If those who watched the final presidential debate came away thinking they had not heard anything new and were left wondering how either candidate would pay for the domestic programs they touted, there was good reason. Wednesday night’s debate was less an exchange of ideas than 90 minutes of dueling sound bites. While President George Bush and Sen. John Kerry traded many barbs, they shed little light on how they would achieve the goals they set for the next four years.

Asked how he would pay for his health care plan, not raise taxes and not increase the deficit, Sen. Kerry said he would reinstate the pay-as-you-go rules that Congress operated under in the 1990s. This sensible set of rules required that new programs and tax cuts could not be approved unless their cost was offset by savings somewhere else in the federal budget. Maine’s senators have strongly fought to bring back “pay-go” but their efforts have been opposed by the Bush administration.

“I’ll tell you what pay-go means,” the president quipped, “when you’re a senator from Massachusetts, when you’re a colleague of Ted Kennedy, pay-go means: ‘You pay, and he goes ahead and spends.'”

Despite his derision of pay-go, the president had no better explanation of how he would cover the cost of reforming Social Security, extending tax cuts and increasing education spending. His contention that he would halve the deficit in five years by encouraging pro-growth policies and “fiscal responsibility in the halls of Congress” rang hollow after his tax cuts, the war in Iraq and increased federal spending have pushed the deficit to record levels.

“Being lectured by the president on fiscal responsibility is a little bit like Tony Soprano talking to me about law and order in this country,” Sen. Kerry joked.

Such spontaneous moments of levity were rare, however. Much of the debate was taken up by both candidate repeating facts and figures from their stump speeches even when they had little relevance to the question asked. Asked about flu shots, the president talked about trial lawyers and the threats of litigation. Mr. Kerry talked about health insurance. Sen. Kerry worked in several times that Mr. Bush was the first president in 72 years to preside over an economy that has lost jobs. President Bush noted as often as possible that his opponent is a liberal senator from Massachusetts.

Such exchanges may have made the candidates feel better about themselves, but they left the viewing public with little idea of how either man would boost the economy, pay for expanded health care coverage or reduce the deficit.

On the positive side, the last debate shed the most light on the candidates’ personal beliefs. Mr. Kerry explained how he tried to separate his Catholic beliefs from his policy decisions. Mr. Bush explained how his faith sustains him and shapes his policies. Both men talked, self-deprecatingly, about living with strong women.

The debates, despite their rigid formats, voluminous rules and the candidates’ tendencies to avoid direct answers and detailed explanations, gave the public a good sense of who these two men are and how their differing views would guide their governing.