Editorial: Kerry’s back in the game

Friday, Oct. 1, 2004 | 6:29 a.m.

WEEKEND EDITION

October 2 - 3, 2004

A week ago it appeared that John Kerry's campaign was headed down the drain. Compounding matters for Kerry was that the first presidential debate would be about foreign policy, which has been viewed as one of President Bush's strengths. But conventional wisdom, as it has so often this election year, was upended again, this time by Kerry winning Thursday's debate in a convincing way. Kerry, who was relaxed, forthright and direct, helped himself by laying out a coherent policy for Iraq and the war on terrorism. The debate also was revealing of Bush, who didn't have the command of issues one would expect of a man who has been president for nearly four years. Bush also seemed distracted at times, even unnerved, by the moderator's questions or Kerry's remarks. In a nutshell, it was Bush who didn't seem presidential.

On Iraq, Kerry conveyed a clear message -- something that he acknowledged during the debate that he hasn't always done during this campaign. Kerry accused Bush of a "colossal error of judgment" in invading Iraq without building a true coalition to wage the war and without planning for the peace, which instead became the nightmarish insurgency under way now. The war, which already has killed more 1,000 Americans and which was undertaken to rid Saddam Hussein of stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction that we now know didn't exist, also diverted U.S. military efforts to wipe out al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden. And Bush, Kerry aptly charged, has shortchanged funding for homeland security.

Bush is in a difficult position after the debate, but he has shown himself to be resilient politically when facing a tough opponent. There are still two more presidential debates and one vice presidential debate left, so there are opportunities for both campaigns to make gains or, alternatively, stumble along the way. And if Kerry is to capitalize on the gains he made from the debate, he will have to continue communicating clearly with the American people -- and not return to a stilted way of speaking that can turn off voters.

Last week's debate reminds us in some ways of the debate in 1980 between President Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Prior to that debate, many pundits thought that Carter's mastery of foreign policy issues would be a huge advantage, and that Reagan would be hobbled by undecided voters' uneasiness about whether he would be a steady hand as commander in chief. Reagan ultimately reassured voters during that debate, helping him capture the White House. Thursday's debate wasn't the same kind of defining moment, but Kerry did show that he understands what it takes to defend this country and make it stronger and safer -- and that he could comfortably make the transition from being a U.S. senator to being president of the United States.