Candidates Push Familiar Themes : Bush, Dukakis Clash on Issues but Avoid Harshly Negative Tone

In a potentially pivotal last debate of the 1988 presidential race, Vice President George Bush hammered home the themes that have made him the front-runner while Gov. Michael S. Dukakis struggled to rescue his campaign by decrying the Reagan Administration’s record and declaring “we can do better.”

The two candidates engaged in several sharp exchanges as they jabbed and sparred on issues ranging from taxes and the deficit to the environment and national security. Striving to project images of presidential dignity and personal warmth, however, both Republican Bush and Democrat Dukakis skirted the harshly negative tone which has often marked this campaign.

The two repeated again and again the points they have emphasized on the stump. Bush stressed traditional values, peace and prosperity. The Massachusetts governor promised to cut defense expenditures, especially for what he called costly and unnecessary strategic weapons, and provide more funds for the homeless, health care, and other domestic programs.

Strong Showing Sought

Before the debate, Dukakis aides had said he needed a strong showing to overcome Bush’s lead in the polls, but the Democratic standard-bearer apparently fell short of that goal. A Los Angeles Times poll of 522 voters immediately after the debate found that Bush had prevailed by 47% to 26%. An ABC poll of 639 voters had it 49% to 33% for Bush.

Exuding confidence and forceful in his answers from the outset of the nationally televised encounter, Bush seized the offensive quickly and then hewed closely to the game plan aides had laid out before the debate: to look presidential and treat Dukakis with respect but meet his rival’s attacks aggressively.

That strategy--with its avoidance of strident rhetoric and occasional displays of calculated generosity toward Dukakis--set the tone for most of the 90-minute event and made it difficult for the Massachusetts governor to land the kind of telling blows that might have rattled Bush.

Dukakis fielded the first question by defending his opposition to the death penalty, which he said was not a deterrent to crime. Bush declared he believed in the death penalty for “heinous” crimes and considered it a deterrent.

And, declaring he was glad Congress had just passed a drug bill that provides the death penalty for drug kingpins, Bush said: “We just have an honest difference of opinion. I support it, and he doesn’t.”

Dukakis criticized Bush for selecting Indiana Sen. Dan Quayle as his vice presidential running mate, a decision polls show has hurt the Bush campaign. This was the “first presidential decision” the two nominees were called upon to make, Dukakis said, and he picked veteran Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen while Bush selected the 41-year-old Quayle.

“Before he did it, he said, ‘Watch my choice for vice president. It will tell all.’ And it sure did. It sure did,” Dukakis declared.

The Quayle issue had been described by some political observers as a potential Achilles heel for the Bush campaign, but the vice president mounted a spirited defense of his running mate.

Expressing confidence and pride in Quayle and declaring that “he, unlike my opponent, is an expert on national defense,” Bush declared the widespread criticism of his choice is “turning around.” The American people resent “the unfair pounding” of Quayle, he said.

Dukakis was widely perceived as having edged Bush in their first debate on Sept. 25 and polls showed most people believed Bentsen was a clear winner over Quayle in their debate. But most felt Bush had the upper hand here. And even among some Dukakis supporters the mood was relatively subdued after the debate.

Show Little Enthusiasm

In Houston, for instance, Bentsen won only half-hearted cheers at a post-debate victory party when he suggested, “it’s now 3 to zip and on to Nov. 8.” An overhead banner proclaiming “a clean sweep” for the Democrats appeared out of place in a rally in which much of the audience showed only limited enthusiasm and remained seated.

By contrast, Bush, who drove straight from the debate to Loyola Marymount College, was greeted by 4,000 by-invitation-only students who cheered themselves hoarse. Indicating he was satisfied at the outcome, the vice president said: “We had a good opportunity tonight, unlike the first debate, to spell out the differences on world peace and what we would do to enhance the peace.”

At a Ft. Smith, Ark., rally, Quayle said Bush had “won the debate hands down.” He said he called Bush to congratulate him and the vice president was upbeat and “felt comfortable” about his performance.

At a rally at the Beverly Hilton following the debate, a throng of supporters cheered when Dukakis asked, “Was it a clean sweep?”

“If one question tonight demonstrated the stakes in the election,” Dukakis declared, “it was the question about the Supreme Court of the United States. The people who are appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States by a President are there long after that President leaves. George Bush supported the nomination of Robert Bork. George Bush demonstrated his commitment to standards, to quality, to strength, by picking as his running mate the senator from Indiana.”

Aides Claim Victory

As the “spin doctors” poured into the press room at Pauley Pavilion after the debate, both sides predictably claimed victory. Craig Fuller, Bush’s chief of staff, called the vice president’s performance “superb” and Dukakis campaign Chairman Paul P. Brountas said the governor had used the debate to “establish the agenda for the next 3 1/2 weeks of the campaign.”

Before the debate, a senior Dukakis aide had said the governor “needs a knockout and he knows it,” but afterwards the Democrats generally tried to minimize the importance of the event and insisted Dukakis still has plenty of opportunities to turn around Bush’s steady lead in the polls.

Although beaming about Bush’s performance, his supporters here suggested they would guard against overconfidence. “We’ve got enough experienced people around to know it really isn’t over until it’s over,” said New Hampshire Gov. John H. Sununu.

