>>>What more can you say? Yee hah!!!!!
>>
>>With her short period stay in politics, she was excellent. Biden has been in politics for more than thirty years and yet he can not knock-down Palin. I think if it's a boxing, Biden won by split decision but Palin has to be considered a force to reckon with in the near future. Saran can be better than Hillary I think in the years to come.
>
>I think they both surprised me. Biden for his restraint (he has been known to go off on a tangent or even distort the truth and he did not do that last night), and Palin for holding her own (mostly). Biden had to hold himself back because there were a few times when he could have really wiped the floor with Palin but he stuck to arguing against McCain, not Palin directly. If he had argued against Palin, he would have appeared to be attacking her and it would have a negative impact on Obama's campaign. She messed up a few times (Biden could have called her on it but he did not and it made him appear not careless, but rather a gentleman instead) but it was clear she was heavily prepared and did very well. There is no question in my mind, Biden won hands down on the debate itself.
>
>HOWEVER, I think just as Obama was more personable in the last debate (even though McCain was more knowledgeable), Palin was definitely more personable last night compared to Biden. Biden apeared too senatorial and somewhat 'fixed' in his positions and he did have a few slipups on accuracy while Palin spoke to the people and did great with eye contact. For the same reasons Obama won the last debate, Palin, in my mind actually won this one. She got her message out even if she had to change the subject to do it :o)
>
>Also, since no one expected much from Palin in the debate (I actually expected her to flub horribly because Biden was always a good debater), she actually excelled. I've read polls that showed that Biden won the debate but according to 84% of viewers, Palin did better than expected and improved their opinion of her. That gives her a win.
>
>Even though I still feel that the moderator should have recused herself for conflict of interest, she was the most fair and competent moderator I've seen in all of the debates so far.
>
>Two things concerned me about the two candidates (more than anything else). Palin's position on abortion and gay marriages, and Biden's position on gay marriages and democratic elections in which hezbollah won recognition. You cannot stop democratic elections simply because you are afraid it will validate a group that you disagree with, even if that group is a terrorist organization. That is the people speaking. If a terrorist organization can win an election, then the existing parties are not representing the people and that is what democracy is all about.

How did I miss what Palin said about abortion? What was it? I did hear what she said about gays, being more sympathetic than I expected although stopping firmly short of gay marriage (as did Biden). Not sure how well it went over with the social conservatives who are so fired up about her, though.

They both messed up a few times. This morning I was surfing around looking at the who-won surveys and checked out Fox News just for grins. I didn't see one of those but did they have a piece on factual issues that I have to say is a good piece of reporting. They both had a few misses and stretchers.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/03/fact-checking-vice-presidential-debate/

Although they left out the one where she referred to a general as General McClellan. Civil War, wasn't he? LOL

I have to disagree about Palin doing better than expected (which I agree with) giving her a win. Not vs. Biden, it didn't, at least not according to everything I have seen so far. Well, other than John Harvey ;-)

Biden was a lot less Senatorial than I thought he would be. He had good command of the issues, as I would expect after all this time in key positions in the Senate, but not like a professor about it.

I'm glad I watched. Well worth missing the Cubs game for ;-(