How Did It Go?

So we've had our one and only vice-presidential debate. What did you think? I thought Joe Biden came off very well, and that wasn't a sure thing going in. He knew what he was talking about, and he presented it in a matter-of-fact way.

And then there was Sarah Palin. She didn't trip over her own words (mostly). She didn't blatantly embarrass herself. So all in all, it can be considered a big win from her point of view. But come on, now. This is the vice presidency that we're talking about. Shouldn't we have a higher standard for qualification that simply not embarrassing yourself? I don't have any idea how viewers are going to score this. Did Palin's folksiness win new converts? It turned me off (although that's pretty predictable, really), but I understand that there are those who find it endearing. (Again, is endearing really what we're looking for in a vice president?) She had no answers of substance, unless you count untruths. And yet, George Stephanopoulos said Biden won, but only just barely (which is more of a stand than he was willing to take online, where he wrote:

My gut tells me there will be a partisan response to this debate with Democrats arguing Biden won, and Republicans reassured by Palin's performance;

that's some insightful gut you've got there, George--way to go out on a limb). Yesterday Michael Bérubé wrote that liberals always make the mistake of believing that debates should go to the smartest people. Somebody (on PBS I think) pointed out that, if the debate was scored by traditional debate scoring mechanisms, Biden took it in a walk. But the general public doesn't look at it like a debate judge. Too many people see Palin's avoidances, obfuscations, and untruths but ignore them (or don't recognize them in the first place) because they're paying more attention to her confident manner and perkiness. How could Biden have possibly competed with nothing more than facts and common sense?