Candidates Do the Surplus Math

Al Gore and Bill Bradley clashed Wednesday night in a bare-knuckled debate that rocked both Democrats back on their heels, as they traded bitter blows over who has waged the more negative campaign.

In a cantankerous session focused far more on tactics than substance, Vice President Gore spent the most time under fire, fending off jabs from Bradley as well as pointed questions from one of the debate’s moderators.

Bradley repeatedly portrayed himself as the victim of smear tactics. He characterized Gore’s campaign as “a thousand promises and a thousand attacks,” and turned that accusation into a negative attack of his own. “Why should we believe that you will tell the truth as president if you don’t tell the truth as a candidate?” Bradley demanded.

Gore, looking affronted, replied: “That’s not a negative attack?”

CNN anchorwoman Judy Woodruff set the tone from the very first question, suggesting Gore--who has been the clear aggressor in the primary contest--had waged a “mean-spirited campaign.” Gore rejected that characterization, insisting he has never lied, purposely misled voters or leveled any personal attacks against Bradley.

He reprised his familiar criticisms of the former New Jersey senator, focusing again on the health care plan at the center of his campaign. “I know you’re uncomfortable hearing this,” Gore taunted. “But I’m going to defend Medicare and Medicaid.”

The debate, co-hosted by CNN and WMUR-TV in Manchester, marked the seventh time the two Democratic contestants have clashed and was by far their nastiest of the campaign.

For Bradley, the stakes were particularly high, with the debate offering the underdog his first and perhaps best chance to kick-start his campaign here after a lopsided defeat Monday night in the Iowa caucuses.

Recent New Hampshire polls show Gore opening a small but significant lead over his only rival, after trailing Bradley for the last several months. The political reverberations from Iowa are rarely clear, given the prized independence of New Hampshire voters. But there is little doubt Bradley needs a victory here to regain the momentum his campaign has lost in the last few bumpy weeks--and that seemed to explain the more pugnacious stance he displayed Wednesday night.

Early on, Woodruff asked whether he was too low-key to wage a strenuous fight against the eventual GOP nominee. “I fight for my convictions and things I believe in,” Bradley replied. “I don’t believe in politics as usual, the charge-countercharge. . . . I believe in fighting for principle.”

Then, for close to 60 minutes, on an antiseptic TV sound stage, Bradley matched Gore dirt clod-for-dirt clod in precisely the sort of mud-heaving both professed to abhor.

In one of the harsher exchanges, Gore renewed his attack on Bradley for his vote in favor of the federal budget cuts passed under Republican President Reagan in 1981.

“I just don’t see how you can vote for Ronald Reagan’s budget cuts, then try to campaign like Robert Kennedy,” Gore scoffed.

“That reminds me of the story about Richard Nixon,” Bradley shot back. “Richard Nixon was the kind of politician who would chop down a tree and stand on the stump and give a speech about conservation.”

When they weren’t casting aspersions, the two candidates were busy laying blame. Bradley accused Gore of waging the more negative campaign. But Gore insisted that Bradley was the only candidate forced to apologize for his campaign tactics, a reference to an anti-Gore flyer that was briefly circulated in New Hampshire before being withdrawn after Bradley disavowed its contents. “If you’re going to talk about a higher standard,” Gore said, “you need to live by one.”

Bradley said there was a considerable difference between a flyer circulated “to a couple hundred people vs. an advertisement on television. That’s like comparing a gnat to an elephant. You’re the elephant of negative advertising.”

Aside from the tenor of their respective campaigns, the candidates also sought to pick apart each other’s records. Gore forced Bradley to again defend his vote against the 1996 welfare reform bill and past Senate votes for a school vouchers experiment. Bradley made Gore explain his past support for some restrictions on a woman’s right to choose abortion and forced the vice president to deny he was under the sway of special interests contributing to his campaign.

All the vituperation aside, there was some new policy ground explored. Bradley explained why he alone among the presidential candidates opposes higher defense spending. “We no longer have to fight the Cold War,” Bradley said, calling for greater consolidation of military bases and “tough choices” about Pentagon spending on various research technologies.

Gore, asked about the anti-administration sentiment called “Clinton fatigue,” touted the economic accomplishment of the last seven years. “People are tired of the whole discussion about the president’s personal mistake,” he said. “They think that by and large he has been a great president in turning this economy around.

But he also vowed, “This will be a fresh new administration” and offered no job assurances for Clinton administration holdovers.

There was even a light moment, when WMUR’s Tom Griffith, the co-moderator, asked Bradley about the worst behavior he ever had on the basketball court. The former NBA star forward owned up to “occasionally holding” the Boston Celtics’ John Havlicek--a sports legend here in New England.