58 million viewers: Debate ratings top first debate from 2008; Update: Revised upwards to 67.2 million; Update: 70 million?
posted at 4:41 pm on October 4, 2012 by Allahpundit
The last time a beating this brutal drew a wider audience was Ali-Foreman, I believe.
More than 58 million people watched the first Presidential debate last night between President Obama and Mitt Romney, up substantially from the first debate in the 2008 election cycle, which had 52.4 million viewers.
Fox News was the most-watched cable news network during the debate, and will likely be the most-watched network on TV, though final broadcast numbers will not be released until after 4 PM.
The second Obama/McCain debate in 2008 drew 63.2 million but those ratings were goosed by off-the-charts public interest in Palin’s VP debate held five days earlier. Ryan/Biden won’t build the same degree of curiosity for Romney/Obama II, but the fact that Romney destroyed The One yesterday might. Casual voters who passed on last night’s show will see the headlines today and wonder if Romney can do it again; pair that with the fact that the next debate is a townhall format, which adds a bit of unpredictability, and you might see huge ratings on October 16. Then again, the first debate is usually (but not always) the highest-rated of the three, probably because of the novelty of seeing the combatants finally together on stage and dueling. That being so, if there’s any debate to which you want to bring your A-game, it’s the first — which is why desperate rationalizations like this are even dumber and lamer than they appear:
Some people suggest that Obama is luring Romney like the Russians lured Napoleon, getting him in too deep and out of his element. Maybe…
— Charles M. Blow (@CharlesMBlow) October 4, 2012
I promised you the Luntz focus-group video in last night’s thread but it wasn’t posted until late, so here it is at last. (MSNBC’s focus group also agreed that Romney won.) Can’t wait to see which new persona O rolls out 12 days from now to overcompensate for last night’s deficiencies. If you disliked him as the passive, lethargic incumbent forced to defend a failed presidency, you’ll loathe the angry, table-pounding class warrior who wants to know Mitt Romney’s annual effective tax rates since 1970 and wants to know them now, mister.
Update: I take it back. I should have said that a beating this brutal hasn’t been seen by so many people since Frazier-Ali I:
Nielsen: An estimated 67.2 million people watched the debate.
— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) October 4, 2012
I forgot how dramatically the ratings can inflate after the preliminary assessments. With the new numbers, it turns out Romney/Obama drew nearly as many viewers as the Palin/Biden VP blowout in 2008. Bad, bad, bad timing for The One to perform so terribly.
Update: A fair point by the NYT:
FYI, we’re saying the debate “reached more than 70 million” to account for Web streams and out-of-home TV viewers. nyti.ms/PBJOgB
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) October 4, 2012
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Gosnell attorney: Maybe a 16-week deadline for abortion and more regulation would be better
Holder reveals: U.S. has killed four American citizens in drone strikes
Cruz: No, “I don’t trust the Republicans” with the debt ceiling
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: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.
Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.
tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM
Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .
BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…
Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM
Perfect!
lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.
bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM
If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!
SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)
He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.
Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2