I didn’t see it. But if you did, feel free to weigh in.
Here is a statement she issued after the debate:
Wilmington, Del. – Unfortunately, some pundits are already criticizing Christine O’Donnell, the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate seat in Delaware, for her answer to a Supreme Court question during Wednesday night’s debate. In response, O’Donnell released the following statement:
“Frankly, it makes sense that it wasn’t easy to recall some egregious Supreme Court cases when asked about ‘recent’ cases with which I disagreed. Such cases are few and far between with an outstanding bench of four solid constructionist Justices and a swing vote that often votes with them. There have been only a few cases during the Roberts and Rehnquist courts in which the liberal activist position has prevailed.
“One such case was Kelo v. City of New London in 2005 in which the court incoherently ruled that local governments could misuse the Fifth Amendment’s takings clause to throw private citizens out of their own homes and give the land to private developers to increase tax revenue.
“Such Constitution-shredding rulings should occur rarely, if ever. It is why it’s so important that Delaware’s next Senator commit to voting for federal judges and Supreme Court Justices who know how to read the plain English in the Constitution, apply that plain English to complex modern cases and don’t invent ’emanations and penumbras’ that the Founders never intended. Unlike my opponent, who just tonight referenced his view that we have different Constitutions based upon what year it is, I believe that the original version serves just fine.
“Tonight Chris Coons said that ‘this campaign is a job interview.’ By the end of the debate it was clear that Mr. Coons does not deserve a promotion. His tax-and-spend record and the doubling of the unemployment rate during his tenure as New Castle County Executive were just two of the items on his political resume that Delaware voters will reject.
“I was grateful for the opportunity to speak directly to Delawareans and to lay out a common sense way forward.”
So there you have it. Allahpundit collects some post-debate analysis from various sources, which suggests that O’Donnell was thrown off by several questions, including questions about evolution and financial problems (did she not think this would come up), and that Coons was openly contemptuous of her, which might help her.