I have to be honest... I came off as less than impressed with her interview.
I'm not really happy about the paternalistic tendencies of the interviewer, Charlie Gibson. If he was trying to come off as sounding unimpressed with her before the interview even began, he did a great job.
It seems he was trying to nail her with questions that seemingly had no right answer. "Did you hesitate when John McCain asked you to be his VP? Did you stop and thinking, 'maybe I'm not ready for this'?". If she admits she hesitated or had doubts, then she will be seen as weak. If she didn't hesitate or have doubts, she is seen as being conceited and full of hubris.
However, I wish she would've just not played this game and gave canned, unconvincing responses to his questions--even if some of them seemed more fitting for a cross-examination than a sit-down interview.
For instance, when Gibson asked "With Alaska being next to Russia, what insight does that give you into Russia, especially as it relates to the events of the last two weeks", I wished she would've just said "Look, Charlie-- I'm not going to sit here and pretend that just because Alaska is next to Russia and we have a long history, as very close neighbors, of dealing with each other-- even if informally-- that that means I have any special insight into what Russia is trying to do with Georgia. I'm not a pyscoanalyst, so I cannot tell you what Russia's plans are, but we have to make clear, through appropriate channels, to Russia that unprovoked aggression against a soveriegn democratic nation is not acceptable." Instead, she flails about stuck way too hard on the fact that "you can actually see Russia from Alaska!".
When Gibson asked "How many heads of foreign states have you met?", instead of not directly answering the question, she should have just side "None-- which is exactly as many as Abraham Lincoln, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama had met when they embarked on their campaigns for the Presidency."
In any case, it was rather apparent to me (a McCain-Palin supporter) than her anwers were heavily coached instead of based on deep-held principles that she has long believed in-- and that is what was most dissapointing. Not that I think that McCain, or (especially) Obama aren't coached, but at least Obama has the presidential-like quality to take someone else's words and stances and make them appear to be something they really hold and believe.