I am increasingly troubled that the focus is all on form, not on substance.

I think the polls usually show that form is more influential than substance. It's hard to avoid talking about form when you have one candidate who is a gaffe machine and another who has had trouble forming coherent answers in interviews.

It's hard to avoid talking about form when you have one candidate who is a gaffe machine and another who has had trouble forming coherent answers in interviews.

True. But I feel like a political zombie right now - wandering around shouting: "I want Brains!!! BRAIIIINNNNNNSSS!!"

Gwen Ifill is moderating, right? I have faith she'll ask good questions. The NYT has an editorial today with suggested questions.

You may but the right is already getting hysterical about the fact that she has a book in progress about the impact/historical significance of Obama's candidacy. The idea being that she has a conflict of interest since her book will be much more successful if he is.

The idea being that she has a conflict of interest since her book will be much more successful if he is.

Yeah, but the McCain campaign knew that (or should have known that) when they agreed to have Ifill be the moderator.

I just had my first experience with the magic of cell phones -- a cab driver just called me from my father's cell phone, which he had left in the cab. I gave him my parents' address, and he said he'd drop off the phone! Assuming he does that, instead of robbing my grandmother or some other awful thing, how great!

Yeah, but the McCain campaign knew that (or should have known that) when they agreed to have Ifill be the moderator.

Which is good for them. Gwen Ifill is a pro, she'll be fair, but if the debate doesn't go well for Palin, they can blame the ref.

I think she ought to bring along a backup moderator, and ask if either of the candidates objects to her being a moderator, AS THEY AGREED MONTHS AGO WHEN GWEN'S BOOK WAS ALREADY ANNOUNCED THROUGHOUT THE PRESS INCLUDING FOx NEWS AND TIME MAGAZINE. If there is any objection, here are five college debating team coaches to choose from.

Yeah, it's not like she wrote the damn book yesterday.

plus, Ifill has such a stellar reputation (at least, I think so)

So am I the only one looking at this debate as pure dog-n-pony show? The VP debate (even Quayle!) never actually changes any minds; the best real purpose it has (if there is one) is to focus on "is this person competent to take over", which has already been answered on both sides, and I think that's normal these days -- it was more of an issue when there was a lot less media attention and a relatively unknown VP nominee could stay relatively unknown.

I'm making popcorn. I'll throw some popcorn at the TV from time to time. This will make the dog extremely happy. I'll say snarky things on the internets, here and with my coworkers on Twitter.

I actually think there's a lot more substantive stuff out there this cycle than in a lot of past cycles; I think that the combination of Palin and the economy has finally shaken the media into asking more and following the script less than they ever did with either round of Bush. But the VP debate is all about the popcorn-tossing.