One thing was clear about the first presidential debate of the season: nobody was sure how to score this thing. Pundits were tongue tied immediately following the debate and reluctant to declare a winner. Did Obama win because he didn't lose? Did McCain lose because he didn't win? Hopefully the answers to these questions come fast. Here's more debate fodder to scramble your noggin ...
- If America had a Parliment the debate wouldn't be necessary. David Ignatius writes of the candidates' debate performance that one was more commander-in-chiefy and one was more collegial and that neither was particularly good.
- ... Over at the Guardian, where they know a thing or two about Parliments, Michael Tomasky is having trouble sorting it all out. "I've never been quite this confused about a debate in a long time. I think this may be one of those cases where the post-debate debate, the next 48 to 72 hours, is far more crucial than usual."
- Score it a huge win for McCain, says Roger Simon at Politco. "John McCain was very lucky that he decided to show up for the first presidential debate in Oxford, Miss., Friday night. Because he gave one of his strongest debate performances" ever.
- Err, I mean, Obama. New York Times columnist Gail Collins awards McCain a few points simply for showing up to the Oxford, Mississippi debate, then she immediately penalizes him points for talking about silly pork projects. "...When the wandering debater finally showed up Friday night, he just looked like a smallish, grayish, slightly grumpy guy with a grizzly obsession."