ELIZABETH BRACKETT: In Southern cities like Atlanta, Georgia, Democrats hope it will be their moderate candidate, Lloyd Bentsen, who brings Reagan Democrats back to the fold, while Republicans are counting on Dan Quayle's conservative views to keep voters in the Republican column. The Bush campaign was up 8 points in the polls in Georgia before last night's debate, but here, as elsewhere, many voters are uncertain about Quayle's credentials and experience.

We first met some Georgia voters before the debate. Liz Flowers is at home with a new baby. A former mortgage underwriter, she leans towards George Bush, but was very disappointed with his choice of Dan Quayle. Billy Copanezos calls himself a Reagan Democrat. He remains undecided in this year's election, even though he shares a Greek heritage with Michael Dukakis. Trish Long teaches 7th graders at a private school. She leans towards Bush and Quayle, but likes to think of herself as unaffiliated when it comes to party preference. Kitty Hawks isn't sure who she will vote for next month. Her husband, Barrett, an attorney, describes himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat and says he was very pleased when Bentsen joined the ticket. Former Navy Captain Norman Harbough is now a college professor. He likes both George Bush and Dan Quayle. Marcia Spiller doesn't think either Republican candidate is talking about the real issues like the problems of the haves and the have nots. This former schoolteacher is more comfortable with Dukakis and Bentsen. Last night, the group gathered in Liz Flowers' Atlanta living room to listen. For most, it was the first chance to get a good look at two candidates they had heard about but didn't really know.

SEN. DAN QUAYLE: [Debate Segment] If I was called upon to serve as the President of this country or the responsibilities of the President of this country, would I be capable and qualified to do that? And I've tried to list the qualifications of 12 years in the United States Congress.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Put aside for a minute whether or not you would support Dan Quayle and think about whether or not you think he was convincing in terms of the kind of experience he's had in order to become Vice President or President.

NORMAN HARBOUGH: I think that he came in as a clear underdog, and it was up to him, the ball was in his court, to try to prove that he wasn't a lightweight, and with all that pressure on him, I thought he did a remarkable job.

BILLY COPANEZOS: He had a set of lines that he kept repeating over and over again. He did a good job. I mean, someone in his position, who would have known that he was going to be up for Vice President not that long ago, just a few months ago, and here he is put on the spotlight and he's been dogged for weeks now and it took some guts to get up there.

MARCIA SPILLER: I'm not sure that he really convinced me that he wasn't a lightweight. The fact that he could only answer that question one way, you know. They asked it to him several ways, trying to get him to address the fact what would you do if you became President, and he really could not deal with anything but his set pat speech of defining his qualifications. And it would seem to me that he could have thought beyond that and spoken to us beyond that and he really, he didn't.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Do you think that question which they continued to press was a fair question?

LIZ FLOWERS: It's an unfair question to put to him before the election. I think the reason he was coming back with that canned or pat answer was because he was trying to steer the questioner away from the fact that, you know, let's get away from the step by step procedure and get to the real bottom line, you're asking me do I have the qualifications to be the President, and that's what we need to look at.

BARRETT HAWKS: I think the question was not fair, but I found his whole presentation and his address of that issue simply unconvincing.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Why? What didn't sound right about it or feel right about it?

BARRETT HAWKS: He did not seem natural to me. You know, as I was saying to my wife earlier --

KITTY HAWKS: Genuine.

BARRETT HAWKS: Yes, genuine would be another thing. I think he, his, he should have remembered what I'm sure his grandmother must have told him, which is be yourself.

KITTY HAWKS: I agree with Barrett. I think Quayle seemed very well rehearsed, almost down to his gestures, and that I found when I was watching him, I was a little uneasy for him for fear he would slip. I felt Bentsen, on the other hand, was very poised and came across as being again the word genuine.

TRISH LONG: I think that Quayle may be qualified to step in and take over but I don't feel that he was very convincing of that because of his public speaking ability. It's just not at the same level as Bentsen's. I do think the question was unfair too. His answer now may be different three months down the road after the election.

NORMAN HARBOUGH: I was a little disappointed I think in the personal attacks and the counter attacks that went on, but given the situation, loaded as it was, I could, might have expected that.

SEN. LLOYD BENTSEN: [Debate Segment] I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy.

SEN. DAN QUAYLE: That was really uncalled for, Senator.

SEN. LLOYD BENTSEN: You're the one that was making the comparison, Senator.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Who was more sarcastic?

NORMAN HARBOUGH: Oh, I think that Bentsen was more sarcastic and Quayle indicated that he thought that was a low shot, and I think rightfully so.

MARCIA SPILLER: I didn't particularly think the remark was sarcastic. I think that Bentsen was saying, I knew this man personally and you do not remind me of him, and I didn't find it particularly sarcastic.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Sen. Bentsen took some heat, particularly on PAC money in this breakfast club he had. How do you think he did in responding to those questions?

BARRETT HAWKS: He might have fielded that question better and I think he might have said, I don't know when I would have corrected the error if it had not been brought out by the press, but, you know, hopefully it would have been brought to my attention in some other way if it had not been for the press and I would have realized I made a mistake.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: In this group, the debate changed no one's mind about their choice for the top of the ticket, and it didn't help those who were undecided, though there were definite opinions about who won and who lost last night's contest.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: What would you say? We'll go right around the room.

MARCIA SPILLER: Bentsen won.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Why?

MARCIA SPILLER: He just showed himself to be the better candidate. He handled himself very calmly. He was very poised. He was very postured. And I feel like he won.

BARRETT HAWKS: I think he showed up better in the debate.

ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Bentsen?

BARRETT HAWKS: Yes.

KITTY HAWKS: I also agree. I felt like perhaps Bentsen was more himself.

BILLY COPANEZOS: I'll give Quayle, you know, I'll give him a point for just getting up there. He did about what I thought he was going to do. I thought it was going to be worse.

TRISH LONG: I think Bentsen made the better impression.

NORMAN HARBOUGH: I think because of the fact that Quayle was in the hole, I think he may have won tonight because of the performance that he made. I think people expected him to do a lot worse, as was indicated in here.

LIZ FLOWERS: I think that the public perception will be that Bentsen won, but I think again it's because of what we think a leader should be, and that's the older, wiser, but as far as issues and dealing with backgrounds, it was a draw.

Continue...