Rachel: We saw this debate format die a slow death on camera tonight

Love Chris Matthews "This was certainly not an MSNBC debate, huh?"

In previous debates a panel of media types asked questions of the candidates. Sometimes the questions were clearly biased with softballs to one and hardballs to the other. Here there were no questions, just topics and the candidates themselves went back and forth directly responding to each other.

On this one there can be no charges of media bias.

Best format I have ever seen, and I am old enough to remember the Nixon-Kennedy debates. Dad watched them on TV.

It was formless, and in this case, the moderator allowed Romney to completely take over.

Some media type asked him how he would feel if his wife were raped. What kind of question was that? Over the years I have heard a bunch of really stupid questions.

With the candidate directly adressing each other was a much better format, altough a tougher moderator would be good.

Perhaps the format would have been good if the Moderator had been competent. This was just a two-man clusterf*ck.

because of some critical decision, and couldn't fall back asleep afterwards?

I think he was expecting a weaker Romney. He won't make that mistake again. Unfortunately, the first debate is always the most important one. I always has the most viewers and sets the tone for the following debates.

Anything goes as long as you obviously the bullying berater instead of a debater.

You have to be ready for anything your opponent may do. If you go in expecting your opponent to be a nice guy then you will lose.

Because guess what? You can be a really nice guy and lie your ass off. Cons do it all the time.

He sounded the way I do when I've lost sleep too many nights in a row. Have a hard time connecting dots and articulating. All the caffeine in the world doesn't put you back together again. Good nights sleep and suddenly you're "on" again.

I don't think he was overconfident at all. I think he didn't know how to come back at a lying bully. That is a problem most decent people face, especially when you're exhausted.

Now he knows how much of a bully he's up against, he'll come back prepared to deal with a bully. It's a different world calling out a bully while remaining above the fray and not falling into the bully's trap of "did not. did too. did not. did too."

That was the first debate after the League of Women Voters disowned hosting the debates due to assorted demands from the candidates campaigns.

This was the time when "from the candidates campaigns" meant Lee Atwater, Roger Ailes, Floyd Brown etc.

I just didn't feel like googling to get the details.

Has a lot of potential.

But the moderator needs to have a bullwhip, just in case.

Each person gets X time with a yellow light that tells them when they have 30 seconds left, then red for ten seconds. Then the mike goes dead and the other candidate gets his alloted time. During their time they can say anything they want to. At the end of a segment (Y turns each) then a topic is announced for the next segment. The candidates take turns going first.

Each candidate must stay behind their lecturn. Penalties for violating that rule. (Sorry, but Gore was wrong to leave his stool and go over and get in Bush's face.)

Each candidate searched first for hidden notes or recievers.

The moderator would not ask any questions of either candidate. He would simply state the rules and announce the topics.

But seriously, you could have it all programmed, the questions, how long for each side, whose mike is on, all done by computer.

"Hello Americans, my name is HAL, and I will be your moderator tonight."

Or the moderator would have controlled the debate.

It is not the moderator's job to challenge the truthfulness of either candidate. That is the candidate's jobs. If Obama can't handle Romney, how is he going to handle some international bad guys that make Romeny look like a creampuff and there is no moderator? Putin for example.

Obama is just going to have to come out swinging in the next two debates.