Blog

The VP debate: why Edwards won’t win


The Democrats have, once again, failed to understand the political logic of lowered expectations. Minutes after John Kerry anointed the youthful, Southern, telegenic, “two Americas,” son of a mill worker John Edwards as his VP choice, excited Democrats across the land began publicly salivating over the prospect of the successful trial lawyer using his mesmerizing courtroom skills to eviscerate stodgy Dick Cheney in their October 5 debate in Cleveland. Kerry even got into the act, saying he couldn’t wait to see Edwards go “toe-to-toe” with the Vice President.

Problem is, while Edwards was a smart choice to liven up the Kerry ticket, he was also consistently unimpressive in the primary debates (in a few, he seemed to barely be there). He may do better in a one-on-one setup, but he has yet to prove an ability to attack an opponent in an effective way. He mostly stayed “positive” in his race against Kerry (he had to if he wanted to stay in the VP race), and his early attacks on Bush and Cheney in his new VP role have been average at best.  

Second, Cheney may appear old, predictable, and cranky, but he’s also experienced and smart, and he’s not going to let Edwards blow him off the stage. In fact, with all the Democratic talk of how great Edwards will come off in the debate, the Dems have, once again, set themselves up for a monumental failure, with the post-debate talk inevitably focusing not on substance but on how Cheney (who some Republicans desperately want off the ticket) held his own against the litigator extraordinaire. Remember all that talk four years ago about how Al Gore would invariably embarrass George Bush? Well, with expectations significantly lowered, Bush didn’t look half bad.

My prediction: Cheney won’t look half bad, either, and the political pundits will declare him the debate’s “surprising winner.”

Dear Reader, In The Fray is a nonprofit staffed by volunteers. If you liked this piece, could you please donate $10? If you want to help, you can also: