I think Cheney nailed Edwards on his and Kerry's Senate records and their stance on Iraq. Personally, I think he blew holes in Kerry's statements that he was going to be able to get foreign countries to help by pointing out that you can't convince them to lend support when you're constantly telling everyone that Iraq was the "Wrong war, wrong time." I was really surprised by Edwards when he began interrupting Cheney. I thought a lawyer would have a bit more sense of procedure.

But Edwards did rally back during discussions of domestic issues. I give a lot of this to the point that he actually had answers to certain topics rather than the "We'll do better" approach he had on Iraq. He had actual answers even though I didn't agree with some of them.

So, overall, it was a tie. I don't think any swing voters even stayed tuned in for too long after the opening. It was a rather tame debate.

whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."