Portsmouth Herald
RAN 2/18/96 Pg. A1
By Steve Haberman 
Herald Staff
   With the New Hampshire primary looming just two days off, it is
interesting to note that the current polls are showing virtually the same
finish here as in Iowa - Dole first, Buchanan second, Alexander third and
Forbes coming in fourth.
   This is particularly interesting since the demographics of those two
states are so dissimilar, as is the way in which the voters make their
preferences for president known. It could mean that the same issues that
trouble those looking for a choice among the eight major Republicans in New
Hampshire were felt in Iowa, as well.
   In terms of the process for choosing presidential preference, Iowa holds
caucuses in small-town stores, homes and churches, where the merits of
candidates are openly debated prior to the votes being taken. In contrast,
New Hampshire, in its true quest for Yankee privacy, conducts primaries in
which votes are cast in the same 
polling booths that will be used to choose a president later this year.
   Demographically, it would be hard to find two more dissimilar states. Iowa
is almost six times larger in area, and three times larger in population.
While there are more than 100 New Hampshirites living in each square mile of
this state, just over 50 live in each square mile of Iowa.
   The highest elevation in Iowa is just 1,700 feet above sea level, while
New Hampshire's Mount Washington rises almost 6,300 feet above sea level.
   New Hampshire was the ninth state to join the Union and some of its
families date back to the dissidents who opposed the rule of the King of
England, and eventually won this country's freedom. Its people have a strong
sense of self-determination and freedom. In contrast, Iowa became the 29th
state in the late 1700s and its 
founders were mostly farmers.
   Iowa is one of the country's greatest farming states, supplying 7 percent
of the nation's food supply. New Hampshire is mostly a tourist state, with
visitors from around the world coming here to marvel at the beauty of our
mountains, our lakes, and our small but outstanding Seacoast.
   One of the few similarities between the two states lies in the fact that
in each more than 60 percent of the work force is involved in service
industries. That might be the single biggest reason why voter preference
appears to be so similar in states that, on the surface, appear so
dissimilar.
   The issue in this year's presidential election appears to be what it was
in the 1992 election - the economy. While unemployment is approaching an
all-time low all across the country and jobs have been created, wages have
stagnated and people are working harder and longer for the same amount of
money they got four years ago. And those wages are now buying less.
   A rash of corporate downsizing, particularly among large businesses that
employ thousands of people all across the country, has generated a feeling of
insecurity within the nation's work force. The failure of any Republican
candidate to truly address this issue could be the reason why the race for
the Republican nomination has come down to a battle between an aging Senate
majority leader who was in Congress as the choices that led up to this
current situation were being made; a non-politician who, while spouting a
populist message, surrounds himself with those alleged to be racists and
anti-Semites, and whose rhetoric sometimes brings him dangerously close to
being 
included in that category himself; and the Republican version of Jimmy Carter
in a red-and-black-checked shirt but without the humanist credentials.
   Waiting in the wings is a Wall Street tycoon with no experience other than
running a magazine, but with enough money to put his name, face, and attacks
on his rivals before anyone who even occasionally turns on a television.
   An indication of the confusion being felt this year by those called upon
to make a choice in this Republican primary, is the number of voters who
still remain undecided. Just prior to the Iowa caucuses, pollsters cited
close to a 20 percent undecided rate. That number is mirrored here in New
Hampshire just two days before the primary.
   The pressure of a lack of clear voter preference and an inability to
clearly separate themselves from one another has taken its toll on the
candidates as well. Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole has become more negative
in his advertising since eking out a slight victory over Pat Buchanan in the
Iowa caucuses. While he appeared to simply 
be responding to New Jersey magazine publisher Steve Forbes' attacks on him
prior to the Iowa caucuses, now Dole is initiating the attacks, this time
against Buchanan and former Tennessee Gov. Lamar Alexander.
   Forbes, stung by his fourth place showing in Iowa, has pledged not to do
any more negative television advertising in favor of getting his own message
out, but continues to be negative in his comments about his rivals during
debates and personal appearances.
   Buchanan, gloating about his victories in the Alaska straw poll, the
Louisiana caucuses, and a second-place showing in Iowa, has stepped up his
attacks on Dole. And Alexander, rather than supplying details of his
positions on various issues as was promised by his campaign handlers back in
January, continues to try to set himself 
apart as the ``nice guy'' in the campaign, while deriding Buchanan as too
extreme and Dole as too old.
   All eight candidates have said they want to balance the federal budget,
lower taxes, and continue the so-called ``Republican revolution'' that
allegedly began when the GOP seized control of the House and Senate in 1994.
But none of them are talking about how to deal with worker insecurity or
stagnant wages, and that, the people of both Iowa and New Hampshire have
repeatedly told them, is the real issue in the 1996 presidential campaign.