While this year’s race for the White House doesn’t lack for historical firsts—a former first lady squaring off against an upstart black senator on the Democratic side; an aging war hero fighting the Republican base while contending with a populist Southern governor on the other—it might be the first presidential election whose outcome was affected by a Writers Guild strike.

During this strike-shortened television season, with new episodes of hit series like Grey’s Anatomy and Desperate Housewives in short supply, a record number of viewers has tuned into one of the more interesting and dynamic shows on TV: the 2008 presidential election.

“People are choosing between watching a repeat or a real-life drama,” says Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist and Clinton supporter whose San Francisco-based public relations firm, Fabiani & Lehane, worked for the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers during their showdown with the Writers Guild. “This is what makes good TV: compelling figures that viewers can relate to and an interesting plotline that changes from week to week.”

The five most-watched presidential debates in cable-television history have all been in the past six months. The CNN-aired matchup between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton on January 31—the final debate before the February 5 Super Tuesday primaries, in which voters in 22 states went to the polls—drew 8.3 million viewers. The previous ratings winner was the South Carolina Democratic debate on January 21. That broadcast garnered 4.9 million viewers, as opposed to the roughly 3.7 million who watched WWE Raw or the 3 million who tuned into Fox News for President George W. Bush’s final State of the Union address, both of which aired a week later.

Broadcast networks reaped benefits too. ABC pulled in 7.5 million viewers with the Republican debate, which aired just before the January 8 New Hampshire primary; with the Democrats, on January 5, the network attracted another 9.3 million—roughly the same number that Lost, one of the most critically acclaimed shows in recent years, netted with its January 31 season debut.

Meanwhile, some candidates—specifically the lesser-known players—have received a bigger boost to their campaigns thanks to additional couch-potatoes. “Obama has benefited in a measurably significant way from the degree of attention,” says Todd Gitlin, a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University. As for Governor Mike Huckabee, who has lacked the financial resources of his Republican competitors, Gitlin says, “He has probably benefited even more from television appearances. The unknown candidates—the mystery candidates—always benefit more.”

Additional at-home viewers translates into additional voters at the polls. Since the election kicked off in early-voting states like Iowa and New Hampshire back in January, voters have turned out in record numbers. The trend continued on Super Tuesday, in early February, when both Democratic and Republican voter turnout set records in more than half of the states that held primaries that day, according to a report by American University’s Center for the Study of the American Electorate.

“Interest in this election is at an all-time high,” says Michael P. McDonald, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an election expert. “We know that interest is connected to higher television viewing. It’s part of the same underlying thing we’re seeing: higher numbers of people watching at home, higher numbers at the polls.”

If viewers from both sides of the political spectrum continue to tune in at home—and if they go to the polls in November—the country and our political process can only be better for it. “[More voters] is an intrinsically good thing,” says Gitlin. “The intensity of the commitment to the political process is a sign of a healthy democracy.”

Not to mention a lot more fun than reruns of CSI.