That CNN Ticker is Fascinating. My Observations.

[Truth2Tell]

So I watched the debate on CNN, and for the first time I closely followed their "undecided voters ticker". It's fascinating to watch the lines move up and down at the mention of particular words and themes; and it's interesting to watch the differences between the reactions of men and women. Some of my observations:

First the obvious - Obama won. That was obvious. The ticker gave him a better response to almost every question. And Obama is more popular with women. That was also obvious. Of course, Democrats traditionally do a few points better with women, but I think Obama exceeded the typical tonight.

But all that has been said. So here are some others:

Women ticked up at the mention of JFK. But not men. Women ticked up at the mention of the Peace Corps, but not men. Men ticked up at the mention of nuclear energy, but women... not so much. Women ticked up more during discussions of education and children. Men ticked up more during discussions of help for small businesses.

EVERYONE ticked down at the mention of Joe Lieberman.

And EVERYONE ticked WAY DOWN whenever either candidate attacked the other. They ticked down when either candidate - but especially McCain - even so much as sneered or became sarcastic. The only exception was Obama's attack on McCain's loose aggressive language. Bomb bomb Iran. Guess that didn't sell Johnny. I suppose the adverse reaction to negativism should come as no surprise to me, but it still does.

Lastly, and most sadly, my biggest take-away from my ticker tracking: Americans love war. Nothing got the ticker higher than bellicose language about America’s "enemies" - not just Bin Laden, but Pakistan, Iran and Russia as well. The meter pegged out when the boys talked tough - either one of them. Clearly Americans pine for some Iran ass-kicking, and we love to hear about whoopin' up on that evil Putin. Kill kill kill. It made me a bit sad and a bit sick to listen and watch the ticker. But it's where we are as a nation. No one's gonna get elected President around these parts without talkin' the talk. I just hope Obama decides not to walk the walk.

Oh well, at least I can console myself with the Lieberman tick. :)

[livetohike]

1. Thanks for the great analysis

My husband and I flipped a coin on which station to watch. I wanted CNN because of the ticker and he didn't like it cluttering up the screen so we ended up watching on PBS.

While watching the V.P. debates on CNN, I noticed women were not favorable to much of what Palin said :-).

[jennied]

2. Yes, I noticed the same things as well. Very interesting.

[Mind_your_head]

3. How does this ticker thing work that I'm hearing so much about

but have never seen.

Do they have a focus group hooked up to a polygraph type machine or WHAT? Sounds kinda weird and unlikely sounding to get that sort of minutia of reaction from people.

What is this ticker and how does it supposedly work?

[Truth2Tell]

4. They do have a focus group hooked up

but the people get to move their own dials up and down based on how they are feeling about what the person on screen is saying. In this case it was undecided voters in Ohio. Usually it's a hundred or so, maybe 200.

[Mind_your_head]

6. Hmmm..... thanks for explaining that

I guess that just measures people's immediate gut reaction then, and assumes they're telling the truth about their gut reaction.

[RoyGBiv]

5. War ...

This is far too simplistic an analysis on my part, but I think it hits at the base of the issue.

People are pissed. When people are pissed, their baser instincts are more apt to bubble to the surface. They want to break stuff. If they can't break stuff themselves, the liked to talk about breaking stuff, and when other people are talking about breaking stuff also, it pumps them up.

There is a lot of anger in this country, a lot of urge to break other people's stuff ... and other people along with it.

[crickets]

7. Fascinating analysis. Thanks for the run down.

I have enough trouble trying to listen to the debate, skim DU reactions, watch the candidates and think at the same time without trying to watch the ticker too.

Got gum?

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. One more, 9.11 ain;'t hunting no more

[Truth2Tell]

9. good catch. I saw that too. nt

[Sydnie]

10. I don't think we love war as much as we have a fear hangover

We have been spoon fed fear for 7 years. It's going to take a while before we get to where Kerry was trying to take us ... a time where we look at these things as things that require police action type responses rather than thinking there is a boogie man around every corner. We need to take a lesson from 'The Shawshank Redemption' ... we need to "get busy living or get busy dying" and Obama represents the first where McCain represents the second.

