I watched the Vice-Presidential debate last night, sitting in my chair and staring at the television screen, as is my wont. My wife was in the room next door, listening to the TV drone as she worked/played on the computer, as is her wont.

About a half hour or forty-five minutes into the event, she called out, “Is it just me or is Palin getting creamed out there?”

“No,” I said, genuinely surprised. “I think she’s doing a good job at holding her own against Biden.”

“Really?” she replied, her own surprise clearly as deep and genuine as my own.

Our exchange might well summarize the evening in a nutshell. If you listened to the debate, then Biden won it. If, on the other hand, you watched the debate, it was a draw.

This was never Biden’s debate to win. Viewed as Palin’s clear superior in both policy knowledge and debating experience, his bar was set excessively high for him to control the outcome. At best, he would come across as unexciting and at worst, as condescending or a gaffe machine. Winning or losing lay in Palin’s hands alone.

Thus, Biden’s strategy was to not lose and hope that Palin would badly blunder. This did not happen.

Palin did extremely well last night. She was supremely confident and at ease. She oozed likeability and charm when she was connecting with Main Street Americans as well as when she was slipping a knife between the opposition’s ribs with a wink and a smile.

A CNN poll taken immediately after the debates showed about eight-five percent of viewers found her to have performed better than expected. This was partly due to how low her bar was set, based on her limited television interviews. Still, Palin did not merely exceed expectations but actually performed as well as she was capable. On that basis, she should have handed Biden his head on a platter.

The reason she did not is Biden’s relative performance. That same CNN poll showed sixty-five percent of viewers also found Biden performed better than expected. With his bar set unrealistically high, Biden impressed almost as much as Palin with her bar set incredibly low. Palin pulled off the best night she has enjoyed in the past two months; Biden had the night of his life.

Employing a boxing analogy, Biden is a heavyweight and Palin a lightweight in their debating styles. Biden lumbers around without much defense, swinging enthusiastically but not always accurately. Sometimes he takes so long winding up for a punch, his opponent has danced away before he can even throw it, let alone land it.

Palin is much more a natural jabber. She darts in and out, using Republican talking points and sarcasm to take down her opponents with surgical precision, often before they realize what hit them.

The rapid pace of the debate ought to have favored Palin. However, like McCain, she tried a long-shot risk and battled Biden more on his terms, striding out to the center of the ring and trading jabs toe-to-toe with him there.

She was effective in that regard, landing blow after blow after blow. Yet Biden seemed to absorb her punches rather than being throw off by them and for each punch he delivered a factual counterpunch that often left Palin unable to answer. While last night’s format favored her policy shortcomings and rhetorical style more than in-depth interviews, she often seemed unable to deal with the reality that, unlike a stump speech, her devastating accusations and cutting one-liners would not go unmet and unchallenged.

Palin certainly helped her own reputation with last night’s performance but, counter to the forming conventional wisdom, I think she helped McCain too.

First, she helped quiet growing doubts, even among some conservatives, about McCain’s judgment in picking her simply by proving her own mettle. Second, I suspect her performance will reenergize the Republican base in a manner similar to if not quite as intense as her convention speech. Third, it is “safe” for her to appear in public again and she continues to be an effective campaigning tool, if only for the large crowds she consistently draws.

However, with only a month left to go in this contest, Biden did the most direct good for the top of his ticket. He was not especially charming or awe-inspiring about it but he was relentlessly on message in tying McCain to the failed policies of the Bush Administration and much of the current financial crisis and general economic downturn.

Americans tuned into this debate waiting to see which V.P. candidate would under-perform most abysmally. Instead, they saw a lively exchange in which both candidates excelled. This is only to the good for the nation. Biden happened to be the candidate who excelled more and that is only to the good for Barack Obama.

knew that if I remained patient that you would eventually return to your clear, non-biased essay format.

You and I watched the same debate last night. It's amazing how many BOTFers watched, instead, some Twilight Zone alternative where Biden mopped up the floor with Palin and left her a gibbering wreck.

As you stated, Biden beat Palin on plain substance, but Palin beat Biden on connecting with Average Americans . . . the group that is actually going to select the next president. On the other hand, Palin having done well last night does not necessarily rebound in the poll numbers to McCain's credit. I expect his numbers to reflect a small rise in comparison to Obama's but not much more than that.

What we saw last night, however, was a future presidential contestant in her own right. Eventually she WILL learn all this domestic and foreign policy wonk stuff and will learn how to finess hostile 'gotcha question' interviewers and then she will become very dangerous indeed BECAUSE she has the ability to speak directly to Average Americans and connect with them.

But that is for some future election cycle and she still has a great deal of study to do. Last night she reassured the nation that she is neither a 'light weight' version of Dan Quayle [oh my!] nor a bad mistake on the part of McCain.

Oh and as far as the "My good friend McCain doesn't get it and is incompetent," rhetoric that Biden pounded on last night that really doesn't mean much to mainstream America because that's what they expected Biden to do. In comparison Sarah Palin came across as the more bipartisan and reasonable of the two vp contenders.

Biden helped Obama last night by not uttering a typical and patented Biden-stupidity. But his continual linking of McCain to incompetence and failure did nothing for Obama because that ONLY spoke to the already committed Obama supporters not to the undecideds who recognize traditional campaign rhetoric for what it is.

