One More Debate: Will it Matter?
WILLIAM J. CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Both sides have agreed to issue public statements unequivocal calling for an end of violence.</s>HANAN ASHWARI, PALESTINIAN SPOKESWOMAN: The Palestinians are really enraged. They feel that this type of agreement was achieved under duress, in the sense that there was an unfair and tremendous pressure on President Arafat.</s>EHUD BARAK, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: We have achieved our goals at this summit, and we'd like to thank the president of the United States, making this effort to bring about the summit here.</s>BOBBIE BATTISTA, HOST: It is too soon to predict an ultimate success for the emergency Mideast summit. But if you must decide which of these two men is better qualified to handle this type of crisis in the future, who would it be?</s>MARC GINSBURG, GORE SENIOR FOREIGN POLICY ADVISER: Al Gore has been one of the most important leaders in this country dealing with terrorism. He formed a commission to help deter terrorism.</s>SEN. TRENT LOTT (R-MS), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: I think it very well could affect Governor George W. Bush because leadership is important, experience matters, but judgment trumps it all, and that's where I think George W. Bush wins.</s>BATTISTA: Good afternoon, everybody, and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. Governor George Bush and Vice President Al Gore face-off again tonight for the third and last in a series of presidential debates. The last time they met, they spent nearly 45 minutes debating who's better equipped to handle the Mideast crisis and other international affairs. A CNN/"USA Today" Gallup tracking poll of likely voters taken over the weekend shows that both were successful in convincing voters: 47 percent think Al Gore is more qualified while 43 percent say Bush is, a dead heat given the 4 percent margin of error. Now as to who would better handle the attack on the USS Cole: 46 percent said Bush compared to 41 percent who said Gore. Here to talk about all of this and the debate coming up tonight are Joe Conason, a columnist and political editor at "The New York Observer." He is the author of the book "The Hunting of the President." Also, Ramesh Ponnuru, a senior editor of "The National Review" is with us. Good to see both of you. Let me just start by saying that the events of the Middle East obviously have pushed presidential politics off the front page for the last week or so. So how much focus do you think will be on international policy in tonight's debate? And how much will it matter, do you think, in people's votes in general -- Joe.</s>JOE CONASON, "THE NEW YORK OBSERVER": Well, I think there may be some emphasis on it probably because, as I understand it, Jim Lehrer, the moderator, gets to pick the questions from the audience. Even though it's a town hall meeting, he will select some of the questions, and he's clearly very interested in foreign policy. And I think he's maybe reasonably concerned that there's been so little attention paid to it through the course of the whole campaign, particularly when the events in the Middle East and other things that have happened brought back the reality to voters that this is a big scary world, and the president of the United States has an important role to play. That domestic concerns are not the only ones that matter, and that, you know, we have to be looking outward in a world that's getting smaller, where trade, defense, human rights, all these issued that preoccupied presidents for at least half of their time in the Oval Office in most administrations still matter a lot.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh, do you think we're going to hear a lot about foreign policy tonight?</s>HAMESH PONNURU, "THE NATIONAL REVIEW": No, I'd be awfully surprised if we had as much foreign policy as we did in the last debate, where there were 42 minutes of it, because Lehrer was asking the questions. The questions are going to be driven by what the audience wants to hear about, and based on past experience, there's not going to be a ton of questions about foreign policy.</s>BATTISTA: You know, we'll straighten this out a litter later with Susan Page from "USA Today," but I think Jim Lehrer also get to ask questions tonight in sort of a follow-up manner, so that could -- we'll talk to her about how much control that, you know, he will have. We don't know what's going to happen in the Middle East in the next couple of weeks, but it seems to me that history has told us in the past that voters seem less likely to change their president or their leader in the midst of a foreign policy crisis. Do you agree with that? Could that work in Al Gore's favor, do you think, Joe?