From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) might get a real challenge in his 2008 reelection bid. Kentucky Attorney General Greg Stumbo formed a "testing the waters" committee, called McConnell "out of touch with Kentucky" and is considering running, reports the Louisville Courier-Journal.

McConnell, in his fifth term, has taken heat from all sides for sticking with President Bush on Iraq and initially on immigration -- before he ultimately voted against the measure. Stumbo will likely look to capitalize particularly on immigration in the conservative state. But Stumbo could have his own problems with a 2001 lawsuit by a woman, who claimed he had fathered her child while he married to another woman and was not paying child support. DNA tests showed Stumbo was, in fact, the father and he then began paying child support. He also opposed tougher drunken-driving laws in 1991 as a member of the Kentucky General Assembly and then "pleaded guilty to public intoxication and paid a $100 fine after his car ran into a ditch."

And McConnell has raised a record-breaking amount of money for the race -- $7.6 million with $5.7 million cash on hand.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Earlier, we noted Obama appeared to sweep the focus groups -- not true. Clinton won a Survey USA instanta-poll and tied in a focus group in Nevada that CNN conducted.

The Survey USA poll showed Clinton won the debate with 39%, Obama was next with 15%, then Biden with 14%, then Edwards with 10%. She also won on the question, "Who's the best Democratic candidate?" Here's a full breakdown of the poll.

The Nevada focus group had Bill Richardson and Hillary Clinton in a tie with six votes each. Obama was next followed by John Edwards

Also, Senior Clinton Adviser Howard Wolfson appeared this morning on MSNBC with Tim Russert during the network's "Super Tuesday" coverage. He pointed out the difference between Clinton and Obama on the issue of meeting with dictators and defended Clinton's stance that it's not realistic to pull troops out of Iraq immediately.

"The difference is we should have diplomatic conversations with other countries, but that doesn't mean that as a candidate you commit to meeting with [these leaders] in your first year without any preconditions," Wolfson said.

Wolfson defended Clinton when Russert asked if last night's debate was an "open-book test" because the 3,000 YouTube questions posed were all posted online.

"No one questions Senator Clinton can stand up on her own two feet," said Wolfson, noting the campaign and Senator Clinton herself had reviewed "some" of the questions beforehand.

Wolfson also hit back when Russert questioned him on Clinton's high negatives in some polls.

"Polls show her beating Republicans one on one, so we feel very good," Wolfson said.

"So there's not a problem?" Russert asked bluntly.

"You know what, I'd rather be winning than losing."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro

Former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said on a conference call with reporters that she thought Hillary Clinton's answer at last night's debate on meeting with dictators "showed she had an understanding of the whole process. It is necessary to have lower-level people make the initial contact to clear the brush away."During last night's debate, Clinton said she would not meet with dictatorial leaders "without preconditions" in her first year as president. In contrast, Obama answered that he would.

The Obama campaign today sent out a memo, claiming Clinton "reversed herself last night, disagreeing with Senator Obama's assertion that we should use every tool at the president's disposal to address problems before they become threats."

They include as evidence an April quote from Clinton in which she said, "I think it is a terrible mistake for our president to say he will not talk with bad people."

When asked about this, Albright responded, "She made very clear it was essential to do the pre-diplomatic actions" by sending lower-level envoys first. "She didn't say there would be no engagement. For me, and I've been involved in this, she showed a nuanced and sophisticated understanding of how this process works. She did not change her position."

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Carly Zakin
*** A Star Was Born: The star of last night's debate -- outside the real Obama Girl and one of the actors from Entourage, who both strolled around the spin room -- was the format. And we mean that as a positive: It was a great forum and a wonderful change of pace from what we've seen before. What's more, the YouTube questions were quite good, and CNN did a good job with timing. But, and this is a BIG but, it was not a debate. Our main criticism was the moderator and his lack of understanding when news was about to break. Anderson Cooper (who's never been mistaken for a political junkie) missed a HUGE opportunity to give all of the TV networks and political reporters a chance to air/write a Clinton vs. Obama lead when he didn't follow up with Clinton after Obama jabbed her on her war vote. That's the down side of an event that is so reliant on a technological format: The news being made gets lost. For all the fun that this format created, the candidates never actually debated.

