Takeaways From The First Presidential Debate

In the days and week building up to the first presidential debate, there was a lot of anticipation and speculation. The level of excitement over the expected fireworks was huge. And while the fireworks did fly, the overall impression many voters had was that it was a complete train wreck.

Here are some of the takeaways from what so many tuned in to see and what we can learn after taking a day to let it all settle in.

Biggest Losers of the Night - Chris Wallace, The American People

While Chris Wallace is the son of a journalistic legend and is typical held in high regard as one of the most professional in the industry, he surely failed at the task assigned to him on Tuesday. Wallace had very little control over the process and it showed. In my opinion, I think his association with Fox News may have been in the back of his head forcing him to try to be overly fair to Joe Biden. The channel has a bit of a reputation, deserved or not, for leaning to the right a little. In order to not show any perceived favoritism to Donald Trump, it seems he actually went overboard. A better choice for moderator form the network would probably have been Bret Baeir.

American's tuning in had to deal with cross-talk to the point that we could often hear very little of what each competitor was stating. The entire point of a debate is to learn about each person's ideas and views. We missed many chances for that.

Biggest Winners of the Night - Also The American People

As chaotic as the event was for those watching, it also had the upside of allowing the public to hear directly from the candidates themselves. They could state their case without the sometimes more often than not filters of the media. Generally speaking, the media tends to spin narratives to fit their own purposes and it's hard to do that with a live debate.

The Debate Format

It's my personal feeling that the current debate format has been in need of a massive adjustment for years. Moderators often let candidates go over the imposed time limits and interruptions occur on both side. This has been going on for decades. I was one of the first people, as far as I can tell, to toss around the idea of cutting off microphones after a period of time to limit interruptions and cross-talking. Now, it looks like this might actually be a possibility the Commission on Presidential Debates in thinking about doing.

In addition to such a rule change, it is important that we enforce the notion that moderators give substantial time to each candidate. While I cannot find any specific data on the matter, it did seem as though Biden was granted more time for answers and rebuttals. This could be part of why Trump overstepped a bit with more interruptions even though Biden was the first to do so.

Grading the Competitors

Before the debate, it is fair to say that the bar for expectations for Biden was set pretty low. It was almost as if it was a major college football team going up against a school with an enrollment of only a few thousand. The outcome was expected to be rather lopsided. That being the case, it's also fair to say that Biden outperformed expectations. But, when a team loses by a touchdown instead of 35 points, it's still a loss. If I had to base it on a scale of 100% I would say Trump - 55% Biden - 45%. Sure, Trump was a bit over-the-top and could have used to shut down his interjections but we also saw him bold it together while Biden stumbled a couple of times (only slightly) and resorted to name calling, something most would have expected from Trump instead.

What Did It Change?

One of the things we always try to figure out is if a debate "moved the needle" for either candidate in terms of gaining or losing potential votes. I would have to say, as many others have, that this one didn't really seem to have much influence on the hearts or minds of anyone. Those who are dung in for one side or another remain steady and those still on the fence have not decided who they should support.