</s>CONASON: Well, they don't have any choice but to change their leader this time because President Clinton is at the end of his two terms and he can't run for office again. So they have to assess whether they think, first of all, that the foreign policy of the Clinton-Gore administration is one that they support or that they think Al Gore's 24 years in public life has prepared him adequately to take over as president, and what -- and how that compares with Governor Bush, who has no foreign policy experience to speak of, but is surrounded by advisers from his father's administration. So there has to be a weighing of factors that whether people want continuity, whether they want to return to the old -- what would amount mostly to the old Bush policies, and that's a real toss-up. I haven't seen a lot of polling data about how people compare foreign policy positions between Bush and Gore.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh.</s>PONNURU: I think it's a bit of a wash, maybe a slight advantage for Bush, actually because Republicans still retain an advantage on questions of foreign policy and defense. And, you know, it's been said that the Democrats are the mommy party, and the Republicans are the daddy party, with the Democrats, you know, take care of you but the Republicans offer you security, and, you know, they're there when trouble breaks out and I think that people may want daddy back.</s>BATTISTA: That's interesting. Dennis, in our audience, a few moments ago said that you were -- you thought that George Bush would handle an international crisis better because you felt he would surround himself with people like Colin Powell and Dick Cheney. So is it George Bush -- is it right to give George Bush the credit for possibly, you know, handling a foreign policy crisis better or is it -- are people thinking that it's because he would surround himself with better people? Ramesh, or Joe, go ahead.</s>CONASON: Well, I think there's a real question as to whether being surrounded with the likes of Dick Cheney and Colin Powell makes for a better foreign policy team. You know, we had a big foreign policy crisis in Kosovo and at the time that the president decided to join with the NATO allies and bomb to brush back Serbia, Governor Bush hid out in his house for two weeks, Colin Powell opposed it, and it was a very important and successful action on behalf of values that the United States seeks to promote in the world. So I'm not sure that the Republicans any longer have that great an advantage on these issues.</s>PONNURU: I think Bush actually took a pretty responsible course during the Kosovo intervention.</s>CONASON: He didn't say anything.</s>PONNURU: He supported the bombing and he came out against Congressional attempts to interfere with it. You know, there was an attempt in the house...</s>CONASON: Eventually, he did, but for the first couple of weeks he had nothing to say. And, you know, the point is whoever is surrounding him, whether it's Powell, Cheney, George Schultz, the people who are responsible for Iran-Contra or other any number of other Bush foreign policy advisers, in the end, the president is the one who has to make the decisions, and people have to decide whether they think Governor Bush is equipped to make those decisions.</s>PONNURU: And what -- but some of the decisions the president has to make is to figure out whose advice to listen to and I think people do give Bush credit for having very talented and bright team of advisers. I don't think that's anything that Bush needs to, you know, shy away or run away from advertising.</s>CONANSON: No, but -- well, they've been trying to educate him on foreign policy matters for a while, but, you know, he showed that he's still pretty shallow on these issues in the last debate. He didn't know that we'd pulled out of Haiti a long time ago. He didn't know that almost three-quarters of the troops to grounds in Bosnia and Kosovo are European allies, and not ours, and several other cases he just doesn't know the territory very well. The vice president has been prepared for this for eight years or more.</s>PONNURU: Well, in the first debate Gore appeared not to understand his own administration's policy about bringing the Russians in Yugoslavia.</s>CONASON: Well, there was a real question whether that was the right thing to do, and the timing of that. But, you know, you have Bush on the other hand making allegation against Victor Chernomyrdin, which could have really set back relationships between the United States and Russia, shooting from the hip when he clearly doesn't know what the International Monetary Fund even does. So there's are real problems there's that kind of outweigh the one slip by Gore.</s>PONNURU: The bottom line here is, though, I think voters are going conclude that both men are competent and capable of dealing with foreign affairs and I don't think it's going to be a major issue in the election.