Ratings: Clinton’s speech finished behind football, had virtually same amount of viewers as Paul Ryan’s speech; Update: New numbers show bigger ratings for Clinton

posted at 6:01 pm on September 6, 2012 by Allahpundit

Via Philip Klein, help me figure something out. The whole point of sending Clinton out there was because he can reach white working-class voters in a way that virtually no one else in the current Democratic Party can, right? Okay, then … why on earth would you schedule him opposite something lots and lots of white working-class voters, especially men, have been looking forward to for months? Wasn’t the painfully obvious smart move here to put Clinton on Tuesday night, when he’d have TV viewers’ undivided attention, and then switch FLOTUS to Wednesday night, since her target audience was women anyway?

What am I missing here?

In the 10 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. block, roughly 20 million people watched Clinton’s speech on ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox, according to CNN’s release of the Nielsen fast nationals. 4.6 million people watched ABC, 4.5 million watched MSNBC, 4.4 million watched CBS, 4.3 million watched CNN, and just over 3 million watched Fox News.

Paul Ryan’s speech also drew roughly 20 million viewers. The Giants/Cowboys game last night drew 23.9 million, while Michelle Obama’s speech on Tuesday drew … 26.2 million. That’s a lot of undecideds who could have watched Bubba’s substantive pitch for a second term of Hopenchange dreck but instead got stuck with FLOTUS’s “he’s trying really hard and cares a lot” soft sell. I can’t imagine what Democratic schedulers were thinking. They’ve already got the women’s vote locked up; why not give Clinton the bigger spotlight to see what he could do with the rest of the electorate? As it is, anyone who skipped the game so that they could watch him is already likely so committed to one side or the other that they’re not switching their vote based on what he said. Baffling.

By the way, have we had any posts yet on the amount of media slobber after Clinton’s speech? Rick Klein’s prose poem on Twitter is tough to top, but the embarrassing eroticism of the intro to this op-ed might well have done it. As I get older, I find the over-the-top excitement among political junkies for convention speeches harder and harder to understand. It’s Bill Clinton. He got elected president twice and maintains a high favorable rating to this day. He knows how to give a speech. Makes me wonder how much of the reaction was really about Clinton and how much of it was liberals feasting on effective rhetoric after being starved of it for four years. In that case, eat up, guys. It’s breadcrumbs for dinner again tonight. Click the image to watch.

Update: Politico’s Keach Hagey has new numbers from Nielsen. I shouldn’t have underestimated the power of the Bubba:

Obviously good news for Democrats but the point above stands. If this is the guy you wanted everyone to watch, why not put him on when everyone could watch? If his numbers were 25 million head to head with the NFL — which are still lower than Michelle Obama’s — what might they have been on Tuesday night without the competition?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

So where are the people the media will find all 50,000 of them who came all the way from parts unknown by bus to watch Obama in the “panther stadium” and then found out once they go to NC that they moved it and they no longer have a seat.

tjexcite on September 6, 2012 at 7:18 PM

They were all promised legal status last time I checked, wouldn’t matter to them if they have to listen to anyone…

riddick on September 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Bill Clinton beat football in ratings last night, 25.1 million to 23.9 million total viewers, per Nielsen.

but clint eastwood, he was great, man.

sesquipedalian on September 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM

If I had only 2 channels to choose from, and the choices were Clinton or this, guess which one I’m tuning to…

Oh, and check out the size of that soda cup.

BobMbx on September 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM

but clint eastwood, he was great, man.

Yes, yes he was..

sandee on September 6, 2012 at 7:24 PM

That’s the same thing they do to win elections…extra votes magically appear…

aposematic on September 6, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I’m asking for the AQH – Quarterly numbers.

I’m sure Michelle and Bill pulled more, but 3M for Bill and 5M for Michelle doesn’t square. If Bill is going to “beat” the NFL, then he should have crushed Ryan, but Bill’s timeslot does not correlate with the NFL. He went 30 minutes past them. So what was his AQH?

I tend to believe his number popped after the third quarter of the game, when Dallas ended it.

I think what Nielsen is obfuscating, is Castro had a larger Univision audience, and also held those who tuned in for Michelle. While the audience, after Ann, left Christie when he didn’t deliver.

budfox on September 6, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Manning was mouthing to himself last night-
“Man I am missing Bill Clinton and I don’t think we are going back to the Super Bowl”

redguy on September 6, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Overall ratings are still lower than last years, even with the additional numbers.

People are just not watching the conventions like they used to.

I do think Democrats tend to watch more than Republicans, because they are more fanatical and less likely to have interests outside of politics.

My husband is going to vote for Romney, but he has not watched any of either one of the conventions.He said he got fed up with politics a long time ago. I think a lot of conservatives are like that.

Also…what about the people who watch on C-span…are they all counted in this and then there are the people who watch on line.

There are just a lot of ways to get information now other than sitting and watching this stuff.

