There's no point in doing a little political punditry in the October of an election year without going way out on a limb, so here goes: As I smelled it, the most important thing that happened in the second presidential debate is that George W. Bush lost a good chunk of the women's vote.

He's been ahead, you know, among large blocs of women. If you take away black women, who appear to vote more based on their race than their sex (and thus vote heavily Democratic), Bush leads John Kerry among women. The media have made great hoo-ha lately about this fact, noting and arguing that Bush was gaining steadily and building a solid lead among the "security moms" because of his successful attacks (read: fear-mongering lies) on Kerry's ability to fight terrorism.

I'm guessing that Friday night, that trend started shifting into reverse. It wasn't any single thing Bush said. It was the manner: the schoolyard swagger, the left arm cocked like an itchy gunslinger's, the arrogant sneer, the roosterish strutting -- and the voice. God, that voice. You don't quite call that screaming. It wasn't exactly caterwauling. Maybe yowling. Whatever it was, he sounded like a tedious and noisome braggart in the parking lot after a football game. Having seen plenty of those, and having been that myself from time to time, experience teaches me to take the view that most women do not find that figure appealing.

They might have, if Kerry had come across, to extend the metaphor, as the inadequate sad sack portrayed in Bush's television commercials. But he didn't. Kerry was terrific. Far better, by my lights, than he was in the first debate. I know no one else will see it that way, because he was the first debate's obvious winner, while he merely edged out round two on points after Bush didn't show up in where-am-I-again? mode. But Kerry was, if anything, stronger -- more succinct and direct, more challenging to Bush, and tougher -- than he had been in the first debate. And he especially showed all those qualities when he was talking foreign policy. I'm betting the security moms noticed.

Of course, I'm guessing, and I have no actual idea whether I'm right. Certainly, this isn't the kind of angle that will have been discussed on the cable post-game shows. The few women permitted into the club are busy proving that they can be one of the guys (Andrea Mitchell) or that they can be just as sycophantic toward Bush as the big boys (Candy Crowley); they know that's the only way they can stay on television, so they sure aren't there to represent their sex.

It's very much worth remembering, in fact, how aggressively male a domain cable television is. The worst moment, when Bush just clearly behaved like a rude jerk, came at 9:36 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, when Charlie Gibson was trying to ask him a follow-up and Bush brusquely waved him off, interrupted, and charged forward and started yelping about Tony Blair. It was witnessing this moment that made me start to think about women viewers. But Chris Matthews, naturally, thought it was great. Which makes me think I'm on to something.

Polls won't deal with this question for a few days, and if they prove me wrong, they prove me wrong. But as hunches go, this strikes me as one worth playing.

Michael Tomasky is executive editor of The American Prospect.