Let me start by saying, it's painfully obvious that there's only one serious candidate worthy of the Presidency in this race, which sadly, means he will probably lose come November.  And then go on to win the Nobel Peace Prize.  Don't be fooled by this.  Whatever Obama's faults, and he has his share of them, he is the only viable choice for change of some kind in November.  Even if it's merely a change in the manner and tone of public discourse — and I do believe Obama has conducted himself with exemplary restraint throughout this long campaign — it's enough. 

Eight years ago, before he was back-stabbed by Bush and then became his bitch-boy, McCain was a somewhat viable candidate, himself.  Now he's a caricature — a cartoon.  And he just doesn't have that Presidential timber.  Obama does.  Watching McCain shuffle around the stage like an Alzheimer's wanderer in Debate No.2 didn't instill confidence in me, and won't in world leaders and markets either, especially with the Arctic Huntress as his second, just itching to get at that nucular button.  Nucular war is the be-all end-all, after all. 

Don't get me wrong.  McCain got in some good jabs last night, but taken as a whole, when you compare his demeanor to Obama's, it was a desperate display, a little like watching a way over-the-hill boxer staggering around the young up-and-comer, poking at him in the vain hope of landing a knock-out punch.  McCain didn't have any fancy footwork to speak of.  It was basically all poke and jab.  To the kidneys.  Again and again and again. 

Obama was cool as a cucumber throughout.  He was decent — relentlessly decent — even when asked by Moderator Bob Schieffer to trash Sarah Palin (McCain went after his old buddy Biden without blinking an eye).  Obama could be seen chuckling every time McCain used his time to plug a slogan in.  This was a bit of meta on Obama's part, editorializing, but not in the exasperated way Al Gore did in 2000 with his tortured sighs and eye rolls. 

By chuckling Obama was calling attention to the cynicism of his opponent.  It was as if he were saying, "please, John, come on.  This is too transparent."  And it was. I mean the whole Joe the Plumber shtick was as patronizing as Sarah Palin's "golly gee whizzes" and "Joe Sixpacks and Hockey Moms of the World Unite!"  Biden could often be seen in their debate smiling broadly and chuckling at her chutzpah, too.

McCain was too busy struggling to get to Obama's jugular — or any major artery, really — to do much more than snarl at his opponent a couple of times, employing every bit of snark he could find in the Idiot's Guide to Snark to little effect in the end.  He offered several backhanded compliments, acidly hailing his opponent's "eloquence," which is obviously the new "elitism".

I have to take issue with the charge, myself.  Obama's rhetoric can soar at times, but much of the debate he missed opportunities to state his case in simple, eloquent terms.  Eloquence is not the same as wordiness.  In fact, there's a certain unacknowledged John Kerryness to Obama's debate performances.  

At one point, for example, Obama is being interrupted, and appeals to McCain: "let me complete my response," instead of a simple, "let me finish."  Let's be clear.  There is no reason to say "let me complete my response."  None.  Ever.

There were other, much worse examples of Obamaldeegook, as when McCain accused Obama for the umpteenth time of having voted to raise taxes.  Obama answered, in part:

[T]he notion that I voted for a tax increase for people making $42,000 a year has been disputed by everybody who has looked at this claim that Sen. McCain keeps on making.  Even FOX News disputes it, and that doesn’t happen very often when it comes to accusations about me. So the fact of the matter is that if I occasionally have mistaken your policies for George Bush’s policies, it’s because on the core economic issues that matter to the American people, on tax policy, on energy policy, on spending priorities, you have been a vigorous supporter of President Bush.

A dodge worthy of Sarah Palin there.  McCain's claim "has been disputed"? Obama never addresses the claim itself, and whether or not it's true.  It sounds so patently dodgy, I don't even care if it's true or not now*. I mean, that something has been disputed doesn't mean anything.  Is the earth round or flat?  That's been disputed, too. 

But wordiness is not a mortal sin, and can even be endearing in certain circumstances (I'm banking on it, myself).  This election has been the Democrats' to lose all along.  Obama is in the midst of a perfect storm, and it's looking more likely every day that it will sweep him into the Oval Office.  But it's good to remember that even meteorologists have trouble predicting the weather with any real accuracy.  
___________________________________________
*It's sorta not, according to AP fact-checkers: "The vote was on a nonbinding resolution and did not increase taxes. The resolution assumed that President Bush's tax cuts would expire, as scheduled, in 2011. If that actually happened, it could mean higher taxes for people making as little as about $42,000. "