John Price, president of the Cherokee County Democratic Party, was also put off by Palin’s verbiage, but acknowledged she performed better than he expected.

“Her handlers obviously prepared her well,” said Price. “But she avoided answering any question that might have revealed a weakness, after telling the moderator that she was going to do exactly that. At the end of the debate, I found myself asking, ‘Now what did she say?’ She used a lot of coded words designed to make us feel warm and fuzzy, tried to sound folksy by dropping the ‘g’ at then end of words ending in ‘ing’ – and even gave a couple of winks to the television audience, but she had very little substance.”

Dr. Fritz Laux, associate professor of economics at NSU, was surprised to hear pundits say they thought Palin performed well during the debate.

“Clearly, she had some very good moments, but her presentation was weaker than I had expected,” said Laux. “Overall, I didn’t think it was so much that Palin was the winner, but that Biden was the loser. This is because the issue is not one of style, but substance. Biden seemed ‘smoother’ to me, but he was advocating socialism – protecting homeowners, socializing medicine, socializing the energy markets. Palin was advocating smaller government. Speaking style aside, anybody who can look at how our world works and still believes in socialism – well, that person, Biden, is just not qualified to be president. Perhaps that’s why public reaction to Palin’s performance seemed so positive.”

But most Press respondents disagreed with Laux’s view on Biden, saying he seemed quite presidential throughout the debate.

“Biden did a better job of responding to the questions put to the candidates, especially when asked to be specific about plans to effect the ‘change’ that both campaigns now claim to want,” said Price. “Palin probably squelched the talk from some Republicans that she ought to drop off the ticket, but she did not make me feel any more positive at the thought of her being voted to be second in line for the presidency.”

McQuitty indicated Biden had the appropriate style and tone for the venue.

“Biden showed his vast knowledge of the subjects under consideration, also showing he knew Obama’s position,” he said. “I was pleased with his debate style. He was considerate of both Palin and the moderator, never being condescending with Palin, but registering the right degree of umbrage when it was necessary. He never lost his cool under Palin’s attacks, some of which were targeted right at him.”

Help-In-Crisis Executive Director Deana Franke watched the debate with five of her family members, and believed Biden could have been tougher on Palin.

“I though he did a good job of staying with the question that was asked,” said Franke. “I thought he handled [Palin] with kid gloves, and I think if she is running for the second-highest office in the land, she should be able to debate as well and hard as anyone else. I don’t think any of the debates with [Sen.] Hillary [Clinton] were as ‘careful’ as this one.”

Barker-Harrold believes Biden was in a tough spot when it came to the public’s perception of his treatment of Palin.

“Biden was in a terrible position, while Palin could easily deliver her ‘zingers’ and then would appear tough and confrontational,” she said. “If Biden did the same thing, he would have been [labeled] condescending or sexist. I think Biden struck exactly the right tone and clearly won the debate.”

Dr. Ron Becker, assistant professor of political science at NSU, believes Biden was adept at navigating tough issues on both domestic and foreign policy.

“He surely appeared presidential in his tone and manner,” said Becker. “More impressive than getting an ‘A’ in style is his knowledge of the issues. He is an authority on nearly every aspect of the federal government.”

Becker said he felt it impossible to imagine a “President Palin” leading the country, and believes the McCain campaign is happy to have the debate behind them and will return to the plan of shielding her from the media.