Veep Hopefuls Set Gold Standard
After watching the debate Thursday night, there is no escaping the conclusion that the two major parties have nominated kangaroo tickets; for both Democrats and Republicans, the strength this year is in the hind legs.
First, let’s dispense with the question of who won the face-to-face encounter between the two candidates. I would give the nod – by the slimmest of margins – to Joe Lieberman, but if you felt that Dick Cheney had a slight edge, you’d get no argument from me.
In fact, the fairest decision would probably be to call it a draw. Their 90-minute debate was that close.
Winners and losers aside, what made the most striking impression was how both men thoroughly outclassed their “principals,” as Cheney put it last evening.
In contrast to Al Gore’s disdainful reactions Tuesday night, Lieberman did not resort to smug smiles, derisive eye-rolling, or sighs of exasperation when it was his opponent’s turn to speak. Lieberman was a model of courtesy.
As was Cheney. And in contrast to George W. Bush’s responses on Tuesday, which were often vague, unfocused and repetitive, Cheney – like Lieberman – demonstrated a solid command of each issue.
Thursday night’s performance makes me wish there were some way, even at this late date, to flip-flop the two tickets and move the strong legs up front where they belong.
Lieberman clearly has the experience and temperament to serve as president. Gore may well be better suited by nature to the role of Veep, the office he has occupied with distinction – and occasional brilliance – for the past eight years.
As for Cheney, does anyone doubt that he is senior to Dubya in every sense of the term? Is anyone wondering why Bush felt he had to chose Cheney?
And while both men brilliantly muted their own intelligence with constant compliments directed at their would-be bosses, they also managed to regard each other with an esteem that is rare among campaign rivals.
It was obvious that each debater viewed the other as a foe worthy of his steel; although they disagreed sharply on most of the issues, they did so with the utmost courtesy.
The courtly tone was set at the very outset when the candidates promised to refrain from negative and personal attacks. Adding a droll touch to his pledge, Cheney smiled at Lieberman and said, “I promise not to bring up your singing.”
“And I promise not to sing,” the senator replied with a warm smile of his own.
Yet even as they sparred, the two men made a point of singing each other’s praises. I lost count of how many times one or the other began his answer by saying, “With all due respect…”
Over the course of the evening, Lieberman and Cheney covered a wide range of familiar issues – among them tax cuts, Social Security, military readiness, energy policy and abortion – and for the most part, each candiate articulated his positions with ease and clarity.
The only reason I’m inclined to give the edge to Lieberman is because of the personal comments he made about his family both at the start and at the end of the debate.
Any candidate, regardless of party, who begins by talking about his 85-year-old “Mom” and ends with a wish that his “Dad” were still alive to share this historic moment is bound to strike a responsive chord.
At the same time, the case can be made that the triumph was Cheney’s because he was the one who had the most to gain. For the past month or so, Lieberman’s favorable ratings have been much higher than those of his Republican counterpart – and it’s almost certain that Cheney bolstered his public image – “big time,” as the man himself would say.
In the larger sense, both men were winners. In both style and substance, they surpassed not only the Bush-Gore clash earlier this week, but almost every other political debate of recent memory.
One can only assume that their leaders were watching this brilliant performance and hope that Gore and Bush have enough sense to try to follow the example it set.