Well ok then, who won?

[Skip Intro]

[Connie_Corleone]

1. I accidently voted for Cheney.

I meant to vote a Draw. The board is screwed up.

Anyway, both did what they had to do. Matthews and the others are idiots. People won't even remember this debate by Friday night. I think Edwards did very well. But, it was still a draw.

[DixieDem]

2. HUH??? Did you four just watch the same debate that I did???

I'm especially interested to find out the reasoning of those that thought it was a draw (I already know where the other two stand). Please, please, please... how do ya figure? Waiting...

[makhno]

3. It's not so simple

There are at least three answers:

1. On substance - Edwards carried it by some margin. He had strong points, he explained the platform well.

2. On performance - a draw. Edwards was steady, effectively repealed Cheney's and the moderator's attacks. Cheney also produced a steady performance, stuck to his points and generally parried Edwards' attacks pretty well.

3. On perception - Cheney wins. Defense was sufficient for him, and Edwards failed to step up with an out and out attack. Anything short of a decisive victory will be spun into a republican victory. Tune to any post-debate show to see how.

As we all know, (3) is the only answer that matters.

[countmyvote4real]

7. Perception is in the eye of the beholder.

In the eyes of the media whores, the real POTUS was formidable in dishing out lies and barbs. They will find much more comfort in propping up their fascist administration than they could for the spokesperson POTUS.

In the eyes of truth, Edwards slew the evil giant and called him out point after point.

[Astarho]

4. Edwards held his own

He definately got under Cheney's skin a few times, but Edwards came out swinging

The problem is Cheney isn't Bush. Cheney can lie articulately with a straight face and without fear of consequences. Cheney has no "tells" when he lies either.

The real showing was in the introduction and the closing statements.
Introduction: Cheney looking grumpy and unhappy sitting there. Edwards seems engaged with the audience and uses that smile.

Closing statements: the clear cut "hope vs. fear".

[Arioch]

5. Emperor Palpatine

Never mind Vader....

Edwards was like a grain of sand in Cheney's shoe...
Constantly irritating, causing discomfort, yet unobstrusive.

I this Edwards did a great job.

[davhill]

6. Compared to his Chimpness

Chenney looked positively smooth and polished. Edwards did not live up to either his reputation or the Kerry performance last week.

[Carolab]

8. All Cheney did

was criticize Kerry and Edwards. He did virtually NOTHING to boost Bush. Edwards did an excellent job of supporting Kerry, which as vice president is exactly what he is supposed to do.

Also, Cheney did NOT lay out a clear plan about what this country is going to do to fix the mess we are in. All he did was bloviate and tell lies.

Finally, what on earth gives him the right to call Edwards out on "lack of attendance" when it is QUITE common for a Senator running for higher office (and especially one running for president and then VP) to have to miss time on the floor. His staff, as I understand it, is in constant communication with him and he continues to serve. Furthermore, I haven't seen Cheney slither out of his hole much in the last three years--and WHERE was he on and after 9/11, exactly? And calling Edwards "senator gone" is the height of hypocrisy, when Chimpy has been gone 40% of his entire time as (p)resident.

Edwards was straightforward, hit the salient points home, detailed the plan and gave the nation a clearly optimistic message.