MSNBC: “This was not a good debate for Obama, period.”

I didn’t watch, so I will have to rely on those who did. Chuck Todd did, and said Obama had a very bad night:

In the first 40 minutes of the debate, most of the questioning was on Obama’s negatives (except for a lone Bosnia-sniper question to Clinton) and that’s what helped create what was a near disastrous performance by Obama in those first 40 minutes. He was weak in a lot of his answers on his personal negatives. (Did he really compare Tom Coburn to a one-time ’60s radical/terrorist?) Clinton, meanwhile, piled on, particularly (and surprisingly, actually) on Ayers. While I’m not sure if Clinton’s piling on ever is good for her in the long run — see her current poll standing — it created some post-debate issues for Obama. Many news organizations will feel compelled to do Ayers stories in the next few days. While some may question the fairness and relevancy of the Ayers issue, it’s not going to be good for Obama.

So Sean Hannity and Co. have been talking about Bill Ayers for months now, but Hillary mentions him in a debate and the press finally wake up. It’s sad, really. You know this isn’t the first time they have heard about the connection between Bill Ayers and Barack Obama. I mean, do a Google Search.

If they do turn up the heat on Barack, there is no way Hillary is going to bail out of this campaign. This might turn out to be the most important debate of the race.