Cheney won it. No question. Edwards is pretty (oh my, yes), but he has so little substance it's frightening. He has much to complain about, and many intimations of lies and misrepresentations, but no solutions or answers.
Overall, a great debate, and even without getting decent answers from Edwards on many issues, it was an engaging conversation.
Now the campaign chairpeople are up for interviews. Mary Beth Cahill is on first, with yet another whiny ad populem. What is with these people? Do they not understand there are other ways to make a sales pitch besides the suggestion that everyone already believes the conclusion? She's also trying - not very convincingly - to spin that Cheney came off grumpy. Ken Mehlman is upbeat, on the other hand, and refutes Wolf Blitzer's spin with little effort. Excellent.
I'm disappointed at just how soon the talking heads are spinning it, here; one on CNN has leapt wholeheartedly to the conclusion that this has helped Kerry. It is not proven. That's what was fantastic about Cheney's performance here: He proved as much as he could, as fast as he could, as thoroughly as he could.
I want to like John Edwards. I really do. He's got amazing charisma. But he hasn't proved that he's even thought about what he says, let alone what he might have to do as president.