Video: NBC's Chuck Todd offers his first read on last night's debate

*** Clinton: She did nothing to lose her front-runner status. Obama had to go out of his way to take a shot at her (and then the moderator didn't follow up). The contrast between Obama's answer and Clinton's on the question of if they would meet with controversial world leaders was the difference between someone running for the Democratic nomination and someone running for commander-in-chief. She got the better of him on that one (see today's Miami Herald for proof). But on further reflection, one could argue her answer -- at least compared with Obama's -- also seemed like something you'd hear from the current White House. And the Obama camp has passed around news clippings with past quotes from Clinton calling for engagement with Syria, Iran, and North Korea -- especially this one: " I think it is a terrible mistake for our president to say he will not talk with bad people."

*** Obama: While Clinton bested him on that one question (and it was important because it exemplified her experience argument), Obama has really improved from his earlier performances -- he's much better answering questions in 60 seconds, and he did a very good job tonight of getting key parts of his biography in his answers. Perhaps more importantly, he unanimously won the post-debate instant-polls. Why did Obama do so much better in the various focus groups, but Clinton did better among the pundits? It's realism vs. idealism on display. While the chattering class watches these debates with an eye on the general election, many of us may very well underestimate the pull of idealism among Democratic primary voters. Also, Obama may have also done better in the focus groups, because the last 30 minutes of the debate were his strongest -- and last impressions can have a greater influence on these people.

Video: Gravel and Obama spar on who will affect the most change

*** Edwards: He had his moments. His story about the man who couldn't get the operation in order to talk until he was 50 was riveting. And his "Hair" video is going to get plenty of play today. Yet maybe it's just us, but the debate seemed to separate Clinton and Obama from everyone else. Also, is his campaign going to get negative feedback for suggesting that he didn't like Clinton's outfit (when asked what he likes and doesn't like about her)? It seemed innocent enough, but some women may have viewed the shot as having a tinge of sexism.

Video: Candidates trade gentle barbs to wrap debate

*** The Rest: Of the candidates not named Obama or Clinton, Biden probably had the best night. He was passionate when necessary and blunt when called for -- he was the straight talker on that stage Monday night. Richardson was better but didn't get much of an opportunity. Dodd, with the limited time he got, was strong as well. In fact, everyone was better last night. Practice makes perfect.

*** Ames, Here We Come: While the Democrats were debating, the second-tier Republicans were busy beating each other up in advance of the Ames Straw Poll. There's a fascinating underground campaign going on in Iowa between Brownback and Tancredo -- but will anyone pay attention?

*** On The Trail: Brownback holds a fundraiser in San Antonio, TX; Clinton participates in a forum on energy and the environment in New Hampshire; Edwards campaigns in South Carolina before heading to Georgia for a "Small Change for Big Change" fundraiser; Giuliani meets with voters in Riverside, CA; Huckabee stumps in Iowa; Hunter is in DC, where he speaks at a Christians in Cable Breakfast; McCain hits fundraisers in Michigan and Illinois; Obama is in New York City; and Richardson campaigns in Iowa.

*** Another Super Tuesday: For coverage of these events -- and much, much more -- tune into MSNBC's all-day "Super Tuesday" coverage of politics.
 
Countdown to the Ames Straw Poll: 18 days
Countdown to MA-05 Special Election: 41 days
Countdown to LA GOV election: 88 days
Countdown to Election Day 2007: 105 days
Countdown to LA GOV run-off (if necessary): 116 days
Countdown to Iowa: 173 days
Countdown to Tsunami Tuesday: 195 days
Countdown to Election Day 2008: 469 days
Countdown to Inauguration Day 2009: 546 days

One of our favorite dial testers, Rich Thau, had a group in New Hampshire of Democrats and indies. And like the CNN and Fox focus groups, his survey had Obama doing the best (in terms of improvement from pre-debate to post-debate; Obama and Edwards tied with the highest post-debate score).

Video: Handicapping the Democratic primary

We asked Thau about one specific moment -- the two answers Clinton and Obama gave to the Bush-Clinton fatigue question. Thau tells First Read: "Clinton spiked to 80 on first sentence about it being a problem Bush was elected in 2000." But: "Proud of husband's record dips to 70s. Any one of us could be a better president than current President spikes back above 80."

Obama: "...who has track record to bring about change" scores at 70."... who can overcome the special interests" spikes to mid 70s (high point of his answer)." So it looks like both answers worked...

