We, as a community, are emotional about the Lieberman-Lamont debate (whatever side we support). But the key thing is, many of us watched it. That's probably not true of a bunch of voters. Debates are not aimed at the people who actually watch the debate, nor should they be judged that way.
What we should look for...
1. Did one of the candidates make any obvious gaffes or overtly lie in a way that will be picked apart, again and again in news coverage?
2. Who got the better soundbytes out of it? This includes both positive soundbytes from yourself and negative soundbytes about something your opponent said (In this case, the obvious advantage for Lamont is Joe's defense of pork, which will end up in a lot of newscasts and will turn off independent voters).
3. Who won the expectations game?
4. What will the news media go with? This is the most superficial of all and has little to do with the actual debate but it matters. Did someone sweat too much? Did they look flustered? Did they interrupt? Did they repeat a strange, mockable line? Who knows what the media will latch onto - certainly we won't know until tomorrow.
So pro Joe or pro Ned, don't think you know the score right now.