The undercard fight between proxy warriors Vice President Dick Cheney and Sen. John Edwards was a gloves-off affair from the first question.

In tone, manner and language, the debate was nasty. Charges were fast, and the two did not hesitate to attack, challenging one another on facts, figures and interpretations.

Cheney turned in a better performance than President Bush last week, and he did well enough to provide the president with much-needed breathing room for Friday’s town-hall-style debate.

Democrats had been dreaming about the debate between Edwards and Cheney since the moment he was put on the ticket. Behind the table, Edwards suffered from expectations, which were very high. Both men landed with sharp points, but neither scored a knockout.

Edwards challenged Cheney – and his boss, President Bush – with his first chance to speak. Essentially, Edwards called into question the vice president’s honesty and offered a damning indictment of his record throughout his career. Cheney deflected the attacks with a calm demeanor, and launched his own very personal assault of Edwards and his record in the Senate.

Edwards started out talking fast and jabbing at Cheney, who seemed prepared for the onslaught. He hit back at the Democrat challengers on their record on defense and his world view.

Cheney questioned Kerry’s and Edwards’ credibility, and said they lacked the convictions and qualities needed to be a commander in chief. Edwards, slowing down to match Cheney’s pace, fired back. And, as widely expected, Halliburton was raised as an issue. Cheney cited FactCheck.org in his defense. The Sun Journal runs analysis by the nonpartisan organization.

As the foreign policy part of the debate drew to an end, Edwards moved away from Cheney and related a personal story about a trip he took to Israel and the effects of a terrorist attack during that visit.

On domestic policy, it was more bare-knuckle brawling on taxes, jobs and the deficit. Edwards, clearly ready for a question about medical malpractice, provided a detailed plan to counter Cheney’s charges that frivolous lawsuits drive up medical and insurance costs.

After a shaky start where Cheney seemed more poised, Edwards gained his footing, slowed down and got stronger.

Impressions formed during almost four years of scowling and growling are tough to overcome in one night, especially when sitting next to Edwards, who has charisma to spare.

According to a recent Annenberg survey, Cheney’s is viewed unfavorably by 42 percent of respondents. The numbers from Newsweek are even worse. Forty-seven percent of those asked said they had an unfavorable view of the vice president. It doesn’t seem likely those numbers will improve after Tuesday night’s debate.

Edwards’ numbers are much better. In both polls, his favorable ratings outpaced his unfavorables. In the Newsweek poll, 77 percent of people said they find Edwards personally likable. Only 49 percent said the same thing about Kerry. Edwards’ problem is he can come off as a lightweight, especially on foreign policy.

But Cheney’s purpose Tuesday night was not to be crowned homecoming king of the presidential election. It was to present a portrait of the administration as serious, knowledgeable and – most important – experienced enough to protect the United States from its enemies in the world.

Both men are rhetorically polished. Edwards is a skilled lawyer who made a name for himself as a litigator who could draw other lawyers into court just to hear his closing arguments.

Cheney handily outperformed Democrat Joe Lieberman during the 2000 vice presidential debate, and he has served in the highest ranks of business and government for decades, including a stint as secretary of defense and as chief executive of Halliburton, the much-maligned contractor that has been consistently criticized for close ties to the White House.

That resume was the focus for Edwards’ assault. A long resume does not equal good judgment, Edwards said of Cheney.

Republicans were anxious for a win. The news has been bad for President Bush since his encounter with Kerry last week. The challenger has closed the gap in many polls, and bad news from Iraq has kept rolling in. So much so that the president changed his schedule to highlight foreign policy.

Paul Bremer, the head of the U.S. occupation in Iraq, attracted attention earlier Tuesday when his remarks that there weren’t enough troops on the ground in Iraq to provide security were reported. The White House, later in the day, reluctantly admitted Bremer had been critical of troop strength while in Iraq.

Earlier in the week, the Associated Press reported that September was the bloodiest month so far in Iraq and that two major offenses have been launched against insurgent strongholds.

It’s difficult to see how an undecided voter paying attention to the race for the first time could sort out the truth.

On the question of cost, debate raged about the $200 billion figure cited by Edwards. The actual appropriated figure for operations in Iraq is about $120 billion. The $200 billion counts money for the current fiscal year, but that money has not yet been appropriated and is a projection.

On the question of jobs, Cheney is correct. About 1.7 million jobs have been created in the last year. But Edwards is also right. There has been a net loss of about 1 million jobs since President Bush took office, and job creation has fallen far below levels predicted by the administration.

Copy the Story Link