Good Newcastle: Glad Eno at least got a good drink out of the evening, and your analysis is right on, sir. This was a sleeper. If I were a pollsters "undecided" I'd still be waffling. Larry King's interviewing Jorge Santos, an advocate of some sort for Latin America, however broad that might be. Bush might have done himself a favor, though, if he had broadened the foreign policy debate into other areas, like LA. His biggest weakness tonight was letting Kerry take the fight to him on Iraq and define foreign policy in the bubble of losses in Iraq. It might have been a more interesting night. As it was, very predictable, graded only on style points. Too bad.

A Pair of Jacks: This'll get called a tie, but in reality, both men lost. Neither did what he had to do. Bush needs to learn that repeating himself is not an argument. Kerry needs desperately to connect with people, not do his lame-ass Pompey-the-Senator act. Bush got in some good hits, but in the midst of an incoherent, rambling argument. Kerry made some good policy points, but buried them in his fourth subclause of the eighth run-on sentence of his tenth monotone paragraph.

You gotta love how Kerry praised the foreign policy of . . . Ronald Wilson Reagan, whom he said he would try to emulate. Kerry spent his first Senate term fighting against everything Reagan did. Somebody call him on it, please.

Final thoughts? A draw, but a lame one. Most Americans switched this off about 30 minutes in, so anything that came up after that just went to the pundits. I'm starting to think that both of these candidates are part of a marketing conspiracy to turn us all into glazed-over tapioca.

The Newcastle was good, at least.

At long last: It's over, and I have peed. Time to begin my wrap-up thoughts.

First, grades.

Bush: C Plus

Kerry: B

Kerry was a better speaker, smoother and more confident. He did a good job of attacking. But I think Bush's weaknesses are his strengths in times like this. His whole attitude is one of "How many times do I have to explain this to you?" He doesn't rack up many debate points, but he makes Kerry look more confused. Like he needs it explained to him. I don't think Bush did squat to convince any Democrats to switch alliances, but he solidified his base. The fact that he got beat rhetorically might help energize Republicans to come out and support their guy. I can't say much more in favor of Bush, sadly. In fact, I expect him to take a quite a large hit in the press, but he would have had to shine for that not to be the case. But I don't think Kerry did much to bring much support to his side, either. I don't think many people will respond to Kerry's mulit-lateral song. I, and not many others, don't to hear that we'll win in Iraq by bringing in the U.N., and Kerry outlined no real plan outside of that. Too bad.

Nuclear proliferation: Yeah, we got the easy shit before Bush was President. That's why we haven't secured more since.

Drunken update: I'm not, three G&T's in. But I am out of ice, due to party crashers. Last cocktail before switching to beer.

Rue the day? Who talks like that? Name the movie for bonus points.

Follow through: Kerry's right with his, "you break it, you own it" line. But isn't that what we're doing? I have a friend who leaves tomorrow for Iraq with the national guard, and he told me that's exactly what they're doing. Working with the locals to fix the problems that exist. Terrorist insurgence is only one of the problems, but it's the hardest to fix. While we're doing that, we're trying to fix the freakin' water system and deliver the mail.

Speaking skills: All right, Kerry is a much better speaker. The only thing Bush has going for him, is he sounds agonized over the decisions he makes. That won't play with the chattering classes, but it might with the public.

A Good Hit: Bush makes a good point. You don't bring allies into Iraq to help by calling this the "wrong war, the wrong place, the wrong time." How do you say (to France, Germany), "Follow me into a mistake, a quagmire"? He's also doing a good job hitting Kerry for flip flops, without using that term.

Allies: Why can't Bush call a spade a spade re: the U.N. The collection of governments that comprises that body have little desire to see us succeed. Abdication of our responsibility is not a plan.

Pinkie's up: Gin is my drink of choice this evening, Eno. In honor of those Imperial Brits, our steadfast allies. The beer's in the fridge, though, being held in reserve for the post-debate follow up.

Clarification: it's Tanqueray, not Sapphire.

