3 hours of platitudes with a dose of sage commentating.
Who won? Well, let's dismiss voters from that possibility, but we'll stick to the debaters.
Among the Republicans in order of best to worst showing:
- Romney - the most specific and on-target answers; stuck to the issues and not to personalities, but certainly positioned himself for abuse from the other debaters
- Giuliani - a lot of specific and on-target answers and some fancy dancing, especially around illegal immigration
- McCain - some good answers, but displayed his penchant for making things personal and petty
- Huckabee and Thompson - moved the air with their words, but mainly took up space; although Thompson provided some humor and showed his obvious very conservative philosophy
- Paul - appeared to be on a different planet
- Obama - not so much about great points, but he was somewhat successful in moving the debate from specifics to the idea of inspirational leadership
- Edwards - stayed focused on driving home his position as defender of the underdog while avoiding the personal barbs between Obama and Clinton; has overcome his "Breck Girl" disaster, but is appealing mostly to those who want the government to take care of them and let someone else pay for it
- Clinton - focused too much on the negative and how much she drove change for 35 years while decrying that what we now needed most was change; her pedantic style is her undoing while her attempts at "being likable" are just sad
- Richardson - just waiting for the debate to be over so he can go out with Ron Paul for a few beers
Subject most avoided by Democrats: how they have blocked nuclear power plants and oil/natural gas exploration... and now blame George Bush and oil companies for the high cost of oil and gas and lack of alternative energy.
Did the debates settle anything for voters? We'll see.
..