Outset’s Overnight In-Depth Interviews of 90 Undecided/Independent Voters Who Watched Debate Finds That 68 Percent Favored Vice President Harris’s Performance

Harris’s overall performance and Trump’s bizarre statements were top two standouts for research participants

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 11, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Outset, the first AI-moderated research platform providing the scale and speed of a survey with the depth of a one-to-one interview, announced today the results of an overnight in-depth interviews with 90 undecided/independent voters who watched last night’s U.S. presidential debate. Each interview lasted approximately 15 minutes and was conducted by an AI-moderator that dynamically probes into participant responses. The interviews took place online between 11pm ET last night and 2am ET this morning. 

Highlights:

• 68 percent felt that Harris had won the debate.
• The two top debate standouts identified across all research participants: Vice President Harris’s overall performance (50 percent) and Trump’s bizarre statements (47 percent).
• Those who think former President Trump won attribute it to his criticism of Vice President Harris and President Biden (69 percent) and his policy focus (62 percent).
• Those who think Harris won attribute it to her clear communication (89 percent) and composure/professionalism (56 percent).
• Those who thought Trump lost the debate attributed it to his focus on attacks and rhetoric (64 percent) and lack of credibility (62 percent).
• Those who thought Harris lost the debate attributed it to her ineffective communication and lack of substance (76 percent) and failure to address issues (52 percent).

Outset used its AI analysis tools to draw out these highlights and conclusions from the 90 conversations. 

Aaron Cannon, co-founder and CEO of Outset, said, “It’s clear that undecided and independent voters think Harris won, but mostly due to her composure and Trump’s bizarre statements. These undecided voters are looking for more clarity and substance to help them make a decision, but many didn’t get it last night.”

Other key takeaways from Outset’s research:

• The Public Craves Substance: The study revealed a widespread craving amongst participants for more substantive debates that prioritize policy discussions and clear communication. Many expressed frustrations with the lack of focus on plans and solutions, emphasizing the need for candidates to articulate their vision for the future and how they would address critical issues.
• Voters Desire Clear Communication: Participants placed a high value on clarity and directness in communication from candidates. They highlighted the importance of straightforward answers, concrete policies, and specific plans that address the concerns of the American people. Many expressed disappointments when candidates resorted to evasive tactics, personal attacks, or simply failed to provide sufficient details on their policies.
• Disillusionment with Sensationalism: Participants indicated a weariness with the current trend of political debates focusing on sensationalism and inflammatory rhetoric. Some participants were even turned off by the highly charged and often unproductive nature of the debates, longing for a more respectful and focused approach to political discourse.
• Call for Moderator Impartiality: Several participants expressed concerns about the lack of impartiality from moderators. Many felt that moderators tended to favor one candidate over the other, influencing the flow of the debate and ultimately impacting viewers' perceptions. These concerns highlight the need for moderators in future debates to maintain a neutral stance in order to ensure a level playing field.

Specific comments from research participants include:
Harris’s performance: For me, it ended at the handshake, at the start. Kamala Harris walked out with tremendous confidence and walked straight up to Donald Trump, looked him in the eye and shook his hand. That did it for me. That's all I needed to see. He backed away. He wasn't ready to do it. He didn't look her in the eyes at first. She won right there.
Trump’s absurd comments: For me it was the lack of argument on Trump's side. There was no reason or support for any of his claims and much of what he said was just completely outlandish, particularly the comments about eating pets and cats and dogs.
Kamala not having substance / inauthentic: Kamala Harris' talking points all seemed very canned, very pre-rehearsed. Nothing that she said seemed remotely genuine… And whenever Trump would respond and she would have to respond back to him, her responses were very flustered because she's only good at doing things she's pre-rehearsed at. 

See the full research methodology, data and participant comments here.

Note to press: Outset is able to query the data set with custom questions from reporters. To submit an inquiry, reach out to kerry@big-swing.com. 

About Outset
Outset is the first AI-moderated research platform providing the scale and speed of a survey with the depth of a one-to-one interview. Designed to help Fortune 500 enterprises obtain deep, qualitative research results quickly, Outset leverages AI to conduct and synthesize video interviews to inform strategic business decisions. Dozens of enterprises, including WeightWatchers, Away and Opendoor rely on Outset to deliver in-depth data results and insights faster than traditional survey methods. Learn more at http://outset.ai.

Media Contact:
Kerry Metzdorf
Big Swing
kerry@big-swing.com
978-609-0766