I watched the Des Moines Register Democratic candidate debate partly out of sheer curiosity--to see if the Register or its editor and moderator, Carolyn Washburn, adjusted to the savage criticism they received after yesterday's GOP debate.

They did, to some extent; there was no prohibition on discussion of key issues, and relatively little "Nurse Ratched" scolding of candidates for violating petty debate rules. But the format remained one that provided few opportunities for candidate interplay, pretty much letting them broadcast their messages to audiences in Iowa and elsewhere. There was also, as occurred yesterday, a heavy focus on the Register's peculiar obsession with fiscal policy.

Given that basic framework, the debate enabled the Big Three to sharpen their central pitches. HRC got in one very good defining line, though it may have been too subtle for many viewers: Some demand change (Edwards), some hope for it (Obama), but I know you have to work for it. I wouldn't be surprised to see her develop that line in the next three weeks.

But Edwards and Obama got to strut their stuff more often and more effectively. If it's possible to hone a message into a blunt instrument, Edwards has done so with his anti-corporate theme, which he reinforced with almost every breath. And Obama achieved a nice balance between his wonkiness and rhetorical uplift. In the Frank Luntz focus-group reaction to the debate on Fox, Edwards and Obama scored very well. Indeed, it was a good reminder of how little attention regular folks pay attention to campaigns that several focus group members seemed happily surprised by Edwards' I've-fought-corporations-my-whole-life routine, which us political junkies have heard him do about 5,000 times.

The other candidates, denied any chance to spark a fight, did the best they could, with Dodd touting his experience, Biden his expertise, and Richardson his folksiness and resume (though he seemed to have been surprised by the Wen Ho Lee question). The only candidate who had a really bad day was Dennis Kucinich, who was excluded.

The only other points worth making were again by Luntz, who noted (a) that his Dem focus group participants were vastly more positive about all the candidates than the GOP focus group he convened yesterday, and (b) that all his research in Iowa convinces him that the Democratic turnout on Caucus Night is going to be very, very heavy. Regardless of how that affects the outcome on January 3, that's a good omen for Democrats next November.

UPDATE: It occured to me after posting the above that I made no reference to what is likely to become the one big sound-bite from the debate, Obama's "I look forward to having Hillary advise me" line, probably because it had no real meaning. But on reflection, the interesting thing about it is that Washburn blew the question in a way that turned it into a softball. In asking why Obama had so many Clinton administration advisors, she was presumably trying to say: Doesn't this show your inexperience? But because she didn't spell that out, the question actually conveyed the impression that Obama's managed to secure support from people who ought to be with Hillary. His rejoinder to HRC's friendly jeering about the question clinched the round for him quite nicely.