Strategic Underdog Maneuver? [View all]
Clearly, I don't post a lot, but I read nearly everything you good folks post, and that includes last night and today.
No judgement from me, and I have nothing to add except merely to raise a point below.
Please note there is a debate scheduled for September 10, a time when the actual campaign will be happening:
A "Strategic Underdog Maneuver" involves intentionally appearing weaker in an early debate to achieve several goals: energizing one's base, causing the opponent to become overconfident, and setting up for a stronger performance in a later, more critical debate closer to election day.
Initial Debate Performance: The candidate deliberately performs below their full capability, appearing less prepared or less aggressive.
Rallying the Base: The underwhelming performance sparks outrage and angst among the candidate's supporters, increasing their engagement.
Opponent Overconfidence: The opponent becomes overconfident, believing they have a significant advantage, which might lead them to be less prepared or complacent in the next debate.
Strong Comeback: In the subsequent debate, closer to election day, the candidate delivers a powerful, well-prepared performance that surprises the opponent and sways undecided voters.
Advantages
Base Activation: The candidates supporters become more motivated to support and campaign for them.
Opponent Complacency: The opponent might underestimate the candidate in the next debate, leading to potential mistakes or lackluster preparation.
Media and Voter Surprise: The stark contrast in performance can generate significant media coverage and sway public opinion.
Disadvantages
Risk of Permanent Damage: A poor performance might have lasting negative effects on some voters who do not see the comeback.
Opponent Adaptation: The opponent might realize the strategy and adjust their approach in the following debates.
Credibility Issues: The candidate risks losing credibility if the initial weak performance is perceived as genuine incompetence.