strategist like Rove who can handle both.

[TonyB06]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Remember: voters are stupid (OK, OK - not "stupid", but rather lazy, biased by their own experiences, and without any real desire to generally learn more than they have to). They only know what you tell them. Most do not take the time to read anything beyond the first couple of paragraphs, and the sound bite rules the day. People make decisions by forming a cohesive and coherent narrative in their own mind to either confirm or deny their original hypothesis - the first story that fits becomes the decision.

Now, repeat this to yourself over and over and over again.

Once you do this, you'll completely understand why McCain pulled this move - sure, it's spin, and it's borderline hack, but the average, undecided voter will only know what he sees and will likely not think about it on this level.

BTW - there's no way Obama takes the stage alone, that would be suicide by McCain since Obama's weakness is in unscripted situations. McCain will merely use this as a "safe harbor" anchoring his own unscripted responses - he can constantly come back to this point in his speaking. It's really ABC stuff.

I agree with a lot of this post...but not all. Voters' historic biases do tend to drive their future actions, but there are circumstances, particularly economic circumstances, where they act in a contrary fashion.

Take 1992. Bill Clinton was an alleged womanizer, pot-smoker, draft dodger, clearly the "first story" narrative most people got of him wasn't the most flattering ....but the country was in a economic rut (like now??) and voters set aside the collective "morality" issue and voted for the guy they felt had the better economic recovery plan. People do vote on a variety of issues, but when economic security is seen as threatened, a lot of other issues get pushed aside. ...So I don't think the first story that fits, always sticks.

(I'm not ascribing the motives attached to Clinton in '92 to either Obama or McCain, but am saying that while "change" or risk is a high hurdle, but one that people will readily jump if they feel their economic circumstances are sufficiently threatened.)

I read the Associated Press' tick-tock on McCain's actions/whereabouts today in DC (which I'm sure will get wide play on the more liberal media outlets.) It's not clear to me that his possible upside was worth the risk of postponing the debate when 100 million people (many uninformed on the political postering angles being played) were planning to tune in to see these guys square up.

I agree that McCain has to show up to debate. He's not going to give his opponent the undivided attention of 110 millon people.