Neither can claim a clear win

CALL THIS ONE a tie, a polite but pointed debate in which each of the two number twos did reasonably well.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here's the good news for the Republicans: Last night Vice President Dick Cheney turned in a performance far superior to that which his boss offered up last Thursday. Cheney came to the debate with the principal objective of raising doubts about John Kerry's resolve on fighting terror. To that end he ran through Kerry's record on Iraq, accusing Kerry and Edwards of voting against the $87 billion for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan because of the rise of Howard Dean and asking, tellingly, how Kerry could stand up to terrorists if they couldn't resist that political pressure.

"There is no indication at all that John Kerry has the conviction to successfully carry through the war on terror," Cheney said at one point.

The vice president also offered a sharp critique of the Democratic nominee's record on defense and foreign policy, including his vote against the 1991 Gulf War.

Although Edwards defended Kerry effectively, voters will make a judgment about the presidential nominee based not on what his ticketmate says but on their sense of the candidate himself. That means Kerry will have to address this issue again, and forcefully.

What Edwards did best was act as a truth squad. One good moment came when he rebutted the Republican's "global test" line of attack, noting, accurately, that they were distorting Kerry's debate comment about the need for US military action to be seen as legitimate in the eyes of the world.

Meanwhile he reminded voters again and again that despite Cheney's frequent suggestions of connections between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, no operational ties have been discovered. When Cheney justified the administration's aggressive use of military force by saying that the United States had been attacked and the president had responded, Edwards seized the moment: "Mr. Vice President, we were attacked, but we weren't attacked by Saddam Hussein."

Although neither man can claim a clear win, Edwards may have reduced any perceived stature gap. Four years ago Cheney was seen as the stable, steady, experienced, avuncular figure who would help a president unschooled in the ways of Washington. After a term as one of the administration's leading ideologues, Cheney tried to reclaim his previous role last night by stressing his long years in public service.

But despite the obvious experience gap, Edwards didn't give away much during the discussion of foreign policy. And after repeatedly expressing the wish that healthcare would come up during the domestic discussion, he skillfully made his own opportunity to lay out the Democratic approach on that important issue.

So will this clash matter? In the past, the vice presidential debates, when they are remembered at all, have been memorable mostly for gaffes or withering rebukes.

There were none of those last night. Although the vice president may be only a heartbeat away from occupying the Oval Office, voters make their judgments based almost entirely on the men at the top of the ticket.

Expect that to be true again this year.

Scot Lehigh's e-mail address is lehigh@globe.com.