Minnesota U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar "turned in her most aggressive performance to date" during Tuesday's Democratic presidential primary debate, using what could be her last appearance on the nationally televised debate stage to sharply attack rivals and make the case for a more moderate path to the White House.

So how did it go? Here's a look at what political analysts are saying about the Minnesota Democrat's performance in Ohio: 

Many pundits thought Klobuchar had a good night — some even called it a breakthrough performance: 

The Washington Post's Aaron Blake listed Klobuchar among the night's "winners":

"The Minnesota senator arguably made herself Warren’s chief foil in this debate, creating contrasts on taxes, Medicare-for-all and other issues... we’ll see if voters are buying it."

A number of experts told Politico that Klobuchar "stood out" for the first time:

"Klobuchar took advantage of her opportunity to own the stage [and Warren] and did so effectively," said former Republican National Committee Chair Michael Steele.

"Klobuchar had some smart answers. I’m starting not to care that she is brutal to her staff," added Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics.

Jim Geraghty over at the conservative National Review said Klobuchar was one of the candidates who brought their "A-games" and "managed to stand out":

"Where has this Klobuchar been all this campaign? She was lively, common-sense, and pugnacious, particularly with Warren. Most of the other candidates are now in the state where they’re terrified of telling any primary voters anything they don’t want to hear, so they promise all things to all people, and that none of it will require any sacrifices or offsets. The corny humor and jokes about nagging her daughter would probably work in a general-election battle in the Midwest. And when Klobuchar went after Warren, you would have thought the Massachusetts senator was a staffer who had fouled up Klobuchar’s lunch."

And Talking Points Memo called her performance "even," saying it "seemed to be her strongest so far":

"Her framing of the need to confront big tech as a “pro-competition” issue — something both parties once advocated for — was effective."

Her answers on impeachment, attacks on President Donald Trump and case for pragmatism got kudos from some: 

 

Her jokes, however, were... once again the subject of jokes (and groans):

Added Blake, over at the Washington Post:

"One piece of advice, on behalf of all of Klobuchar’s fellow Minnesotans: The bad jokes need to stop."

But was the "good" night enough to give her campaign a boost heading into the final months of 2019?

The New York Times saw "no game-changing moments for low-polling candidates," including Klobuchar:

"While exposing the divisions between the party’s factions, the most taut moments of contrast served more as an example of what is to come once the field shrinks."

And Dan Balz at the Washington Post also isn't so sure:

"Klobuchar has tried in previous debates to make her mark as a results-oriented moderate, without success. Whether Tuesday night will change that is debatable."

What did you think of Klobuchar's debate performance? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.