VP Debate, Nagourney the surprise

The debate was boring and didn't change any minds. The only surprise was Adam Nagourney's fairly decent analysis.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 - Once again, Dick Cheney sought Tuesday night to come to the rescue of a member of a political family that he has served so loyally for nearly a generation.

For most of the 90-minute encounter with his rival, Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, Mr. Cheney tried to reassure Republicans unsettled by President Bush's debate performance against Senator John Kerry last week, while hammering home the case against Mr. Kerry that polls now suggest Mr. Bush failed to make.

But if Mr. Cheney's task was big Tuesday night, his path was not as easy as it was in 2000, when he faced a genial and unchallenging opponent, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, rather than the combative trial lawyer who sat at his left elbow on Tuesday. Again and again, Mr. Edwards - politely and deferentially referring to his opponent as "Mr. Vice President" - challenged Mr. Cheney's attempt to discredit Mr. Kerry's views and record, poking away at Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush.

As the challenger going up against a seasoned vice president, Mr. Edwards needed to demonstrate a sense of authority, his aides said, and to convince the nation that he could step into the presidency at a moment's notice. For much of the night, he offered a competent, calm performance as he sought to turn back challenges to his experience.

No one was expecting a slam dunk but Edwards did OK against a seasoned politician who can actually use the English Language.

Indeed, if Mr. Cheney came into the debate seeking to reverse the slippage the Republicans have witnessed since Mr. Bush's answers and demeanor Thursday night distressed many supporters, Mr. Edwards succeeded in blocking him for much of the night, although certainly not all. Instead, viewers watched two stylistically different but clearly accomplished politicians in an intense and often grim debate, and loyalists of both parties can be forgiven for thinking that the No. 2 candidates were more slashing debaters than Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush.

Edwards brushed aside one thrust by Cheney in a convincing fashion, unlike Lieberman's unconvincing performance in 2000.

"Whatever the political pressures the moment requires, that's where you're at,'' Mr. Cheney said. "But you've not been consistent, and there's no indication at all that John Kerry has the conviction to successfully carry through on the war on terror.''

Mr. Edwards almost leapt from the chair that the debate rules required him to stay in.

"What the vice president has just said is just a complete distortion,'' he said. "The American people saw John Kerry on Thursday night. They don't need the vice president or the president to tell them what they saw. They saw a man who was strong, who had conviction, who is resolute, who made it very clear that he will do everything that has to be done to find terrorists."