</s>BATTISTA: Yes, I was just going to say that because I think what we heard a lot of last week was a lot agreement between the two candidates on how they would handle some of these matters, so are there any real fundamental differences?</s>PONNURU: I think people are not going to get into the weeds on, you know, the specifics of each -- of our policy towards each country. I think what we saw in the last debate there's a difference in emphasis where Gore beliefs in using American power abroad to support our values and our ideals, and Bush thinks more in terms of concrete interests, national interests and we should only use our power when it's very definitely benefits the national interests. But that's a difference of emphasis because both of them are willing to concede to the other that ideals and security are important criteria.</s>CONASON: Well, that's a very vague way of saying something that could have very concrete results or impact, and it has in the past. I mean, the Bush-type foreign policy is one that ignores human rights concerns, you know, you can see it in the record of his running mate who voted to -- against a resolution to free Nelson Mandela from prison. You know, consistently supported South Africa over its critics in the international arena. In other countries like the Philippines, where Bush's father was a supporter of Ferdinand Marcos, the dictator there. In other words, these kinds -- this attitude that we should discard human rights and other types of important concerns in favor of simple commercial interests or military interests is one that can have a real impact on people's lives.</s>BATTISTA: But the other issue that Americans can wrap their arms around is whether or not they think that our military is spread a little bit too thin, Ramesh, and that's the way, I think, a lot of Americans relate to our foreign policy issues.</s>PONNURU: Yes, I think Bush has struck a nerve with the idea that the military is not getting the resources it needs and is being over deployed, that it is being pulled in both directions. And I think that that's a debate that Bush and Cheney are likely to win.</s>CONASON: Well, you have to ask yourself, then, why Governor Bush and Mr. Cheney are only proposing a $45 million increase to -- billion, I'm sorry, increase to the military budget over nine years, and Vice President Gore is proposing to increase the military budget by $100 billion over 10 years. So if Mr. Bush...</s>PONNURU: Well, Gore is counting a lot of non-military things in the military budget.</s>CONASON: If Mr. Bush would give a slightly smaller tax cut to the very wealthiest people in the country, he could afford to do the things that he says need to be done for the military, which the Clinton administration starting to do, that is to say raise salaries for military personnel, giving them decent housing and improving conditions in the military for our personnel so that people were more willing to stay. And so whatever readiness problems there are, which I think have been exaggerated, can be addressed.</s>BATTISTA: I...</s>PONNURU: Well...</s>BATTISTA: Quickly, Ramesh, I've got to take a break.</s>PONNURU: The administration's been dragged kicking and screaming to improve its lousy record on military affairs. People aren't going to buy that they're better than Bush would be.</s>BATTISTA: We do have to take a break. We'll be back in just a moment. And as we do, we invite you to you take part in our TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at CNN .com/TALKBACK. Today's question is, do you need tonight's presidential debate to help you make your decision? We'll be back. President Clinton oversaw the famous handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat on the White House lawn in 1993. Since then, Mr. Arafat has been to the White House a dozen times, more than any other world leader.</s>STEPHANIE: Well, I lean towards Bush. I've always been a Republican, but I like some things about Al Gore also. I like, as a woman, I like that Al Gore is pro-abortion. I feel that's up to a woman to decide and no one else's business. But yet, I feel Bush -- I like it that -- I think he does have experience in some foreign affairs just because of being with his father and around that, and he has experienced that. But I don't know how I feel about tonight, and I think sometimes Al Gore appears too egotistical. And as I said before, I think job sharing would be great, because they both have great qualities. Either one will probably do a good job.</s>BATTISTA: You knows what, you bring up something that I'm going to follow up on, because it has been in the news, I personally think too much, but nonetheless, the question has to be asked, Joe, because so many people are asking it, which Al Gore are we going to see tonight? That seems to be a problem for a lot of people.</s>CONASON: Well, I think, frankly, that the vice president reacted a little too much to media criticism of him after the first debate when he appeared in the second debate. In other words, he pulled back too much. He should definitely just be himself, which is a pretty aggressive politicians who knows a great deal and has a lot of experience. I think if he unleashes that real Al Gore, he'll do fine against Bush or anybody else, as he's shown in the past.</s>BATTISTA: John, you're an undecided voter as well.</s>JOHN: I think, you know, if nothing changes, I'll vote the same way I have for the last 25 years. But I'm waiting for something to really hit me. I'm from Indiana, I'm middle class, I think I represent the majority of the population. I want to hear something about health care, education, Social Security that's going to affect me. And I think if a candidate comes out and really hits me with something that I agree with, that's the candidate I'm going to go with.</s>BATTISTA: All right, I got an e-mail a few moments ago that I thought was sort of interesting. Steve in Indiana says, "It will be interesting to see how the two candidates react to the tragic death of Governor Carnahan. With Missouri being such a swing state, the candidate with the most emotion and compassion to the governor's death could lock up that state." And we have a bunch of folks in the audience from Missouri who said they were discussing that very thing later today. Gina, you think that's possible? You never know what's going to change people's minds one way or the other.</s>GINA: I mean, I think that Missouri lost a wonderful leader, and I would hate to see his death be politicized. And I think that it really comes down to, you know, if they talk about it tonight, who's going to seem more genuine about it. But, really, I think that it really doesn't have a place, especially in that it just occurred, you know, last night. And I think Missouri's still a little shell shocked over it.</s>BATTISTA: I think, Ramesh and Joe, too, how do you think it will affect the tenor of the debate, if at all?</s>CONASON: There may be a kind of somber mood to it, particularly in the beginning, when I assume Mr. Lehrer and both the candidates will acknowledge the tragedy. But I think as it goes on, that's not going to be what controls the tenor of the debate. In the hall in Missouri, I think people are going to be very sad, particularly the people who knew Governor Carnahan and who admired him. But I don't -- I hope that, you know, whoever emotes the best as an actor will not swing the debate it in his favor. That doesn't seem appropriate.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh?</s>PONNURU: I agree with Joe on that. I suppose -- I mean, Gore could, I suppose, talk about honoring Carnahan's memory by supporting some of the policies that Carnahan was associated with, but if he did that I think he'd look like he were exploiting the emotion of the moment. So I really don't think that he will. I think Joe's right. I think you're going to have some opening comments, and that will establish a sort of solemn tone at that time beginning. But then the debate -- the natural dynamic of the debate will reassert itself.</s>BATTISTA: Let me take a quick break here, and then we'll talk more about other issues that may dominate tonight's debate, and we'll talk with Susan Page of "USA Today" as well. We'll be back.</s>BATTISTA: Joining us now in St. Louis, Missouri is Susan Page, White House bureau chief for "USA Today." Susan, thank you very much for joining us.</s>SUSAN PAGE, "USA TODAY": Hi, Bobbie, good to be with you.</s>BATTISTA: All right, let's talk a little bit about tonight's debate, it will be a little different from the previous two, it's in a town hall meeting format -- we are pretty familiar with that. How is that working tonight for them?</s>PAGE: Well, there are going to be about 100 undecided voters selected by the Gallup organization, and they'll be -- moderator Jim Lehrer -- they will have submitted some written questions, they'll be screened -- the questions will -- by moderator Jim Lehrer, and he'll call on them to pose the questions to the candidates, so Jim Lehrer will know what they're going to ask; the candidates won't.</s>BATTISTA: And does Jim Lehrer get to do follow-up in any way, shape, or form, or he gets to ask nothing tonight?</s>PAGE: You know, I think he's in control. So for instance, if he felt it was important to ask a question about the Middle East and no voter was going to do that, he'd be free to do that. But I think basically the format is designed to give voters a chance to ask about their concerns, and we know what those concerns are, they're the same things that people in your audience have been mentioning: Social Security, Medicare, patients' bill of rights -- those are the kind of issues that are on the top of most voters' minds.</s>BATTISTA: Which candidate is thought to have the advantage in tonight's format?</s>PAGE: Well, you know, Al Gore has been in politics for 24 years, and he was doing town hall meetings all that time, initially in his Tennessee House district, so he certainly has more experience with this format than George W. Bush. On the other hand, George W. Bush has a very nice, informal, engaging manner, so it's not as though he's at, I think, a tremendous disadvantage with the town hall format. And it's been interesting in past races to look at these town hall formats, as in 1992, really a way for voters to get a sense of what the candidates are like.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh and Joe, do you both agree that this is a positive thing for both candidates tonight, this format?</s>CONASON: I do agree. I think they both have strengths that are served by this format. I think, as Susan said, Bush's manner -- easygoing manner -- is probably helpful to him in a studio audience situation, and I think that Gore's knowledge and quickness on policy issues will help him to address unexpected questions that may come up from voters.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh, you too?</s>PONNURU: Yes, I do. I think that having politically won the last two debates, though, expectations are a little higher now for Bush than they would be otherwise, and in that sense I think that the -- that he has a little -- he has a bit of a disadvantage going in.</s>BATTISTA: You know, Susan, one thing that was missing from last week's debate, because the events in the Middle East took precedent, was that there wasn't really much spin after the second debate disappeared so quickly from the headlines. Was that thought of as an advantage or a disadvantage by either camp?</s>PAGE: Well, you know, I think the Gore people were really poised to jump on some misstatements that Governor Bush made. You remember he said that all three of the people in the James Byrd hate crime had been sentenced to death; that wasn't correct, two of the three had. And he said we should have more Europeans in the Balkans among those peacekeeping forces; well, 80 percent of them already are European. So the Gore people were ready to try to capitalize on that, they really didn't have a chance to do that because the Middle East turmoil really took everything over.</s>BATTISTA: Eduardo has been hanging on the phone from California. Go ahead.</s>EDUARDO: Hi. First of all, I would like to say my name is Eduardo Cohen (ph), and I'm Jewish, and I think the bombing of the ship in Yemen is symptomatic of a much bigger problem: a very imbalanced policy in the Middle East that really devalues Arab lives, and I think that's represented by embargo against Iraq that's killed a million innocent civilians, according to the United Nations. And in Israel we know that there are radical Jewish demonstrators who throw stones, yet we've seen the Israelis use lethal force against Palestinians they have never used against Jewish rioters. So I think that indicates that this is -- there is a tremendous amount of racism in the violence we are seeing, but in spite of that, I mean, Israel gets away with this because...</s>BATTISTA: How is -- let me ask you this, Eduardo, how is all of this affecting your presidential choice?</s>EDUARDO: Well, this is the thing, I think that we need to rethink our policy. Israel is carrying on this violence because United -- we used our U.N. veto to protect Israel from sanctions. We don't allow international law to be applied to Israel. We don't apply the same standards to Israel we do to other nations, even with nuclear weapons.</s>BATTISTA: OK, I've got to move on, I'm sorry. But I'm guessing from what you are saying is that you don't really think either candidate is the right one for you to handle the situation in the Middle East. But thanks, Eduardo, very much. Comment from -- I'm sorry, I can't read your name tag.</s>BRENDAN: Brendan.</s>BATTISTA: Brendan, OK.</s>BRENDAN: Yes, my comment I have is that, do most voters realize if you vote for Al Gore you are voting for an expanding government that's going to be more invasive in your life, versus George Bush, you have a smaller government that returns more of the power to yourself, and how people feel about that?</s>BATTISTA: Well, Joe, is that a -- that's a matter of perception?</s>CONASON: Yes, I mean, I -- that's one way of imagining what Gore may do or what Bush may do. I mean, I think, you know, from the perspective of a woman, as one of the members of the audience said before, Gore's vision of a government that's pro-choice is less invasive of people's privacy than Bush's potential vision of a government that dictates that choice for women. So I think it really depends what issues you're talking about. I don't -- I haven't heard Al Gore pronouncing any policies which he proposes to invade people's lives or tell them what to do. He has a different tax and spending policy than Bush does but, you know, for most Americans it's not clear that Bush's policy would benefit them more than Gore's.</s>BATTISTA: I've got to take a quick break. We'll continue here in a moment.</s>BATTISTA: We're back; and let me go, quickly, to the audience. Gina (ph), you are a Bush supporter.</s>GINA: Yes, I'm a Bush supporter. I was saying a little bit earlier that I'm a small business owner and I'm really in favor of smaller, less-intrusive government and I really feel like we're going to get that with George Bush. I don't think that the economy has, really, anything to do with the government. As a business owner, I would like to see the government be as responsible in their decision making as I have to go to be in my business and we have grown and we prosper by the hard work of our employees, that we take care of, and the hard work that we do; and I really think that Bush more closely aligns with my views in that regard.</s>BATTISTA: And Jeff (ph), you're a Gore man.</s>JEFF: Yes; I'd say that, in the same sense as Clinton-Gore really has a good feel of the issues and won't just have the issues simmer down to know-a-card. But when he's interacting with Barak and Arafat, for example, or in northern Ireland, he's really going to know the issues, have read biographies, have read a lot of State Department research and won't just have a superficial view of the issues. So, like Clinton, he's really going to get in there and be very personable.</s>BATTISTA: Susan, most people have made up their minds tonight; so who's watching this, particularly over the baseball game, tonight -- and, I guess what I'm asking is, who's undecided right now and why are they still undecided?</s>PAGE: It's really a dwindling group of people. You know, there are people who tend not to be very partisan. Because people who really consider themselves Democrats or Republicans have generally lined up behind the party's candidate by this time. They're disproportionately women. We know that women make decisions in political races later than men do; so it's a very small group of people, really, that the candidates are trying to talk to tonight. They're trying to talk to undecided voters in swing states. And that's probably a group that numbers well under about 1 million people. So, while there are going to be millions of people watching this debate tonight, the intended audience, or the critical audience for the two candidates is just a fraction of that number.</s>BATTISTA: And Joe, who does Al Gore have to talk to tonight? What does he have to do?</s>CONASON: Well, I think he has to convince people that he is the more qualified, more prepared candidate; and I think he has to enunciate, very clearly, the policy differences that he has with Governor Bush on taxes. And I also think he ought to, for a change, start to talk about the record of the administration over the past eight years, because I do believe the Clinton fatigue is mostly a myth, that the president's approval ratings are high and that the record of the administration, particularly on the economy, is a very strong one that Gore ought to try to take some credit for.</s>BATTISTA: There is some thought that me may get rather aggressive, as he has been in the last week or so, with George Bush's record in Texas. Is that a good or bad strategy, do you think?</s>CONASON: I think that's a perfectly sound strategy if he has the facts to back himself up. That is the only record that Governor Bush has, is the record of one and a half terms as governor of a large state, but a large state where the governor actually doesn't do very much. So it's sort of a double-edged sword. You can say that he didn't do much because the governor is very weak in Texas but, then, how much responsibility does he really have for the problems that are in Texas that are severe, particularly in the environment, health care and a few other places.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh, who does George Bush have to reach tonight?</s>PONNURU: Well, I mean -- first of all, I think viewership is going to be down from the previous two debates. I think most people think they've got a pretty good sense of where these guys are coming from; and, particularly, the folks who they most want to reach are probably the people who are least likely to be watching because they tend not to be paying tons of attention to politics and to have sort of a weak relationship to the political process. I think what Bush has to do is again show that he is just he's -- you know, he's unflappable. He's competent and he's got ideas on issues that appeal to people. I think that he needs to do a better job than he has in the past of defending his tax-cut plan against Gore's criticisms. But I think he should welcome a debate about Texas, because I just don't think it's going to work. I think Bush's answer in the last debate makes perfect sense: Look, if I've been such a lousy governor, how did I get reelected with 68 percent of the vote? Does Gore know what's better for the people of Texas than the people of Texas do?</s>CONASON: He outspent his opponent in Texas by literally 30-1.