As we enter the last phase of the general election most of you are probably thinking “please make it stop” but there is a series of events we think everyone should watch: The Presidential Debates.

There are four debates in all with three featuring the President and Mitt Romney and one for the VP candidates.

The debates can be pivotal events of the campaign. The debates were critical to Reagan beating Carter and Kennedy defeating Nixon. 

So, with so much at stake, you would think both campaigns would be hyping the opening debate as much as possible right? Wrong. There is a kind of twisted math that goes into debate strategy called the Expectations Game.

As there is no declared winner at the end of the each debate,  people just have to make up their own minds. That decision is informed largely by how they thought a candidate was expected to do. If, for example Mitt Romney promises a crushing victory and delivers, well, Touchdown. But if he only kind of beats Obama it is the same as a loss because he failed to live up to expectations. 

Strategically, President Obama has little to gain from the debates; he has been up in the polls pretty consistently riding some post convention momentum. So it’s not surprising to hear his senior campaign advisor, Robert Gibbs say this:

Mitt Romney, I think, has an advantage, because he’s been through 20 of these debates in the primaries over the last year. He even bragged that he was declared the winner in 16 of those debates. So I think, in that sense, having been through this much more recently than President Obama, I think he starts with an advantage.

And a Romney Surrogate say this:

We’re going to be ready — very ready to face the president and we’re going to win,

The Romney campaign is gambling (oops) that by hyping the debate and delivering sparkling victory, the candidate will be able to demonstrate a clear edge over Obama. Anything short of that is a win for the President. 

Thoughts?