The only GOP candidate mentioned last night by name was Mitt Romney. That had to make the folks in Boston smile. They are trying VERY hard to engage the Democrats on a daily basis. 

If you thought the debate was centered on Clinton and Obama, you weren't the only one. "Many questions in the nationally televised session were aimed at the two leading candidates, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), and they used the forum to challenge each other more directly than they have in past debates."

The format -- not the candidates -- was last night's star, the New York Times says. "Most of the video questions posed in last night's Democratic debate were more memorable than the answers, proving that novices can ask good questions, but not necessarily elicit better answers than professional journalists."

Perhaps the biggest flaw of last night's TV event? The candidates were given the answers to the test. "Because many of the submitted questions -- ranging from health care to predatory lending by banks -- were posted online before the debate, the eight Democratic presidential campaigns were able to view many of the questions ahead of the debate and prepare answers."

The Washington Post's Shales seemed to like the YouTube questions, but was disappointed in the moderator. "Cooper was obsessed with the candidates' keeping answers brief, frequently interrupting them or cutting them off. This impulse, supposedly designed to curb long-windedness, leads to 'debates' that are just collections of quotes and sound bites, like political commercials, and is precisely the kind of thing that has helped trivialize issues and discourage voter interest."

Hotline On Call notes the gender imbalance of the questioners --  2-1 men vs. women

Obama's missed jab… He took a shot at Clinton last night, but because the moderator missed the hit, many of the print reporters buried it. Says the Los Angeles Times in its 15th graph: "It was 'terrific' that Clinton asked the Pentagon about its plans, Obama said. 'I also know that the time for us to ask how we were going to get out of Iraq was before we went in, and that is something that too many of us failed to do,' he said. The partisan audience applauded. Clinton was expressionless." 

The NY Post gives the debate to Obama with the headline, "Obama chills Hill: Attacks her over Iraq in Wacky 'snowman' debate."

The upside of the forum: "While some of the questions were on topics routinely raised in candidate forums, others were subjects rarely broached by journalists: whether the candidates had discussed sex education with their children, for one, and if speculation about Al Gore as a presidential contender "had hurt y'all's feelings?"

The Chicago Tribune adds that last night's debate's avoided "being this campaign season's version of a candidate playing saxophone on a talk show, the few dozen amateur questions that co-sponsor CNN selected from among almost 3,000 posted to YouTube led to a relatively lively and informative two hours." 
 
Check out this headline in the Miami Herald: "Obama, Edwards say they would meet with Castro, Chavez." Is that a headline for a candidate who can carry Florida?

The Hartford Courant's Lightman says Dodd "has been a constant critic of past debates, saying he did not get enough time and he was often ignored. By the end of Monday night's … affair, his actual air time still lagged behind front-runners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as John Edwards. Dodd got 8 minutes, 39 seconds for his answers, roughly the same as New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. But Monday, Dodd did get the first question."

And now for the pundit reviews… Politico's Simon gave the win to Edwards, followed by Clinton and Obama. He liked Edwards' voice raising, thought Clinton was playing not to lose, and that Obama's jabs at Clinton were good but too subtle.

Here's the Wall Street Journal's front-page teaser: "Clinton drove home her readiness to be commander-in-chief, while trading tweaks with Obama and Edwards in a Democratic presidential debate with queries taken from submissions via YouTube."

Iowa columnist Doug Burns scored it big for Clinton. "No longer should the question be: Can a woman be president? With her fourth in a series of crushing Democratic debate performances the question everyone in America should be asking themselves: What have we been missing by eliminating more than half our population from the application process for this job since the late 18th century?"

And the Des Moines Register's Yepsen says "hats off" to CNN and YouTube for the debate format. As far as winners and losers, Yepsen calls Clinton "cool and cogent… Since she's the front-runner, until she stumbles -- or is tripped up -- she'll remain the front-runner." He said Obama and Edwards "played to a draw." He adds that Dodd and Richardson "gained the most." He called Biden's performance "mixed." Kucinich "seems to be a protest candidacy - or an ego trip." "Kooky," "loose cannon" Gravel's attacks "have grown tiresome and have moved beyond constructive criticism."

EDWARDS: Yesterday, we failed to highlight a very personal profile of Elizabeth Edwards from Saturday's Wall Street Journal. It's something many folks should read.

