Debate numbers
by digby
Am I the only one who thinks it's odd that nearly 70 million people turned into the first presidential debate? In fact, according to this, more people tuned in that any election since Carter-Reagan, which I find astonishing. The second debate had fewer, but still more than most.
I've also found that my personal friends are more engaged in these debates than I ever remember. I'm not sure what it means. If I'd had to bet a month ago I would have said that people were apathetic and disillusioned and not inclined to tune in, certainly in comparison to 2008. It turns out that this is not true.
I don't know what that means for the outcome of the election, but it's probably good news for democracy. Unfortunately, it's been good news for Romney as people tuned in and saw him as a reasonable alternative. Lying convincingly in front of 70 million people is obviously a good political strategy.
I'll be surprised if the numbers hold up for a foreign policy debate in a year when foreign policy isn't at the top of the agenda. But what do I know?
.
