[montomike]

Which interview were you watching? I was impressed with Bush. He came across as believing what he said. To me, that is the most important criteria in judging a politician during an interview. It only takes a few seconds to realize whether the interviewed is full of crap. I don't get that impression from W.

Russert was true to form. He hammers the Republicans but blows the Democrats.

[cubreporter]

The other thing I mentioned to my husband was Russert's appearance. He looked a little on the disheveled side. His collar and shirt did not look crisp and sharp. Maybe it was the end of the day but...for a prestigious intervew like this I would have thought he would have looked as great President Bush. I dont' know...was weird.

[Delta-Tango]

that is the most important criteria in judging a politician during an interview.

From your keyboard to the ears of all those undecided voters out there. To me, the most important criteria is to try hard to view it as an undecided rather than a partisan who wants validation -- to try and get a feel for how he comes across in flyover country. Frankly, he came across as insecure and tentative...at least to me. That's not a problem as he already has my vote. But the fact is that both candidates are going after about 20% of the electorate who are toss-ups right now. It is also early. Which is why I want the person who insisted he go on Meet the Press in February assigned to stuffing envelopes in Massachusetts -- where, as they say in medicine, he "can do no further harm."