This might end up being the Red Meat debate for that reason. We have two candidates who clearly have little respect or admiration for one another. So why not let them just go at it. Certainly many Democrats would like to see Dick Cheney taken down a peg or two, and there must be many Republicans who would like to see John Edwards "exposed."
On the other hand, both candidates can try to continue the momentum (in Edwards case) or reverse it (in Cheney's case). That goal might lend them a little caution. If Cheney comes off as a foaming-at-the-mouth bulldog or Edwards comes off as overly lawyerly, well, that would hinder their goals. My prediction is that Cheney will remind us all that Edwards is a trial lawyer. I'm don't know if Edwards will remind us of Cheney's comments on the campaign trail, that we either vote for Bush-Cheney or get blowed up.
Paul Krugman has some typically well-reasoned analysis of Dick Cheney's obstacles going into this debate.
The vice president is portrayed as a hardheaded realist, someone you can trust with difficult decisions. But his actual record is one of irresponsibility and incompetence.The Vice President has gone further out on limbs attached to Iraq war than any other member of the administration. We'll have to see what Edwards does about that tonight.
Case in point: Mr. Cheney completely misread the nature of the 2001 California energy crisis. Although he has stonewalled investigations into what went on in his task force, there's no real question that he placed his trust in the very companies whose market-rigging caused that crisis.
In tonight's debate, John Edwards will surely confront Mr. Cheney over that task force, over domestic policies and, of course, over Halliburton. But he can also use the occasion to ask more hard questions about national security.
No comments:
Post a Comment