Presidential Debates Have Shockingly Little Effect on Election Outcomes-Scientific American magazine

[barbaraann]

The first 2020 presidential debate did not go well for Donald Trump. Viewers were turned off by the president’s constant hectoring of Joe Biden. And many were alarmed when he not only declined to denounce white supremacists but went so far as to tell a far-right neofascist group to “stand by.” Polling by FiveThirtyEight revealed that 50 percent of people who watched the event rated Trump’s performance as “very poor.”

But while Biden clearly won the debate, this does not mean he will win the election. Studies indicate that televised presidential debates have very little, if any, impact on votes. For a variety of reasons, this observation is especially true in 2020.
...
Across all voting systems and election types, Pons and Le Pennec found that debates neither helped undecided voters to make up their mind nor caused those who had already made a decision to switch candidates. “I was surprised,” Pons says. “If you look at the numbers of people watching TV debates and at all the media attention around debates, you would think debates matter.”
...
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/presidential-debates-have-shockingly-little-effect-on-election-outcomes/

My own personal opinion WHICH COULD BE TOTAL BALONEY, is that every moderator I saw seemed to be subtly engineering the debate against the Democrat. I remember thinking after one debate that Gwen Ifill had thrown it. Seriously, if any Presidential debate were conducted in a manner to reveal the truth, people would run screaming away from Republicans because they would be revealed to be pure evil, ambition, and deception.

Caveat: Admiral Stockdale's debate performance DID destroy Perot's chances, IMHO.

[uponit7771]

1. K&R, too much of US politics is still centered around the 50s - 80s

[Zambero]

2. One notable exception

The second and third Obama-Romney debates allowed Obama to regain his footing after a lackluster first debate that had raised questions about how committed he was to winning a second term in office.

[yardwork]

3. That's obvious. Anybody watching in 2016 should have seen that Trump was insane.

[dameatball]

4. After (hell, during) the first 2016 Republican primary debate, hosted by Fox News, it was clear the

actual intellect/competency debate performances were irrelevant. What became clear is that flamboyant nimroddery was more appealing to such a significant number of Republican voters that competence and grasp of issues was rejected. In retrospect, we saw the first reality tv president pilot show. The media hosts ran with it after that.

[patricia92243]

5. This is true now in the age of many forms of information. When there was

just mainly TV, the debates meant everything. My sister and I made our decision on who to vote for on these debates. I didn't know anything about politics back then.

[JanMichael]

6. Smoke and mirrors. It's all an illusion.

The reality is they're not real debates. They are organized sound bites. The only variable is if somebody really screws up. Virginia this last cycle might be a good example for governor.

Nixon took a lot of crap for his makeup dripping down his face.

But I doubt that Republicans really gave a crap about some running makeup.

[unblock]

7. Donnie wears clown makeup and they think he's a god.

[ananda]

8. It sure did in 1960 though!

I remember that one.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

9. I gave up watching them a long time ago

because I realized I wasn't learning anything new. As someone said, they are not remotely debates, just well rehearsed sound bites.

[Walleye]

10. "Will you shut up, man". That was the turning point

[patphil]

11. I think the country is so badly polarized that people's minds are already made up.

The Republicans have shown that real issues are no where as important as manufactured ones.
The Republicans know that people will believe what they want to believe; to see "truth" through their internal filter of what the would like it to be.
For Republicans, the real battleground is the web of illusion they weave.
Debates do nothing to support the illusion, and can actually damage it.
So, as long as they can successfully program their base to vote on these manufactured issues, a debate is not needed.
Huge partisan rally's are where it's at now.