Terrye on September 6, 2012 at 7:34 PM

I”m sorry, but I’m calling BS. There is no way more people watched Bill Clinton that the opening day game. Just no way.

And if it really did happen, what does that say for America?

ButterflyDragon on September 6, 2012 at 7:43 PM

The Honorable Horeable Debbie Wasserman Schultz

KOOLAID2 on September 6, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I”m sorry, but I’m calling BS. There is no way more people watched Bill Clinton that the opening day game. Just no way.

And if it really did happen, what does that say for America?

ButterflyDragon on September 6, 2012 at 7:43 PM

I agree. Total BS. Nielsen just doesn’t want to get the same bloody horse head in its bed that Gallup got.

Rational Thought on September 6, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Much more instructive (better headline too)

Tied with Honey Boo Boo

ElRonaldo on September 6, 2012 at 7:57 PM

So working class men watched football and liberals watched Clinton. I guess he swayed them.

RSbrewer on September 6, 2012 at 8:04 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/09/06/gallup-doj-axelrod

enough said, Nielsen would rather go with the flow of just throwing out numbers or else face the wrath

jaboba on September 6, 2012 at 8:04 PM

but clint eastwood, he was great, man.

sesquipedalian on September 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Still burning about having Obama mocked and reduced to an empty chair; and “Labor” Day turned into National Empty Chair Day?

Fallon on September 6, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Looks like Nielsen got a call from Axelrod and that goon at “Justice”.

forest on September 6, 2012 at 8:27 PM

National Empty Chair Day?

Fallon on September 6, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Lol!!! I like it! May become my favorite holiday! ; )

Bmore on September 6, 2012 at 8:30 PM

but clint eastwood, he was great, man.

sesquipedalian on September 6, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Clint is a former President? Who knew?
Seriously though. I’ve taken Neilsen calls and even had a box and diary(yeah I’m old.) And I lied all the time. Most people do. Who wants to admit they’re watching some mindless tv show instead of a political convention…wait, nevermind…they’re the same thing.

Deanna on September 6, 2012 at 8:32 PM

Bill ain’t running.

mbecker908 on September 6, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Ah let ‘em have their ratings–they’ll need something to comfort themselves late in the evening on Nov 6 when they plunge into deep dark abysmal, bottomless, unfathomably cavernous despair, despondency, and demsperation after Prezuhdunce Incompetent gets booted from office in that landslide.

stukinIL4now on September 6, 2012 at 9:01 PM

130 millions voters in 2008, Obama got 70 millions votes, and 25 millions watched Bill Clinton… big nothing… When numbers are put in perspective it makes more sense… but hey if you want to sh*t in your pants so be it…

mnjg on September 6, 2012 at 9:24 PM

And my personal favorite, after noting that the Clinton speech was half an hour more than it was scheduled, “but the extra length was part of the magic.”

BTW, Clinton got elected twice, but never with anything close to 50%. If Ross Perot hadn’t made a delusional run for the presidency in 1992, people would barely remember his run for the presidency. He would have been Dukakis the 2nd.

So as a “rock star,” he falls pretty short.

tom on September 6, 2012 at 9:33 PM

Was Clinton really supposed to reach white working class voters? Or was he meant to reach women? I know, I know–it sounds crazy. But the liberal men I know were fairly quiet about Clinton’s speech, and the liberal women were absolutely ecstatic about it.

I see the hypocrisy–sure. But the same women I know who regularly rant about the “war on women” also worship–adore–say disgusting things fantasizing about–Bill Clinton. So maybe he was sent out there for the women.

Or…maybe it was a way to keep his ratings from dwarfing Obama’s. If they put Clinton up against a big game, he would still capture plenty of attention. But the numbers would be less likely to threaten Obama’s numbers for his big night. (If I were Obama–insecure, petty, and not the biggest fan of the Clintons to begin with–that’s how I’d play it.)

butterflies and puppies on September 6, 2012 at 9:59 PM

Yes, yes, all very well, but…

How did Der Slickmeister do against TLC’s ratings juggernaut “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo”?

Enquiring minds want to know…

cinnabar on September 7, 2012 at 12:11 AM

I’m sorry but I don’t believe it. Clinton or not, it’s the freaking NFL season opener. Just not buying he beat the Cowboys vs. The Giants.

kit9 on September 7, 2012 at 1:05 AM

AubieJon on September 6, 2012 at 9:12 PM

I just saw that. I believe it to be a sign of the Apocalypses.

Cindy Munford on September 7, 2012 at 1:06 AM

Politico’s Keach Hagey has new numbers from Nielsen.

Well ain’t that just miraculous? Sure it is.

pilamaye on September 7, 2012 at 8:53 AM

Some of the sarcastic poetic verses were pretty funny…
“It was a dark stormy night”
“A shot rang out”

Klein could have started with: With the wind beneath his wings…

right2bright on September 7, 2012 at 9:13 AM

Comment pages: 1 2