Reply to thread

I think the real question here is what constitutes a win.

Did Obama win because he did not implode and maintained his lead?

Did McCain win because he had better substance?

Did Obama win because McCain did not get a much needed bump from the debate?

I think given any context you look at it, McCain could have won the debate on substance, but lost on the idea that what needed to come out of the debate was a boost, which he did not get.  Thus, it is all in how you are interpreting what each candidate needed to do going in to the debate. (which of course differs from person to person) 

I do not see really a media conspiracy here, just a bunch of people asking the same question in different ways.