[crickets]

11. Very good point. -nt

[Tigress DEM]

12. I don't think the response says Americans "love war" but a Commander in Chief ...

WILL be judged on wheter or not he/she has what it takes even up to having to go to war.

LUCKILY for US Obama is very clear that war has to be the last option used only when all others are exhausted.

[snot]

13. THANK YOU for your close attn.

THIS kind of attn. and reporting is truly helpful.

(Any evidence re- the reliability of the CNN ticker?)

[Truth2Tell]

15. I think you gotta take the CNN ticker

with quite a few grains of salt. It was just Ohio. And what does "undecided really mean"? How low-info and fickle is someone who is "undecided" in today's political climate?

But still, it's a snapshop with some value, IMO.

[intheflow]

20. And only about 25 Ohioans, at that. n/t

[gopbuster]

14. Great analysis...thanks! nt

[WilliamPitt]

16. Drat. I watched it on MSNBC, so I missed the additional data from that ticker.

Your description was marvelous, however. Many thanks for taking the time.

CNN actually broadcast raw, unmassaged information?

Stone the crows.

:)

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Yes... yes they did

[alittlelark]

17. Your 'take away' is progaganda at it's FINEST.

[Truth2Tell]

18. Please elaborate... how do you see it?

What explains the reactions to the tough talk? Not a love of ass-kickin and takin' names? You really believe Americans don't love that shit?

[intheflow]

21. I also watched and have some other observations.

Women gave Obama the highest rating during the second time he spoke about his healthcare plan--it was a long stretch of 95-100% agreement.

Both women and men went down when McCain talked about nuclear energy.

I interpreted your war-loving as excessive nationalism. Whenever a candidate started talking about war, they always prefaced it with talking about our glorious soldiers or our glorious country. That's what got the sharpest rises in approval (sadly). Overall, though, I thought both candidates did about the same during the Iran part--between 30-50% approval.

McCain did better on the Russia question, which I didn't understand until I saw the demographics of the group. About 25 people, mostly if not all white (I don't remember seeing a face of color), and I'd say 60-70% of them were over 55. I think that's a generation that grew up with the Cold War, so when McCain was talking about it, it was familiar territory to them. Unlike Iran or Pakistan, which are fairly new and grew to their current prominence in a terrified post-9/11 atmosphere, the Cold War was something familiar they could wrap their heads around much more easily. And especially since Gramps was obviously a military and political veteran of the Cold War.

Just mho. Other than that, your analysis was dead on. The women certainly did dig the service corps stuff better than men, but by the end of that answer, the sexes were just about united on that.

[tavalon]

22. I loved that answer not because of the peace corps specifically

since I happen to know how very poorly that program is run but because Obama talked about what we can do for our nation. That's the only kind of nationalism that I can get behind.

[intheflow]

23. Of course Americorps is run poorly.

It is a government agency, after all. ;) But the important thing about it is that it's service to one's country. I saw first hand Americorps and Vistas doing work the National Guard would have normally been doing after Katrina, yet they are diminished over and over again as "paid volunteers"--as if that were bad. Our entire Army is staffed with "paid volunteers," and both arms of these services are consistently underpaid and overworked, and their funding is always in jeopardy. I used to tell that to people in Mississippi and watch their brains explode. :)

[tavalon]

24. I have a couple of friends who went into the peace corp and were utilized terribly

One left early he was so appalled. But it's not the governmentality of the Peace Corp, I just think they lost their way a bit. It happens to plenty of established groups.

[Truth2Tell]

25. Thanks intheflow for the thoughtful post. I think you are right

about the nationalism and the cold-war nostalgia. The info on the demographics helps explain a lot.

I still hate to see the meter peg at the tough talk, but maybe it's not as ugly out there as I sometimes feel. I hope Obama gradually cools that stuff off after the silly season is over, rather than constantly flaming it as Bush has done for eight years.

[Laelth]

26. Interesting and honest analysis. Thanks.

:dem:

-Laelth