</s>PONNURU: Look, if that had been winnable for Democrats, there would have been tons of money in there.</s>CONASON: Probably because the corporate interests that he was serving in Texas poured millions and millions of dollars into his war chest and the Democrats couldn't begin to beat him. But Texas is a Republican state. That doesn't mean that Americans want Texas policies writ large across this country. And I think it's...</s>PONNURU: But...</s>CONASON: The other thing is that Bush actually severely distorted his own record in Texas.</s>CONASON: For example, he claimed that the state of Texas pays $4.7 billion -- paid $4.7 billion last year to cover the uninsured. As it turned out, the state of Texas actually paid out aobut $1 billion. The rest of the money he was referring to was -- came from private charity and from hospitals spending their own money to care for the uninsured. That kind of thing could really trip him up in this debate, because the record there is difficult to defend on some issues: on care of women and children particularly in health care, and on the environment, which is a disaster down there, and that he has done very little to improve.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh, I will let you answer that when we come back. We have got to take a break.</s>BATTISTA: A poll by the Pew Research Center showed that, in 1996, 96 percent of voters said they planned to vote on Election Day. Only 48.8 percent voted. This year, 97 percent of voters say they plan to go to the polls. Internet quesiton: Let me go ahead an take this. "How will Joe Lieberman, an Orthodox Jew, deal with the Middle East crisis?" Joe, you want to go ahead and take that one?</s>CANASON: Well, actualy, you know, I think we've have a lot of Jewish-Americans in the diplomatic service who have delath with Israel, I think, in a quite even-handed way. Dennis Ross, who has been the negotiator, the chief negotiaotr of -- for Clinton -- and who worked in previous administrations as well on the peace process -- happens to be Jewish. And, if anything, he's been criticized by other Jews for being too favorable to the Palestinians in the whole process. So I actually don't think that is going to matter very much. I think Lieberman will be accutely aware that he will be judged for how fair-minded he is in dealing with Middle East issues in particular.</s>BATTISTA: Ramesh, is that a concern?</s>PONNURU: I don't think so. I think Joe is right on that point. If Lieberman is willing to reach out to Louis Farrakhan, I think that he's going ot be able to have an even-handed MIddle Eastern policy.</s>BATTISTA: Jody, on the phone in Florida. Jody, go ahead.</s>CALLER: Hi, Bobbie. I just have a quick question -- or a comment, really. I don't understand the foreign policy with George W. You know, when Bill Clinton came in eight years ago, there was not a big concern as to what his foreign policy was. And I think they are making more of it. I really don't think people care about foreign policy like they are acting. That is pretty obvious with the downsiziing of the American military. My husband is retired military. So I have a comment for Joe, also. The military is not staying in. And I think people need to be concerned. And I think George W. will make sure that the military is strong again. And I don't believe Gore when he says that he is going to give an increase. We have seen over the last few years where Congress gave themselves 100 percent increases, and our military got anywhere from 2.5 to maybe 3 percent increase. So, yes, that -- I am just a little floored at the foreign policy as far as...</s>CANASON: The biggest -- well, the biggest cuts that have ever been made in the defense budget since World War II were made by George Bush's father. And some of the largest increases in the last 20 years were made by Clinton and Gore. So appearances can be really deceiving on these issues.</s>BATTISTA: Susan, she -- she brought up another point. She said she doesn't think Americans care about foreign policy. We had an Internet comment there a few moments that said, people, all they care is about their money. And they are going to vote money in this election and not on foreign policy. Do you agree with that?</s>PAGE: Well, if people are only voting money, I think they would probably vote for Al Gore. The county has never had such a period of extended prosperity. And, traditionitionally, you would think that would mean the incumbent party would be in pretty good shape. The fact that the race is so close menas that people vote for things other than money, in this case I think: voting on issues of Clinton fatigue, a desire to return honor and dignity to the White House. That is a phrase we have heard George Bush use a lot. On the issue of foreign policy, it's interesting we see the situation really flip from eight years ago. At that point, George W. Bush's father was running as a person who had with a lot more experience in foreign affairs. Bill Clinton was the governor of a small Southern state, had almost no foreign policy experience. Now, we see that changed. Gore has pretty extensive experience on foreign policy over the last eight years. George W. Bush has very little. I think, in both cases, the impact though is likely be pretty marginalized. I think voters are really inclined to vote on domestic issues.