Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 1, 2004; Page A06
NEW YORK, Feb. 29 -- Sens. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and John Edwards (N.C.) played predictable roles in the final debate before Tuesday's 10-state round of primaries and caucuses that could effectively decide the Democratic presidential race: Edwards sought to shake things up and Kerry played it safe.
Edwards looked like a man who knew that time was running out, and was eager to use as many of the 60 minutes as possible to make the case for himself and to draw whatever distinctions he could with the front-running senator from Massachusetts.
Kerry looked like a candidate confident of the direction of the campaign and satisfied to let the clock run out on the race. In contrast to Thursday's debate in Los Angeles, where he forcefully challenged criticisms from Edwards, Kerry appeared less eager to engage and rebutted his rival only when he most needed to do so.
Three-quarters of the way through a debate that often seemed ready to fly out of control, the cameras neatly captured the dynamic of the session, with Kerry sitting quietly, a slight smile on his face, and Edwards leaning into the table, talking and gesturing over the interjections of the media panelists.
It was fitting that one of the most chaotic of all the Democratic debates was held in New York, a city known for confrontational and high-decibel politics. It is doubtful that what happened here Sunday -- including Edwards's pointed jabs at Kerry -- will have any material effect on the outcome of the Democratic contest. The more interesting question is what it may have revealed about the possibility of a Kerry-Edwards ticket becoming a reality.
For many weeks now, Democratic activists and party leaders have talked openly about the attractiveness of such a ticket, and by his performance this year, Edwards has certainly earned himself a spot high up on Kerry's short list of possible running mates. But Democrats watching Sunday's debate may wonder whether the chemistry between the two men would allow that, even if practical political considerations and pressures inside the party argue for it.
Kerry allies say privately that the senator is not a particular fan of Edwards, and a question to Kerry about what he has learned from Edwards about how to be a more likable candidate must have rankled the man who is in control of the Democratic race.
Kerry made no bow to Edwards's talents as a candidate in his answer. What he learned, he said, came from the voters he has encountered along the campaign trail. "I learned it in Iowa, and I learned it in New Hampshire," Kerry said. "And I think the reason I've won 18 or 20 contests so far, and I'm now campaigning hard to win others, is that give me a living room, give me a barn, give me a VFW hall, give me a one-on-one, and I think I can talk to anybody in this country."
CBS anchor Dan Rather then put the question to Edwards in what he said was a Texas vernacular: "Does Senator Kerry have enough Elvis to beat George Bush?" Edwards offered only a minimalist endorsement of his rival. "I know John Kerry," he said. "I like him very much. And he and I have known each other for years."
Edwards has run a generally positive campaign, and even in drawing distinctions with Kerry, he has been careful not to let things become too personal. But there was little evidence of any genuine warmth or affection between the two on Sunday.
Edwards aggressively pointed out differences with his rival that Kerry said do not really exist, challenging Kerry as someone spouting "that same old Washington talk that people have been listening to for decades" and questioning whether the Massachusetts senator could change the status quo in the capital when he is a Washington insider himself.
Kerry in turn suggested that Edwards was being disingenuous on trade and lacked the "experience and proven ability" to get things done in Washington. "I just listened to John talk about Washington, D.C.," he said. "Last time I looked, John ran for the United States Senate, and he's been in the Senate for the last five years. That seems to me to be Washington, D.C."
By winning the overwhelming majority of the states with contests on Tuesday and the biggest share of the delegates, Kerry could make it almost impossible for Edwards to say he has a genuine chance to become the Democratic presidential nominee, and that would increase the pressure on Edwards to end his candidacy.
Edwards hopes for a reprieve on four states: Georgia, Ohio, Minnesota and Maryland. But he dismissed questions about whether a poor showing would drive him from the race and insisted that he intends to continue campaigning, even if he loses all 10 contests on Tuesday. "The American people deserve a choice, and we are a very different choice," he said.
That is the natural response of a competitive politician confident of his skills as a candidate, but the issue before Edwards, if not in Sunday's debate then soon after the polls close on Tuesday, is where his ambitions lie and what is the best way to get there.
There is no good way to campaign for the vice presidency. Edwards's allies debate privately what makes the most sense, if Edwards is truly interested in being considered for the ticket. Should he campaign hard against Kerry in an effort to demonstrate his vote-getting appeal in primaries and caucuses, or should he scale back his criticisms in an effort not to inflict damage on Kerry that the Republicans could exploit in the general election?
On Sunday, Edwards walked that line carefully, nicking Kerry but avoiding an all-out attack. Still, Kerry did not look pleased. If the race goes on much longer, the senator and his advisers may be even less charitable toward Edwards and his tactics. That is why, once Tuesday's voting results are in, Edwards will face a most difficult decision.
a paul wellstone democrat.........