While Dukakis was forced repeatedly to answer the charge that he is a liberal, Bush was called to task for running a negative campaign based on portraying his opponent as a left-wing extremist.

Bush maintained that he has been forced to define Dukakis as a liberal because the Massachusetts governor “ran on the left” in order to win the Democratic nomination, then abandoned his ideology at the Democratic convention.

“He’s the one that said, ‘I am a liberal--traditional liberal--progressive liberal Democrat’ ” in the primary campaign, Bush said. “ . . . I have to help define that and if he’s unwilling to do it, if he says ideology doesn’t matter, I don’t agree with him.”

While never denying he is a liberal, Dukakis sought to minimize the importance of the label. “If I had a dollar, George, for every time you used that label,” he joked, “I’d qualify for one of those tax breaks for the rich that you want to give away.”

He then went on to define the difference between himself and Bush in his own terms.

“The vice president is complacent, thinks we ought to stick with the status quo, doesn’t think we ought to move ahead, thinks things are OK as they are,” Dukakis argued. “I don’t. I think this is a great country because we’ve always wanted to do better, to make our country better, to make our lives better.”

Bush took no responsibility for the negative tone of the campaign. Instead, he blamed others--Dukakis and the press.

When confronted with a remark made by Sen. Mark O. Hatfield (R-Ore.) that even Bush’s late father, former Sen. Prescott Bush, would have been shocked by the negative nature of the campaign, the vice president recoiled.

“Well, I think my dad would be pretty proud of me, because I think we’ve come a long, long way,” he said, noting that his campaign had been “written off” just a few months ago.

While neither candidate pulled back from the sharply worded attacks that characterized their first debate, both attempted to show viewers a warmer, personal side of themselves.

Dukakis, responding to a question about why some voters may find him unlikable, smiled and said: “I think I’m a reasonably likable guy. I’m serious, though I think I’m a little more lovable these days than I used to be back in my youth when I began in my state Legislature. But I’m also a serious guy.”

Bush, who smiled frequently and appeared more relaxed than Dukakis, said being liked was not necessarily paramount: “I think it’s whether you share the broad dreams of the American people, whether you have confidence in the peoples’ ability to get things done, . . . “ he said. “You see, I think it’s a question of values, not likability or lovability.”

On defense spending, an issue that clearly splits the candidates, Dukakis said deep cuts in military expenditures might be possible if new arms control agreements could be negotiated with the Soviet Union. Bush, coming to the support of the defense budget, objected to “unilateral cuts” in weapons programs in advance of negotiations with the Soviets.

Bush also implied that his Administration might decide to choose to build only one of two land-based missiles, the rail-mobile MX and the single-warhead Midgetman. Dukakis insisted both are too expensive. He said he would seek a less costly option for modernizing the land-based intercontinental ballistic missile force.

The issue of the huge federal deficit occupied much of the debate, but both candidates failed to explain where they would make cuts in the budget to ease the problem. Indeed, they both said they would not raise taxes and said large categories of spending, such as Social Security, should be immune from cutbacks.

Dukakis said his goal would be to “bring that deficit down steadily--20, 25, 30 billion dollars a year,” adding that he would also like to spend more money to invest in “good schools for our kids, college opportunity for young people, decent health care and affordable housing, and a clean and safe environment.”

But he said that he could not promise a balanced budget by the end of his first term. “I don’t think either one of us can, really. There’s no way of anticipating what may happen.”

Bush repeated his pledge to oppose any tax hike, denying that his promise of “no new taxes” is misleading the voters about his future policies. “I want to keep this expansion going. I don’t want to kill it off by a tax increase. . . . And the way you kill expansions is to raise taxes. And I don’t want to do that. And I won’t do that.”

Vow to Protect Benefits

Both candidates pledged to protect current Social Security benefits. “I’m not going to go to entitlements as a means for cutting that deficit when we’re spending billions on something like ‘Star Wars,’ ” Dukakis said. Meanwhile, Bush acknowledged that Republicans are vulnerable to the Democratic charge they want to cut Social Security. “I will not go in there and suggest changes in Social Security. I learned that the hard way.”

One of the bitterest exchanges occurred over the “sleaze factor” issue--a frequent target for Dukakis during the campaign. Dukakis cited the number of Reagan Administration appointees who have resigned owing to legal or ethical problems, and noted that Bush had “supported (former Atty. Gen. Edwin) Meese . . . called (former Interior Secretary) James Watt an excellent secretary of the Interior (and) . . . supported the nomination of Robert Bork to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

“We’ve had dozens and dozens of officials in this Administration who have left under a cloud,” he continued. “They’ve been indicted, convicted. This isn’t the kind of Administration we need. . . . “

Bush lashed back, “His chief education adviser is in jail. He’s in jail because he betrayed the public trust,” he said, referring to Gerard T. Indelicato, who was imprisoned for defrauding the state of Massachusetts of $80,000. “This sleaze factor, believe me (is) a disgrace,” said Bush, who promised to “do my level best to clean it up. . . . “

Contributing to this story were staff writers John Balzar, James Gerstenzang and David Lauter in Los Angeles, Cathleen Decker in Ft. Smith, Ark., and Douglas Jehl in Houston.