The combination of Haliburton and Cheney's flip-flops on Iraq from 1991 to now (especially considering the air having been let out of the Bush administration's argument for the war), not to mention his lies about statements he made connecting 9/11, Al-Quieda, and Iraq and his various other dubious statements were all well-lit targets. Expectations for Edwards to pull out his best trial lawyer presentation appear to have worked against him as he failed to capitalize on the low-hanging fruit that was all but handed to him.
On the other hand, Edwards did almost definitely connect some parts of the viewing audience. While Edwards does exhibit the "youth and inexperience" that other Republican candidates have attacked in other opponents, his persona is certainly appealing to many, and surely the Democrats came away feeling the connection with their guy. If you like Edwards even slightly, you had to have some inkling of a dark shadow cast by Cheney over the whole evening.
Now that a few hours have passed, and some of the pundits have had their say, two things are clear. First, pundits are never to be trusted, but certainly some factual research that the collection of panelists and journalists were able to pull up following the debate is useful in weighing what was said during the event. Second, while I think Cheney did come out ahead in points-- so to speak-- with Edwards appearing on the defensive more than he should have, I don't think that Edwards really lost with the same magnitude that Cheney won. Time will tell, though...
Dan and Silicon Valley to Re-Unite
