Updated Nov. 5 | 9:15 p.m. EST

Fittingly, season of the unexpected ends with more twists and turns

By CHUCK RAASCH
GNS Political Writer

WASHINGTON — The meltdown of the media's vote-projection system during Tuesday's election was a fitting end to an election season marred by the unexpected.

It was scarred by death and, in the end, by the negative partisanship that so many politicians had temporarily foresworn in the national unity following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In many ways, America remains a house divided. A few thousand votes scattered in a few intensely fought elections could determine control of Congress and governorships. And as Tuesday shows, America still struggles in its civic functions.

This time, it was the failure of the Voter News Service, a consortium of news organizations that in past elections has conducted an intimate dance of technology, brainpower and shoe leather to forecast elections as votes are being counted. Early Tuesday evening, VNS officials declared they had no confidence in their exit poll numbers, and effectively eliminated their ability to analyze why people voted the way they did and to project elections before actual votes were counted.

It was tragic for prognosticators and political junkies, but nowhere near the tragedy that already had been visited upon campaign 2002.

On Oct. 25, Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., was killed in a plane crash in the north woods of his state. His death threw Minnesota into a tornado of grief and politics.

A month earlier, another upheaval - this one far more political - had occurred. New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J. - nicknamed "The Torch" - had quit his re-election effort under an ethics cloud. His replacement on the ballot was a political rival, former New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who campaigned for a month against Republican newcomer Doug Forrester.

But in many ways, the fight for the House of Representatives and the Senate was decided last year. A perfect storm of conditions virtually guaranteed the clouds of 2002.

It began in 2001 when states started redrawing congressional districts after the 2000 Census. They overwhelmingly bent to pressure to protect incumbent members of the House first. That left little room for newcomers or challengers, narrowing the field of opportunities.

Congress also approved a tax cut central to President Bush's economic program, and many Democrats in vulnerable Senate races voted with him. As the economy soured and Democrats couldn't attack with authenticity the central tenet of Bush's economic plan.

And, finally, the terrorist attacks that killed more than 3,000 people fundamentally altered the foreign policy landscape and Bush's image. His approval rating, although it has dipped below 60 percent, is higher than any president at this point in his tenure since John F. Kennedy in 1962.

Additionally, Bush's extremely narrow victory in the 2000 presidential election came with virtually no coattails. There were few marginal Republicans to fuel the normal losses of the party that controls the White House in nonpresidential elections.

So when confidence in October was the lowest in 10 years, Democrats were unwilling or unable to capitalize on the usual election formula of blaming the party in the White House. Bush's Republicans also might have been helped when the stock market, which had made a lot of voters nervous in a September swoon, went up over 1,000 points in the month leading into the election.

Some believe election 2002 was a missed opportunity for both political parties.

Thomas Riehle, president of the polling firm Ipsos-Reid, said Republicans failed to "translate support for the president to support for his party and policies. So you have to say this was a missed opportunity to translate George Bush's standing into a new vision for the party."

For Democrats, the missed opportunity might have been even larger, Riehle said.

"Consumer (confidence) numbers are at the lowest level they have been for years, and people are concerned about the economy and the direction it is taking," Riehle said. "There was a lot of material laying on the ground for the Democrats to make an alternative set of policies, but they could not do so for two reasons.

The first, he said, was Democrats "abdicated" on foreign policy by voting overwhelmingly in October for Bush's use of force resolution against Iraq. The second, Riehle said, came because Democrats "abdicated on the economy because very few Democrats were willing to take on the president's tax policies."