Press: Fighting the Last War

(2 of 3)

NBC, for example, ably challenged the notion that the vote was a referendum on Reaganomics. But its election coverage began, while polls were still open across much of the country, with a too cozy report from the White House on the positive signs that Republicans perceived. CBS erred the other way. The hyperkinetic Rather, who had stoked up on spaghetti for energy, seemed infatuated with homey metaphors ("as long as a well rope") and cutesy topical imagery ("E.T., phone home: [New Mexico Senator and Former Astronaut] Jack Schmitt needs help"). Above all, he appeared hell-bent on spotting a Democratic trend. For Republicans, he said, "it certainly doesn't look good. No way to make it look good." White House Correspondent Lesley Stahl shared his view. Soon after 7 p.m. E.S.T., she announced flatly, "It is a Democratic year." After Reporter Bruce Morton miscalled Hiler's defeat, he suggested that Democrats could win "40 or 50 seats" in the House.

White House aides were understandably furious. Said one ranking insider: "It was the most blatantly partisan election-night coverage that I have ever seen." Presidential Spokesman David Gergen telephoned Stahl during the broadcast to complain. She relayed the protest to Rather, but it apparently had no effect on him or his colleagues. Next day, on the CBS Evening News, Moyers opined that the elections had "crippled the Republican Party."

The networks brought to election light a nest of presumptions that had been established by influential print pundits. Syndicated Columnists Jack Germond and Jules Witcover hammered away about the burden imposed on all Republican candidates by Reaganomics. Joseph Kraft predicted that "the Democrats could pick up 30 to 40 [House] seats."

Tom Wicker of the New York Times forecast that concern over Administration designs on Social Security would drive many Republican-leaning elderly voters into the Democratic camp. And David Broder of the Washington Post performed an uncharacteristic double swerve: after ruminating two weeks before the election about "a landslide that may never land," he trumpeted six days before the voting that Democrats were "in striking range of control of the Senate." He then backed off four days later and guessed, correctly, that a standoff was the probable Senate result. As a group the commentators were like generals fighting the previous war. Having been surprised by the conservative landslide in 1980, the sages were primed to find the electorate speaking decisively once again. They turned ripples into tidal waves.

Many of the national pundits relied on regional newspaper and TV-station polls, which made some notable goofs. Surveys by the New York Daily News, Long Island's Newsday and a subsidiary of the Gannett News Service all gave Democratic Gubernatorial Nominee Mario Cuomo a final-week lead ranging from 9% to 13%; he won by 3%. The Illinois Governor's race brought on the worst polling failures: the Chicago Tribune found Republican Thompson ahead, 53% to 34%, and the Chicago Sun-Times had the race barely closer, 55% to 40%.