Quietly, Lehrer goads pair into battle

This campaign has grown so vicious, so circuslike, that just seeing Jim Lehrer at the helm of last night's presidential debate felt, at first, like a relief. This was a setting meticulously designed for statesmanship (or ripe for parody on "The Colbert Report"): Red carpet, blue curtain backdrop, a giant eagle hanging from the wall, and Lehrer at a desk, sober and refreshingly personality-free.

Except that Lehrer clearly didn't want it this way. He may be the quintessential even-keeled PBS anchor, but he knows good TV - and compelling debate - when he sees it. And in his quiet, understated way, he tried his best to goad the two into battle, to keep them from pretending that the other man wasn't there.

The debate essentially took the format of a talking-heads cable show, albeit some 60 percent more polite; some networks even aired much of the debate in split-screen, to bolster the illusion that the two men were engaged with each other. The first half, in particular, remained an exercise in staying on message - and avoiding specifics at all costs - as Lehrer pressed the candidates on whether they'd support the federal bailout plan on the table.

Obama hewed to the mantra of helping the middle class, McCain to the mantra of being a maverick who had fought to cut pork-barrel spending, and neither said directly whether he'd support the plan. It was the night's biggest disappointment, given the rancor and confusion over the financial crisis, and despite Lehrer's almost-desperate-looking efforts to spark fireworks. When Obama at one point said that "10 days ago, John McCain said the fundamentals of the economy are sound," Lehrer cut in: "Say it directly to him! Say it directly to him!"

"John," Obama said gamely, with a slight smile, "Ten days ago you said the fundamentals of the economy are sound."

"Are you afraid I couldn't hear him?" McCain asked Lehrer.

"I'm just determined to get you all to talk to each other," Lehrer said. "I'm gonna try."

Eventually, Lehrer got his wish, though the moments of personal exchange started out brief and largely snide: sarcastic smiles and grumpy asides, a display of dueling bracelets from soldiers' mothers, some inside-baseball remarks about the role of a Senate subcommittee chair.

It was only when the debate turned full-bore into foreign affairs that the candidates grew more contentious, and the pace picked up. Here's where the candidates seemed more comfortable talking about specifics. Their fundamental differences were stark. When it came to the Iraq war, Obama seemed the more aggressive one, offering such lines as: "John, you like to pretend like the war started in 2007. You talk about the surge. The war started in 2003."

But as talk turned to other nations, and to philosophies on diplomacy, it was McCain who became more combative. In contrast to his vice presidential nominee, he stressed his on-the-ground experience in foreign countries.

And he borrowed a tactic from Obama's primary opponent, Hillary Clinton, chiding Obama for saying he would meet "without preconditions" with foreign leaders such as President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad of Iran.

Obama stood his ground. "I reserve the right as president of the United States to meet with anybody at the time and place of my choosing if I think it's going to keep America safe," he said.

The anger had finally bubbled up, but the sense remained that both men were holding back.

There are advantages to being even-keeled. But Lehrer's instincts are good, too: With stakes so high, it's understandable that so many partisans are wishing for a bigger, louder brawl.

Joanna Weiss can be reached at weiss@globe.com.