DEARBORN - My first impression from the debate is that two hours is a really long time. Beyond that, here's my take on the players, in no particular order:

Fred Thompson: it certainly wasn't a breakout performance, but he didn't fall flat on his face either. His answers on a couple of issues were more direct and specific than expected - and more so than some of his competitors - and his final answer about whether he waited too long finished on a favorable and humorous note for him. But, in general, throughout the debate Fred blended in on the stage among the rest. Depending on your perspective and how much importance you assigned to today's debate, that could mean that 1) Fred's campaign is toast because he needed to stand out and he didn't or 2) today was a pass/fail class and Fred did enough to clear the competence bar and keep his campaign on track.

Mitt Romney: He appeared relaxed, confident, and in his element, probably as a result of being more less on his home turf in a forum that played to his strength as a business exec. He got off to a fast start with a good line about it being unacceptable that Michigan in undergoing a "one-state recession" and had a sharp exhcange with Rudy over the line item veto. The problem for Romney is that he got lost in the shuffle in the second hour, and the most memorable moment involving him occurred when Ron Paul literally scoffed at Romney for wanting to let the lawyers figure out whether he needed to consult Congress over initiating a military strike on Iran - until Mitt's joke about Fred Thompson, that is. (Fred's comeback was pretty good as well). Mitt's final answer about "lack of optimism" being the biggest long term threat to the economy struck me as vapid.

Rudy Giuliani: Another solid performance. Rudy came off well in his exchange with Romney over the line item veto despite the fact he's probably in the minority on that issue with the base. The most notable part of Rudy's performance is that he took every possible opportunity to bash Hillary and the Democrats - so much so that it was conspicuous and potentially overdone.

John McCain: I had a hunch that McCain might be a dark horse "winner" of this debate, but it was an off night for him. The debate just ended and I can't think of single memorable thing he said during the entire two hours. What I do remember, and what most people will probably take away from today, was the trouble McCain had hearing the questions. Fair or not, it made him look old, and for the first time I found myself thinking about his age.

Mike Huckabee: He fell victim to his previous performances today. Huckabee has been so consistently good you know find yourself waiting for him to utter some knockout joke or soliloquy every time he opens his mouth. It was a good performance - and would have been more than good for many others on the stage - but I don't think Huckabee made any strides in shoring up the support of fiscal conservatives today.

Ron Paul: He looks different now with $5 million dollars in his pocket, doesn't he? A little more serious and formidable, not as easily waved away or dismissed as he was in the past. His opening riff on the "debasement of our currency" was quite good, and his aforementioned chastisement of Romney ("this talk about going to the lawyers is baffling to me. Open up the constitution and read it") was clearly his high point. Paul appeared stronger to me today, and the others had better get used to dealing with him because he isn't going away.

That's it for now. Off to the spin room.