RICHARDSON: The campaign is up with a new TV ad that focuses on Iraq and notes what he did benefit-wise for National Guard troops.

BROWNBACK:

If you are wondering why Brownback is getting so aggressive on Romney of late, we've got three words for you: "Ames Straw Poll." The latest Brownback attack on Romney has to do with Romney's changing stance on gay rights, according to CBN's Brody. Meanwhile, Romney's not alone in getting attacked these days. Brownback's campaign has been making phone calls questioning Tancredo's position on abortion rights because one of Tancredo's campaign contributors formed a Michigan chapter of Planned Parenthood in the 1970s.

A Tancredo spokesman tells First Read the congressman was genuinely hurt and surprised when they played a recording of one of the calls for Tancredo -- particularly because Tancredo considered Brownback a friend. First Read also contacted the man who gave the donation to Tancredo, Dr. John Tanton, who told us, "I think it's ridiculous." Tanton, who is also the founder of the hard-line immigration group the Foundation for American Immigration Reform, said he supports Tancredo on immigration -- not on abortion. "If you're going to be real pure and take money from only people who agree with you on every issue," Tanton sad, "you're going to have a pretty short campaign."

GIULIANI:

The Boston Globe's Scott Helman says of Giuliani's new radio ads, "The emphasis on Giuliani's fiscal record reflects a recognition that his support for abortion rights and his history of supporting gay rights and gun control make it unlikely he will win over all of the GOP's socially conservative voters. So he's appealing to their pocketbooks instead. The New York Daily News says Giuliani's new early state ads are due to "growing concern within his campaign about spotty poll numbers."

While the Democrats were debating in South Carolina, Giuliani blasted the three front-runners from San Francisco yesterday. Calling Clinton, Obama, and Edwards "'a bunch of pessimists and defeatists,'" he maintained that "'they do not understand a capitalist economy. They think it's bad. They think it's bad to make money. They think it's bad to be rich,' Giuliani said. 'I'm a little kid that grew up in Brooklyn. I think it's great to be rich.'"

HUCAKBEE: Just curious: Why does the slimmed-down Huckabee hold meetings at pizza joints in Iowa? Imagine attending and then getting lectured by Huckabee about your weight while eating a piece of dough with melted cheese.

The Politico has some behind-the-scenes on the efforts by both Obama and Clinton to court members of Congress. Remember, on the Democratic side, members of Congress aren't just delegates --they are SUPER-delegates, with powers beyond your imagination!  Actually, they simply have the power to change their presidential preference at any moment. So it seems to us superdelegates live their life like a finger in the wind, never knowing where to turn to, before the primaries set in. 

Live free and shoot machine guns? Apparently Manchester City Republicans are planning a fundraiser at a firing range next month. On Aug. 5, these Republicans will arm donors with Uzis, M-16 rifles and other automatic weapons for a target practice at a local firing range. Here's the best part: All of the GOP candidates are being invited to attend. The downside? The fundraiser is the same day as the next GOP debate set for Iowa. We can only hope some of the candidates decide to fly to Manchester for this.

Both Congress and Bush are unpopular, but Bush has lost the trust of the country on the war, according to a new Washington Post/ABC poll. "As the president and Congress spar over war policy, both receive negative marks from the public for their handling of the situation in Iraq. But by a large margin, Americans trust Democrats rather than the president to find a solution to a conflict that remains enormously unpopular. And more than six in 10 in the new poll said Congress should have the final say on when to bring the troops home."

So did the White House get its diplomatic corps too involved in politics during the last six years? It's going to be a huge topic on the liberal blogs today. "In a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, asked whether the briefings inappropriately politicized the diplomatic agencies or violated prohibitions against political work by most federal employees. 'I do not understand why ambassadors, in Washington on official duty, would be briefed by White House officials on which Democratic House members are considered top targets by the Republican party for defeat in 2008. Nor do I understand why department employees would need to be briefed on "key media markets" in states that are "competitive" for the president,' Biden wrote."

A day after the Democrats debated in Charleston, SC, Bush today travels there to speak at Charleston Air Force Base. He then heads back to the White House to meet with the King of Jordan.

