"What mattered was the first half of the debate," contended Fred Barnes. "And that was foreign policy and 9/11 and the war on terrorism and Iraq."

Cheney won that part, Barnes said, because he did two things:

"He brought up this question of a 'global test' that [Kerry has set as his standard for U.S. military action.]

"John Edwards didn't have a very good answer, he sort of wandered on that," said Barnes.

Cheney also managed to get John Kerry's Senate record back on the table, said Barnes, and his demeanor during reaction shots made him look "like a man in charge."

Barnes' partner, Morton Kondracke, was less impressed by Cheney, saying he "was very dry for the most part. ... He came off as old, frankly."

Edwards, on the other hand, "looked so young by comparison that it was like a dog yapping at a grown-up's heels," Kondracke said.

"They punched a few times back and forth and I guess that's the only excitement we got out of it. And I think most viewers were tempted, about midway, to go watch the baseball game."

Bill Kristol thought the veep scored a near knockout, noting, "Cheney clearly won the first half on national security."

While acknowledging that Edwards did well during the domestic policy segment, Kristol added, "But then you have to ask, 'Well, which of those halves could possibly have changed the dynamic of the campaign?'"

Clearly the first half, said Kristol, because it featured a detailed dissection of Kerry's Senate record.

"Cheney repeatedly said that [John Kerry] has a 20-year record in the Senate that makes him unsuitable to be commander in chief in a post-9/11 world."

Ceci Connolly thought Edwards was somewhat effective on Iraq war strategy, noting, "He was able to point to recent comments by Paul Bremer about not having enough troops."

However, the North Carolina Democrat did better when the subject turned to the economy and health care, she said.

Editor's note: