Editorial: Dead-even after astonishing night

Few elections in American history have been as memorable as the extraordinary events last night. Who will forget an election night in which a candidate phoned his opponent to concede defeat and called back 90 minutes later to cancel his concession? For months opinion polls indicated Americans were deadlocked but the real poll has been astounding. After 93 million votes had been counted last night, the contest came down to under 1000 votes in Florida.

The presidential election presented Americans with a classic dilemma: should they vote for the candidate who seemed best qualified, or the man they liked better? It is a dilemma perhaps most likely to arise at a time of peace, prosperity, comfort and complacency. In a crisis, people may be more likely to go for the candidate who seems more competent and decisive.

This election has been so desperately hard for the Democrat, Al Gore, when the economy should have made it a cakewalk. He has been part of an Administration that has presided over eight years of unprecedented prosperity, to which a balanced federal Budget made an important contribution. Mr Gore played a larger part in that Administration than Vice-Presidents usually do.

But it is the Republicans who appear to have profited from the prosperity. A comfortable electorate has given George W. Bush an enthusiastic hearing, despite his deficiencies in policy and technicalities. They liked him, perhaps all the more for his conspicuous lack of expertise and, according to reports, his limited interest in politics. Mr Bush ran as the outsider, though he is the son of a previous President, and Mr Gore carried the Washington baggage - always a heavy burden in US elections.

A contest could have been influenced by a premature call from one of the networks that Mr Gore had taken the pivotal state, Florida. At that stage, voters in states almost as crucial - California, Oregon and Washington - were still to go to the polls. When more Florida results were in, CNN had to cancel its prediction. Who knows how many on the West Coast had gone to the beach rather than the polling booth on hearing the initial call?

But on balance it was an impressive electoral operation, which the internet now enables interested people in other countries to monitor as closely as anybody in Washington. New Zealanders cannot help being struck by the speed at which results from an electorate of that size were processed and declared. It was another indictment of the shambles that this country witnessed last November.

Americans, like New Zealanders last year, had a long night if they were awaiting a conclusive result. But at least American poll clerks had the excuse that the race was tight - tighter even than the Kennedy margin over Vice-President Nixon in 1960.

The deadlock is, among other things, a testament to the accuracy of modern opinion polling. It should be observed that the pollster's task is made more difficult in the United States by the poor turnouts that mark their elections. To find a useful sample, polls have to reach people who are not only eligible and registered voters, but are in the habit of voting.

If yesterday's turnout had exceeded predictions, that would have been cause for celebration among civic-minded Americans. The task of encouraging citizens to vote is not helped by the fact that, when so many positions and referendums are lumped into one election, the ballot paper can grow to the proportions of a small book.

Elections are normally a referendum on the Government, but it is hard to read this one in that way. Mr Gore set out to distance himself from the Clinton White House and demonstrate that his presidency would not be simply a continuation of the past eight years. Mr Bush had little he could criticise in the Democrats' economic record and offered a change of style rather than substance. So however the deadlock is resolved when special votes are counted, continuity in American policy is probably assured.

Whoever finally emerges as the winner will be profoundly affected by the experience of last night. This cannot be a resounding mandate for change or for either contender. The next President, Mr Bush or Mr Gore, will know when he takes office that he has still to win a decisive endorsement and must set out to earn one. That is a good way to start.

Herald Online feature: America votes