</s>BATTISTA: I have got to go to break. As I do: a couple of e- mails along those lines. Jerry says: "President Clinton has no -- had no foreign policy when he entered office, so why does it matter if Bush does?" Bett in Pennyslavnias says: "Vice President Gore has demonstrated global performance, knowledge, experience and work ethic -- will move this nation into the next step in foreign affairs." And Kayla in Florida say: "I would vote for that Conason guy if I could. He is one smart man."</s>BATTISTA: Had to throw that in, Joe. I couldn't resist.</s>CANASON: Not running.</s>BATTISTA: We got to take a break. We'll be back in just a minute.</s>BATTISTA: By the way, during the break, Ramesh, half the audience said that they would vote for you if you were running for president. Just to keep it even-Steven here. Let me go to Maria (ph) in the audience here, quickly.</s>MARIA: I would like to address the fact that the politicians that are running for office, they, throughout history, they have always given us theories; and yet, in reality, we have not got what they have promised. For example, George Bush, he promised us, "read my lips" and we did, all of us; and what did we get? More taxes. You know, what is really happening? I mean, when we go to the polls, do we feel and push that lever, or do we critically think about the issues? And that is the most important thing, is to think.</s>BATTISTA: Trusting the candidate is also an issue, I think, is what you're bringing up -- to deliver what they promise. You know, that's always been an issue, I agree. Leo (ph)?</s>LEO: I have to disagree with the comments that the foreign policy issue is not important. Being Jewish myself, I've kept a pretty close look on what's been going on in the Middle East and, personally, I'm very impressed with the track record of the Clinton and Gore administration. I think they have done an incredible job.</s>BATTISTA: Susan, let me ask you this: Do you think that this debate -- is there any chance at all that this debate could be, sort of, a make-or-break situation for these candidates? Will we see, maybe, any surprises at all or are we just going to, sort of, muddle through until the election?</s>PAGE: Well, I know we often feel like we're kind of muddling through. Yes, I think this could be an incredibly important debate. Now, this race has basically been even up for a couple of months now since we got a week or two out of the Democratic convention. So it, certainly, could go either way. And this is the last big, set piece of the campaign. It's the last time the two candidates will be together speaking to voters. It's the biggest audience they'll have until election night, so it certainly could be very important. But as I saw with the first two debates, it won't necessarily be determinative, because both those debates -- neither of those debates really changed the way the landscape -- we will continue to have a race that's very close, although, at the moment, George Bush is a couple points up. That probably makes the task a little greater for Al Gore tonight. He needs to shake things up. He needs to change the current momentum of this campaign so it comes back his way. So he may have the harder task.</s>BATTISTA: I have to take another break again. As we do, we'll take a quick look at our poll. The question was: Do you need tonight's presidential debate to make you make up your decision? Ten percent still say yes; 90 percent say no. But 10 percent could, certainly, swing an election, so you never know. We'll be back in just a second.</s>BATTISTA: We don't have that much time left. Let me ask all three of you very quickly: What issue do you think that will dominate the debate tonight? Ramesh?</s>PONNURU: Well, I guess the question is going to be, which Al Gore are we going to see tonight? And since Al Gore No. 1 and Al Gore No. 2 lost their debates, can Al Gore No. 3 actually win one?</s>BATTISTA: Joe?</s>CONASON: Well, I hope it's not going to be attack politics like that. I think the main issue tonight will be what it has always been, which is responsibly managing the economy and extending prosperity to all Americans and not just a privileged few.</s>BATTISTA: Susan, quickly?</s>PAGE: A clear task for both. Bush needs to look competent, not make a mistake. Gore needs to look likable -- like a likable human being.</s>BATTISTA: Thank you all so much for joining us; appreciate it. And we'll see you again tomorrow for more TALKBACK LIVE.