OK Bell, you've analyzed the debate from the "mainstream media" playbook, which solely looks at body language, tone of voice, punches and counterpunches, one-liners and soundbites, expectations versus performance, and all the surface things which really don't add up to much...but that's the state of the discourse these days. But in addition to HOW they said what they said, what did you think about WHAT they actually said? Who answered the questions being asked, versus grinding out soundbites on unrelated matters? Who told the truth (more)? Who lied (more)? Who effectively countered accusations by the opponent with facts? Who won on substance?

I was actually waiting for your writeup on this debate, because you usually cut through a lot of the fog. I'm still waiting.

Sarah Palin won by disengaging herself from Tina Fay's devastating caricature of her.

Joe Biden won by disengaging himself from everybody's devastating caricature of him as "Mr. Washington,"the pompous, sexist gaffe machine. The career pol so superficial and vain that he got hairplugs back in the '80s, before they were even convincing.

The most compelling moment of the entire debate, for all of Palin's flash and charisma, was an unmistakably authentic display of emotion from Biden.

"But the notion that somehow, because I'm a man, I don't know what it's like to raise two kids alone, I don't know what it's like to have a child you're not sure is going to -- is going to make it -- I understand.

I understand, as well as, with all due respect, the governor or anybody else, what it's like for those people sitting around that kitchen table. And guess what? They're looking for help. They're looking for help. They're not looking for more of the same."

That's the moment when Biden showed America who he is, and why he has spent his life in Washington, and why he's helping Obama now. He's here because he gets it, and he's in it for us.

It was as powerful as any moment I've ever seen in a Presidential debate, let alone a Vice-Presidential debate. And it could pay unexpected dividends. This election will turn on the question of which party's candidates can be trusted to bring change.

Obama has owned the "Change" side of that equation since 2004, but I have a hunch that Biden might have just locked down "Trust".

If so, despite great (on a curve) performances from both of them, last night was game, set, and match.

Hi, Demcon. I think you are correct in that the biggest development of last night long-term was that Palin re-established herself as a future GOP star, maybe THE future GOP star, and away from the national joke status toward which she seemed to be heading.

It seems to me that while the McCain campaign's desire to protect Palin until she came more up to speed on policy is understandable, I think they erred badly on how to do it. They kept her out of a lot of solo public speaking events, like town halls and press conferences, fearing she would be too easily confused by the fast pace and unpredictability. She is a career politician and clearly thrvies on such situations, as we saw last night.

Instead, they placed her in one-on-one situations with who they hoped would be friendly interviewers. But that gave those interviewers the time to dissect her lack of knowledge of specific policy points. It also mutes what you point out she does best, which is directly connect with an audience. If the GOP is smart, they will cut out the interviews and bring on the live press conferences and town halls.

I would agree that while hammering McCain on ties to Bush has seemed to work for Obama, he will not "seal the deal" with voters until he presents a simple, clear, and credible set of ideas on what he will do to fix things or make things better or at least do less harm than McCain.

Thanks for your reply and own thoughts on the debate.

Hi, MitchK. I thought I had been clear on that in my post but let me state it again unequivocably. Biden won the debate on substance by a fairly strong margin, in my opinion. He needed to do that, however, because Palin was very strong by any standard and certainly well above expectations. Had Biden stumbled badly, not only would Palin be universally viewed as the winner but I think it would come to be seen as yet another moment of major shifting in the campaign.

To put it another way, Palin only had to be average to be considered very good while Biden had to be very good to be considered average. This morning, both are being hailed as having been very good. That makes it pretty obvious who had the best night overall, in my opinion. I hope that helps.

Thank you for replying.

seriously though, i thought it was a genuine moment. a lot like when hrc did it a few months ago. it tied in well to one of the last questions in the debate.

biden was spot on in answering how to bridge the political divide in america: even if you question someone's judgment (i.e., disagree with someone), no one is really in any position to question others' motives (i.e., insist others are evil).

for me, this was probably the most profound comment to come out of the debate.

it's a cautionary note for every progressive.

Hi, Thrasymachus. We agree completely on that being Biden's best moment, although I also thought his "McCain is no maverick" argument was equally powerful on an intellectual rather than emotional level. However, one of Obama's weak spots is that is even temper sometimes makes him look passionless and I think Biden might have helped him in that regard.

I do not know if it was "game, set, and match," as you suggest, but it was big in that Biden beat Palin many times last night on fact vs. fact and logic vs. logic but that was the one and only time I think he bested her on her strong point and connected with the audience far more than she did on understanding the problems/worries of the middle class.

Thanks, as always, for your thoughts.

it's a cautionary note for every progressive.

Really, after the last 8 years, Biden's words should be a cautionary note for every American. Demonizing each other is a big part of how we got into this cataclysmic national mess to begin with. I'd feel a lot better about McCain if I really thought he believed that.

I must not have watched the same debate as you did. Palin's first 6 answers were scripted, much like the first few plays in a football game. In all of those first answers was the word "reform" repeated endlessly. I also found it awkward that she had to constantly refer to her written notes. When Biden was answering she would shuffle through her notes looking for the one to use in response. Her long hesitation before giving her "white flag of surrender" telegraphed that a zinger was coming and it did. She also misspoke several times. Plus, she didn't even pretend to play by the debate rules.

There is a reason the polls are saying she lost the debate by a fairly wide margin. Her responses just weren't very impressive. Afghanistan and health care were two areas where she fell down hard. There was even one point where she appeared to be hot under the collar.