I like the two unarmed opponents crack. Also the bumper sticker Read My Lips - NO NEW TEXANS!

Yes, I watched the whole thing. Neither seemed ever to answer the question being asked - but the moderator was very good at extracting the one-sentence sub-structure of the various answers and stating the difference for the watchers. HE looked good, both candidates looked like they were looking for opportunities to "play their tape" and say their canned speeches. However, Gore was better and trying to get his stock answer to fit the question actually being asked, while Bush just ignored the question. Also, Gore "rose above" the personal insults in which Bush was wallowing. Anyone catch Bush not realizing he was still on camera, rolling his eyes and then pretending he hadn't been? Hasn't he learned anything yet? And the question about What would you do if the unexpected came up - Gore gave an example where he thought outside the box, used his diplomatic connections, and got the Russians to solve something the Americans couldn't. Bush gave an example where he hugged someone and cried. Excuse me?

But I do agree that we need Nader and Bat Pukannon (the greatest spoonerism of all time, don't you agree? And it's MINE!) in the debates. I was talking to a French friend who thinks we should do the two-fer elections that the French use - in the first, you vote for whom you REALLY WANT. THEN there is another runoff election between the top 2. That way marginal parties can actually be represented...