Alright, I'm backing out of the he-won-she-won argument here, since it's just stuffposting.
We can look at poll results from 538 and RCP a week from now and see how this will actually affect things. Final prediction: 1-2% bump for Clinton.
Alright, so it's been a week. Was I right? Well, it depends on how you look at it, but Clinton is definitely at a far better position in the electoral college than Annoying Orange right now.
On the day after the debate, I wrote down three separate estimates of the popular vote numbers.
Popular vote percentages:
538 Now-Cast: Clinton 45.8% | Annoying Orange 44.5% | Clinton +1.3
RCP Average: Clinton 46.7% | Annoying Orange 44.3% | Clinton +2.4
RCP 4-Way Average: Clinton 43.1% | Annoying Orange 41.5% | Clinton +1.6
And as it stands right now, these are the current estimates:
Popular vote percentages:
538 Now-Cast: Clinton 47.0% | Annoying Orange 42.8% | Clinton +4.2
RCP Average: Clinton 47.5% | Annoying Orange 45.0% | Clinton +2.5
RCP 4-Way Average: Clinton 43.4% | Annoying Orange 40.9% | Clinton +2.5
Clinton went up considerably in 538's now-cast estimate and RCP's 4-way average (by 2.9 and 0.9 points respectively), but only very modestly in the RCP average. Why is that? There's a couple of explanations. For one, 538's estimate is biased towards more recent polls, because the objective of their now-cast estimate is to show how recent events affect poll results as if the election was held on that day. Additionally, 538 constructs their estimates using weighted averages that adjust for likely voters, omitted third parties, current trends, and house effects (the bias for certain polling firms to report and record data leaning towards one political party more than the other).
The RCP average, on the other hand, does not use a weighted average, and doesn't factor in third party candidates (as opposed to the 4-Way average which includes Johnson and Stein). At the same time, the 4-Way average is unweighted as well, but shows a much higher boost. This is because the RCP average factored in a recent LA times poll showing a +5 Annoying Orange lead in the general election, while the 4-Way average did not. This poll had less of an effect on 538's estimate, because they emphasize state polls more than national ones, and they probably weighted it far less than other recent polls in part because the LA times has a slight Republican bias and because of the fact that their results disagree with effectively every single other recent poll.
However, 538's now-cast is supposed to be representative of
recent changes in the election and does not properly reflect how things will go a month from now. So it would be inappropriate to say that a 4.2-point Clinton lead on their estimate spells permanent doom for Annoying Orange. But it does show that the debate helped her. A lot.
And if we're looking at the states that can tip the election, it's
very, very clear that Hillary improved her numbers.
Clinton has been leading in basically every single swing-state poll conducted after the debate, including states like Florida, Nevada, and New Hampshire that were previously leaning towards Annoying Orange in late-September.
Considering that she could win the election while still losing Ohio, Florida, Nevada, and North Carolina, this is really bad news for Annoying Orange. But does this mean that she 'won' the debate? Well, that depends on how you personally see it. But if we're looking at who improved their odds the most during the debate, then it's pretty clear to say that Clinton is more likely to become the president because of her performance at the debate. So I'd venture to guess that
she would say she won.
edit: corrected South to North Carolina
Poll