Debate conclusions: Kerry wins on both style AND substance

A personal observation:

In 2000, Gore was usually judged in the debates to have won on "points", that is to say, his arguments were deemed more coherent, cogent, and generally on-target. Shrub, on the other hand, eventually managed to be perceived as the winner -- due mainly to spin, but mainly because it was deemed that his -style- was better than Gore's.

Thinking about last night's debate, I've come to the realization that Kerry did what Gore could not. He not only won on the substance of his debating points and statements, but he also won the style part.

Everywhere I read today, I see comments that all boil down to this: Kerry looked Presidential last night, and Bush did not.

What do you folks all think?

cheers,

. . . Kerry won fer sure.

Just wish we could set a little higher standard for the LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD.