Tuesday proved a night of missed opportunities. The candidates resembled robots; their answers lacked passion and, at times, coherence. The atmosphere seemed flat. The format flattered neither the debaters, nor the moderator, nor the audience of common folk. Now we turn to the negatives.

The evening came after another day of economic turmoil. Expectations soared. Voters sought leadership, insight, and reassurance. The candidates pointed fingers and dispensed bromides. If John McCain had said, "my friends," one more time, he would have provoked a Quaker into throwing a brick at the screen.

Both candidates referred several hundred times to "my plan."

Richard Nixon had a plan, too.

So did Edward the Confessor, Pepin the Short, and Yaroslav the Mad.

The hungry sheep looked up and were not fed.

Regarding the reasons the nation -- and a world urged by the U.S. to mimic the U.S. -- has lurched toward the precipice, the Republican generally blamed Democrats and the Democrat generally blamed Republicans. McCain was a bit more bipartisan in his denunciations, but economics is not his forte. Barack Obama was right about lax regulation (the Clinton administration's complicity went unremarked, however; life did not go astray only after George Bush's inauguration, believe it or not), but why did he find it impossible to say, for instance, "We should have listened when John Snow and others warned us about Fannie and Freddie. My colleagues Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank really missed that one"? Obama's performance suggested the agent of change offers more of the senatorial same.

The candidates charged to the rescue of the middle classes. They explained the need to free up credit. They promised to protect households with mortgages -- the vast majority of which do not confront imminent foreclosure but whose members worry about financial security.

McCain had the most to gain, which means he suffered the greater loss. The town hall was supposed play to his strengths. Even a question as simple as the one asking the candidates to name their choice for secretary of the treasury drew not clarity but fog. Obama did no better. Warren Buffett would be dreadful in the job. The presidential nominees spoke of the profound differences between them. On the most significant piece of economic legislation since the New Deal, the two voted the same. Maybe that is a good thing. The season's first debate encouraged confidence in both contenders. The second seeded doubts.