Reax from editorial pages around the country:

The Los Angeles Times says it was too close to call:

"In a debate that both candidates could ill-afford to lose Friday night, neither did. John McCain proved he was resolute and tough; Barack Obama demonstrated that he was smart and polished. And in this case, a tie could be said to favor either."

The Wall St. Journal gives round one to McCain:

"The first Presidential debate last night was notable for playing to type. Neither candidate broke from talking points, neither one made a gaffe, and both men won on the grounds where they are most comfortable -- John McCain on foreign policy, and Barack Obama on domestic issues...

As planned by the commission on debates, most of the night was devoted to foreign policy and there we give the clear edge to Mr. McCain."

The Boston Globe gives the edge to Obama:

"Obama was assured and a bit cerebral, showing a command of policy but also reaching for a grander vision of an America that could be admired and respected again in the world."

Not surprisingly, the New York Times thinks McCain didn't do well:

"But Mr. McCain's talk of experience too often made him sound like a tinny echo of the 20th century. At one point, he talked about how Ronald Reagan's "S.D.I." helped end the cold war. We suspect that few people under the age of 50 caught the reference. If he was reaching for Reagan's affable style, he missed by a mile, clenching his teeth and sounding crotchety where Reagan was sunny and avuncular."

Equally as unsurprising, the conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review says Obama bombed:

"Throw in his bumbling, stumbling and naivete on national security and foreign policy and Barack Obama came across last night as exactly what he is -- one of the most inexperienced politicians ever nominated for president...And John McCain never looked more presidential."

The Chicago Sun-Times doesn't declare a winner, but says the debate brought out the best in both men:

"On Friday night, they got it right. At their first debate, John McCain and Barack Obama reminded the nation that two fine candidates are running for president, both of them smart, informed and passionate -- everything those silly attack ads would have you believe they are not...This was American politics at its best."

The Rocky Mountain News was also impressed by both men:

"Now that is what we've been waiting for. A spirited engagement over substantive issues by two serious men."

So was the Dallas Morning News:

"John McCain and Barack Obama both delivered White House-worthy performances, staying on message and generally avoiding the pitfalls that have tripped them up in the past. Neither distinguished himself for better or worse with a defining moment - there was no watch checking, impatient sighing or "You're no Jack Kennedy" quip for the ages."

The St. Petersburg Times, however, thought the candidates left voters wanting:

"Voters listening for straight talk Friday night from Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain about a historic financial crisis or the war in Iraq would be still waiting this morning. In their first presidential debate, neither candidate offered a candid evaluation of how the two biggest issues facing this country will affect the next president's ability to carry out his agenda. Instead, they spent 90 minutes reinforcing campaign themes that seemed oddly out of touch and failed to frankly acknowledge the grave challenges facing this country."

The Kansas City Star said Obama won easily:

"Americans looking for a warrior in the White House surely warmed to GOP Sen. John McCain's scrappy debate performance Friday night. But Democrat Barack Obama turned in the more statesmanlike effort. He was unflappable even under McCain's often condescending attacks. While McCain went for punches, Obama scored points with sound arguments."

The Sacramento Bee says last night settled nothing:

"Indeed, if this first debate settled anything, it was that this campaign will be fought out as a contest between competing virtues: youth vs. experience, toughness vs. flexibility, and perhaps most of all, one compelling life story against another...

Within minutes, both campaigns claimed victory, but it is far too early for that. Both can fairly claim to have staked out their ground. If the candidates have their way, victory is likely to depend less on the details of their positions than on whose life story resonates most with the American people. The question is whether voters will settle for that."

The Jackson Clarion-Ledger says each candidate won in their own respective ways:

If the debate were judged on experience, McCain won hands down. If judged on "a broader vision" that departs from past mistakes, Obama won handily.

Americans have a clear choice.