Byron York‘s latest Washington Examiner article assesses candidates’ performances in the first debate of the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

[A] number of established pols here in Greenville saw it as a showdown between former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty and a bunch of other guys. “It’s Pawlenty,” said one veteran of state politics. “He’s got a chance to move up into the first tier or stay in the second tier.” The debate’s other participants — Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson — weren’t going to be much more than a supporting cast.

That’s what the pols thought. Among the non-pols, also known as the people, there was intense interest in Cain. The former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza and radio host has become a Tea Party favorite, with strongly-held opinions on issues he knows by heart from his business career, like job creation and economic growth. The debate, according to his fans, would be the perfect format for him to make a great first impression on the national stage.

Nothing worked out exactly as planned. When it was over, Pawlenty had underwhelmed the audience, doing what many felt was an OK job — passable answers, no gaffes — but also not taking full advantage of the opportunity he had to distinguish himself from the others.

Cain had scored points on some key issues — and thrilled participants in Frank Luntz’s Fox News focus group — but left observers baffled by what appeared to be an astonishing lack of preparation on a key national security issue. And a third candidate — Santorum — who hadn’t been picked as a pre-debate favorite, turned in the evening’s most solid performance.