So the stage is set for the presidential campaign.

It's a pair of Kennedy-style liberals against a brace of die-hard conservatives. Both pairs are maneuvering for the centrist vote that may assure them the presidency and vice presidency.

A folksy Bush and a somber Cheney versus a Lincolnesque, introspective Kerry and a bubbly Edwards. A couple of millionaire Republicans against a couple of millionaire Democrats.

For president, a jet-fighter jock and Ivy League guy (Yale and the Skull and Bones society) versus a Navy gunboat skipper and Ivy League guy (Yale and the Skull and Bones society).

Should either one, as president, be eliminated from office we might see as president John Edwards, a man of telegenic charm but as of now one with little experience of running a country or negotiating international thickets, or Dick Cheney, taciturn but solid, the kind of presidential aide you were glad to see in the White House when 9/11 terrorists struck.

Now begun in earnest, the campaign debate will revolve around Iraq abroad and the economy at home.

Kerry-Edwards will charge, as they did in weekend interviews, that misleading intelligence about Iraq relied upon by Bush-Cheney cost American lives, dollars and prestige. The problem for Kerry-Edwards is that most everybody in Congress — Republicans and Democrats alike — as well as much of the press and a host of foreign nations believed that intelligence to be true at the time. So the question is whether Bush-Cheney or the intelligence community will get the brunt of the nation's scorn. The other problem for Kerry-Edwards is that their criticism of Bush-Cheney on Iraq is all backward-looking, and they don't seem to have any more original plans for the future of Iraq than President Bush has already, but perhaps belatedly, adopted.

Meanwhile the economy may be losing its significance as a hot-button campaign issue for Kerry-Edwards. In the past several months that economy has created more new jobs than were lost in the 9/11 aftermath. New jobs growth is traditionally the last indication of the end of a slump and an upturn in economic growth. Economists I know say irrespective of who wins the presidency in November, either one will inherit a burgeoning U.S. economy.

Edwards was not Kerry's first possible choice as the running mate who could make the Democratic ticket catch fire and brush such practical political problems aside. Though her name may have never publicly crossed Kerry's lips in this regard, and though she may not have been offered it, it could not have escaped the Kerry campaign's fantasizing that Hillary Clinton would have made a sensational running mate. The problem there is that while a Kerry-Clinton defeat in 2004 would position her nicely for her own presidential bid in 2008, a Kerry-Clinton win in 2004, with the possibility of a second term for Kerry lasting to 2012, would frustrate her own presidential ambitions.