Big-City Editorials Rate the Debate, Give Slight Edge to Edwards
___________________________
By E&P Staff
Published: October 06, 2004 10:00 AM EDT
mediainfo.com
NEW YORK Wednesday morning's editorials in big-city papers on last night's vice presidential debate gave mixed marks to both Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards, with the verdict favoring Edwards somewhat but no one declaring a knockout punch by either man.
The Washington Post gave the North Carolina senator a slight edge. "The Democrat was more effective, and more on point, in challenging Mr. Cheney on rationales for the Iraq war that have proven false, in particular connections between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, and for the vice president's continuing failure to acknowledge the difficulties of the Iraq mission," The Post stated. "Mr. Cheney was as cutting as a school principal lecturing a delinquent student on the subject of Mr. Edwards's Senate 'attendance record.' But if the question was whether he has the grounding to assume the presidency if need be, Mr. Edwards delivered a solid performance on both foreign and domestic policy last night."
For USA Today, the contest seemed more of a draw, but editors noted Cheney's performance topped that of his boss. "While the foreign-policy disagreements were largely a replay of the first debate between Bush and John Kerry, Cheney's self-assured command of the facts made him more effective than Bush had been in delivering a similar message," the paper wrote. "Then, too, these are the men running for the No. 2 spot, not the presidency. Historically, what the public wants most in candidates for that office is, as Cheney noted, the sense that they'd be competent should they be forced to assume the presidency in crisis. By that measure, each man filled the bill -- though what the two would do with the office differs enormously."
At the Los Angeles Times, editors took a clear shot at Cheney and declared Edwards a competent winner. "As the evening wore on, Cheney's chin sank down his chest, his gravelly voice turned into an inarticulate rumble and he even started passing up opportunities to talk at all," he paper declared. "When Edwards, with that boyish smile that worked magic with jurors, stuck a knife in his gut (for example, about his role as CEO of Halliburton), Cheney more than once said he didn't know where to begin, and then didn't. Some of his own demagogic thrusts, meanwhile, were bizarre. Surely many GOP small businessmen were alarmed to hear the vice president denounce so-called S corporations (a common tax-favored setup apparently used by Edwards' law practice)."
The Arizona Republic scored one for the Veep. "Who won this debate is easy," it declared. "Cheney took command early and rarely let up. If the Republican strategy was to take the fight to the Democrats, Cheney followed the battle plan."
The San Francisco Chronicle gave both men points and rated the contest a tie. "If nothing else, Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards last night offered Americans a dramatic choice in style and substance. The only thing they seemed to have in common during the vice presidential debate was a disdain for each other. Unlike the Kerry-Bush debate, where the challenger clearly knocked the president out of his comfort zone, neither Cheney nor Edwards seemed overly ruffled by what were often extraordinarily hard shots at each other. Each stayed in character, for better and worse."
The New York Post waved its flag for Cheney: "John Edwards had his opportunity last night -- and muffed it. Not so Dick Cheney: Nothing hit home like his pointed observation on why the two Democrats first voted to commit U.S. troops -- to an operation they now claim was 'the wrong war at the wrong time' -- but then voted against providing those troops with the $87 billion worth of bombs, bullets and body armor that they needed."
But a certain other New York paper disagreed strongly with that. The New York Times declared that Cheney, "who won over many voters four years ago with his grandfatherly demeanor during a debate with Joseph Lieberman, seemed tired and angry. He was particularly dyspeptic when he responded to criticism of his relationship with Halliburton by claiming that Mr. Edwards had a bad attendance record in the Senate," the paper opined. "Mr. Edwards is normally known for his wide grin and boyish appearance, but he was serious and tough last night. If his main task was to show that he could stand up to the older and more experienced vice president, he did everything he needed to do, especially during the discussion of foreign policy -- the area that is supposed to be his weak suit."
The Boston Globe told its readers the debate was a close-call, with a slight edge for Edwards, but no major slam. "Vice President Dick Cheney could have come across as the Bush administration's hatchet man, too mean-spirited to deserve reelection, but he didn't," the Globe stated. "Senator John Edwards could have come across as young and inexperienced, too callow to serve a heartbeat from the Oval Office, but he didn't. ... The major result of last night's debate is that few if any voters will go out to elect or defeat Cheney or Edwards. The race is between Bush and Kerry, with a lot riding on their next two debates."
The Dallas Morning News, Denver Post, Charlotte Observer and Indianapolis Star all essentially called it a draw. The Denver paper declared: "The task last night for the vice presidential candidates was to make the men at the top of their tickets look like heroes and make their opponents look like they've been wearing flip-flops. Mission accomplished!" The Observer called it an even "slugfest."
Copyright 2004 Editor & Publisher
|