NBC's Ken Strickland reports that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will testify before a feisty Senate Judiciary Committee at 9:30 am ET. While the session is billed as a general "oversight" hearing, it will likely focus on various controversies within the Justice Department he runs, such as the firing of nine US Attorneys and the warrantless surveillance program. Committee Chairman Pat Leahy may have set the tone for the hearing with a letter he sent to Gonzales last week.  Leahy said he told Gonzales that when he last appeared before the committee in April, he often responded to questions "that you could 'not recall'... the most conservative count had you failing to provide answers well over 60 times." 

"I would like to avoid a repeat of that performance," he wrote to the AG. "In order to assist you in your preparation," Leahy sent him a dozen questions in advance of tomorrow's hearing. Top among them are questions about his role in the firings of the US Attorneys, abuses of National Security Letters, and the legal basis for the surveillance program.  While the committee's Democrats have routinely dismissed Gonzales as ineffective and made repeated calls for his removal, some Republicans have also been as critical. In his last Senate hearing, Sen. Tom Coburn asked Gonzales to resign. And Arlen Specter, the panel's top Republican, has all but asked Gonzales to quit.

Meanwhile, the Washington Times says Senate Republicans are preparing to go on the offensive to chastize Majority leader Harry Reid and the Democratic-led Congress "for endlessly debating the Iraq war, stalling judicial nominations and squandering time on at least 300 investigations of the Bush administration."

The Obama camp was quick out of the gate -- about 30 minutes after the debate ended -- with a press release containing a transcript of a report of CNN's focus group watching the debate.

Wolf Blitzer: Mary Snow is out in Manchester, New Hampshire, the state with the first primary watching this with some voters who are undecided, Mary, and what kind of sense did you get from those voters?

Mary Snow: Well, Wolf, there's a surprise here tonight. We're here with 24 Democrats, independents, who thought that Senator Hillary Clinton would be the best performer here tonight, but the results that we just got in, this is a focus group; show that Barack Obama got the most favorable in terms of the best performance from the 24 people who are here tonight. Of course, it's unscientific and coming in second senator Joe Biden and third John Edwards. Again, this is all unscientific results from this focus group, but clearly throughout this debate Senator Barack Obama was showing some favorable responses to his answers. Some of the things that he got favorable responses were when he talked about fighting lobbyists, particularly on health care. Wolf.

From NBC's Mark Murray
The scene in the post-debate spin room was a familiar one. Biden, Dodd, and Kucinich spoke to reporters. The front-runners did not -- but had key campaign aides and surrogates filling in instead. Yet there was one big difference: Hollywood stars also made an appearance.

When we walked into the room, we immediately spotted the actor who plays director Billy Walsh in "Entourage" (Rhys Coiro). Obama Girl was also there, too. In fact, we spied one network correspondent, who exclaimed to his camera crew: "There's Obama Girl -- let's get her."

Admittedly, none were true A-list stars. But we Washington reporters are suckers for any kind of Hollywood actor -- or even a YouTube actress.

From NBC's Chuck Todd
With so many debates and forums, there are two things that matter, overall impressions or stand-out moments.  The star of this event was clearly the format, and I mean that as a positive. This was a great forum, a wonderful change of pace from what we've had before. These were good questions and CNN did a good job with timing. My only critique of the format was the moderator and his lack of understanding when a mini-debate was about to break out. Anderson Cooper (who's never been mistaken for a political junkie) missed a HUGE opportunity to give all of the TV nets and the media a chance to air/write a Clinton v. Obama lead. That's the down side of an event that is so reliant on a complicated technology format, the news being made gets lost. For all the fun that this format created, the candidates never did, um, debate.

Now, as for the overall impressions, Clinton did nothing to lose her frontrunner status. Obama had to go out of his way to take a shot at her and the moderator missed the shot and denied us a BIG moment.  Clinton's answer about when/if she'd meet with certain controversial world leaders/dictators. The contrast between Obama's answer and Clinton's answer was the difference between someone running for the Dem nomination and someone running for Commander in Chief. She got the better of him on that one.

This isn't to say Obama wasn't solid, he was. In fact, he got stronger as the debate wore on. She was simply better on that one question and it was important because it exemplified her experience argument. All that said, Obama has really improved. He's much better answering questions in 60-seconds than he was in the earlier debates. He didn't get his shot off at Clinton in a way that got Cooper's attention. Is that Cooper's fault or Obama's? I say it's Cooper's but maybe Obama could have delivered the punch harder. BTW, Obama did a very good job tonight of getting key parts of his personal biography in his answers. In previous debates, his answers seemed a bit impersonal, tonight Obama came across much better and viewers got to know him a bit.

