Both candidates approached the "town hall" setting of last night's debate intensely aware of the political stakes it held for them.

Republican Sen. John McCain hoped to gain some traction with constituents that would reverse the trends in the polls, which have been leaning in favor of Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama hoped to cement his lead, fueled by voter worries over the instability of the financial system. These are concerns that seem to weight the election in favor of a changing of the partisan guard in the White House.

But the ones with the most to gain or lose in the Nashville debate — the second of three face-offs scheduled before the Nov. 4 balloting — are the voters.

Their interests have receded in the past few days as the campaign focus shifted away from the global economic crisis that could cripple everyone's financial future.

Instead, McCain and his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, have charged that Obama's earlier association with a one-time domestic terrorist casts doubt on his suitability to serve as president.

Obama's countercharge: McCain's involvement in the "Keating Five" financial scandal of the '80s raises questions about the senator's vow to uphold the public interest.

But people are far too worried about the economic crisis for such melodrama. And neither candidate has allayed those worries with details about how they'd address it.

That information gap still wasn't closed by last night's debate, which covered much of the same territory as the first encounter in St. Louis. They argued on which had the best approach to taxation and healthcare, and how each would affect business.

The candidates again hedged on how they would alter their spending plans under current circumstances. McCain vowed a spending freeze on all but defense, veterans' affairs and an indefinite category of "other" programs. Obama said he'd go "line by line" through the budget to eliminate unproductive programs but was unspecific.

But the mutual character assassinations of recent days, thankfully, were also conspicuously absent.

Contrary to what campaign operatives might think, the electorate takes a far greater interest in pocketbook issues than in the slimefest. At this critical juncture, voters want much more about concrete reforms to the financial system and a plan for staving off further decline.

Given that voter questions on the economy drove much of last night's debate, the candidates should take that as a cue, and give the voters what they want.