Mixed messages: Kerry's used the phrase "mixed message" several times. He's trying to turn the table. Not a good tactic, if he wants to get people to forget the flip flopper tag. Bush will have to nail him on it. Can he? I don't know, but he keeps leaning on the podium. Seems disengaged and flustered, proto-Bush.

Warning: Steven's server is already running pretty slow, so I'll probably be reading his stuff later.

Cutaways: One "cutaway" to Kerry so far. A trend?

Lights, camera, shock therapy?: So there will be lights to show time left in the candidates' answers. My roommate suggests electrical clips on their privates. Maybe on pay-per-view.

Let's Get Ready to . . . point our pinkies as we hoist a glass? What the hell are you laying in as debate juice, Flyer? Sapphire?

Lift a beer with me. We'll still be stinkeroo before Steve finishes frosting his martini shaker (not meant as a euphemism, by the way).

Last minute thoughts: Many are calling this debate the "joint press conference." That's true, as far as pre-planned statements, ignoring questions, and no Lincoln-Douglas style questioning by the candidates of each other. But I look for some surprises, particularly from Kerry. Some say he's got the most to lose, but based on the polls (and his declining numbers) he's got the least to lose. He probably won't pull a Howard Dean and start screaming, but he's got to be animated and (no small challenge for him) funny. He's got to get people to like him. I look for a "zinger" sometime early, and if it's a good one, he'll get more confident. If it's a dud, he'll sleep with the fishes.

And so, the limes are cut, the ice is stocked. Let's get ready to .....drink!

If Only: Hitch, on the Dems holding out for some bad news:

If you calculate that only a disaster of some kind can save your candidate, then you are in danger of harboring a subliminal need for bad news. And it will show. What else explains the amazingly crude and philistine remarks of that campaign genius Joe Lockhart, commenting on the visit of the new Iraqi prime minister and calling him a "puppet"? Here is the only regional leader who is even trying to hold an election, and he is greeted with an ungenerous sneer . . . How can the Democrats possibly have gotten themselves into a position where they even suspect that a victory for the Zarqawi or Bin Laden forces would in some way be welcome to them? Or that the capture or killing of Bin Laden would not be something to celebrate with a whole heart?

Read it all, of course.

By the Way: For the record, I think Glenn has the most-foolproof-debate-prediction award sewn up:

Unless Kerry melts into a puddle on the floor, the media spin will be that he did well and helped his campaign. This is for two reasons. One is, as Newsweek's Evan Thomas remarked, that the press "wants Kerry to win."

The other reason, Glenn says, is that the media wants a horse race. But that's twaddle, the kind of thing Chris Matthews thinks is profound. Think CBS was desperate to believe anything about Busg in the Guard because they want a horse race?

Look, neither one of these guys will stray far enough from talking points to get into any trouble. This will be a game of millimeters. My prediction, similar to Glenn's, is this: Think back to the 2000 debates. Remember how painfully silly Gore looked and sounded? Recall, too, that the center-left media was quick to declare the debates ties, with perhaps a technical victory on debating points each time to Gore. Meanwhile, the entire country was chuckling over Gore's rouge, heavy breathing, and stage-stalking alpha male posturing. Slowly, the CW on the debates changed, settling on the "Bush won because of lowered expectations" line. Four years later, everyone knows that Gore flat out lost those debates because he acted like somebody you'd like to "to quote Bill Buckley) "sock in the mouth." At the time, though, the best the press could offer was that "nobody gained any ground."

My guess is that 2004 will be about the same, and that Karl Rove is doing all he can to make it so.

Drunkblogging: As Eno pointed out, Steven will be doing his drunken best covering the debate tonight, and I don't pretend to be competing with him. I think I can handle the consumption part, but he's got me on the actually writing anything part. That said, I'm temporarily set up on a wireless system while I try to fix my computer problems (thanks to the roommate for the loan). So, as long as this tiny keyboard doesn't drive me crazy, I'll be doing a running commentary and post-game of my own. Largely, though, I'll be following the Vodkaman's post to see how his typing skills deteriorate with each drink. Though, at his request, I'll try to keep the refresh button from being overworked, so as to keep his server from crashing.