One more important Clinton-Obama exchange to highlight: the question about Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton fatigue. She had a great retort re: the 2000 election. But Obama's answer was a very good closing statement and trumped her answer because he attacked it seriously. How voters view the two answers Clinton and Obama gave, I think, will determine who the Democrats nominate. I'd love to see side-by-side dial-testing on those two answers to THAT one question.

As for the rest of the field: Edwards started the evening on the defensive (thanks to the early questions he got), but had his moments. His story about the man who couldn't get the operation in order to talk until he was 50 was riveting.  But of the candidates not named Obama or Clinton, Biden probably had the best night. He was passionate when necessary and blunt when called for. He was the straight talker on that stage Monday night. Richardson was better but didn't get much of an opportunity. Dodd, with the limited time he got, was strong as well. But one always got the impression that Dodd had to crash the party in order to get attention.

Of the YouTube submissions: Dodd's was the most memorable for me. Edwards' video becomes better on second viewing but was hard to get when first haired, er, aired on CNN. None of the others were as memorable.

UPDATE: There was a legitimate question in the comments about what moment I was talking that Cooper missed. Obama criticized Clinton for being late to the game in her criticism of the Pentagon for NOT having a plan for withdrawal. My apologies for the lack of detail.

From NBC's Mark Murray
It took a while before we ever got a question on Iraq, but it was in this debate where we saw the sharpest differences between the candidates on the war. Obama finally went after Clinton's war vote. After she talked about her fight with the Pentagon over withdrawal plans, Obama said withdrawal plans -- now -- are good to discuss. But more important was thinking about such plans before voting for the war.

Richardson, meanwhile, continually stressed his plan to withdraw troops from Iraq within six months, with no residual forces. Biden talked about his plan to divide Iraq into three parts (Shiite, Sunni, and Kurd). And Kucinich and Gravel emphasized their anti-war stances.

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Did CNN do Obama a favor by making his YouTube the last candidate video?

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Somebody did well in debate prep!  (Thank you B.B.?) That Clinton answer on the 28 years, same two families in charge, was a good one. I'm still convinced it could be a problem for her in the long run ("it" being the issue of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton fatigue), but she did well tonight on the question.

Hillary's response? "I think it was a problem that Bush was elected. I'm running on my own merits, but I am very proud of my husband's accomplishments."

Is there a better prepared candidate?

From NBC's Mark Murray
It took four debates, but we finally got a question about if Clinton wins the nomination, then the general election, and then a second term -- the country could have 28 straight years of Bushes or Clintons in the White House. Clinton sidestepped the question, delivering a blow to Bush instead. "I think it is a problem that Bush won the election in 2000," she said. "I always thought someone else won in that election."

Clinton added that she is running on her own merits, but I'm "proud of my husband's record as president."

Obama followed, "Who's got a track record to bring about change?... Who can overcome the special interest in Washington?"

From NBC's Chuck Todd
We're getting toward the end of this debate but on the issue of health care, Edwards appeared to get the best of both Clinton and Obama on the issue. Until that answer, it wasn't clear Edwards was going to have one memorable moment.

From NBC's Andrew Merten
Gravel and Kucinich were the only ones who said they DIDN'T arrive in Charleston for the debate in a private jet.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
On health care, "I've got a plan; John's got a plan. Hopefully everyone on this stage will have a plan." Hmm.

Obama then took a shot at Edwards' health care plan.

Edwards' "When are we going to do anything about this?" was a strong plead.

He did his Ryan Seacrest thing -- asking people to text "Peace."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Is this format the new town hall debate? These are prepared questions, which eliminates the robotic, nervous town hall questioners. Maybe it's because it's my generation, but I have always liked being able to have a little fun mixed with seriousness.

Traditional "town hall" formats may stick around for this general election cycle and the next and the next. But it might be the minority when my generation gets to the age where they actually vote.

From NBC's Mark Murray
He used the metaphor of digging out of the hole of Iraq -- and the narrarator was the guy from the movie trailers. Nice!

From NBC's Chuck Todd
Overall, as I've said earlier, I like this format very much. The lone downside? There's been ZERO engagement between the candidates. A few times the candidates wanted to debate but the moderator wouldn't allow it.