The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday, high winds and seas lashed the Gulf Coast as Hurricane Gilbert came ashore near the Texas/Mexican border. Mikhail Gorbachev offered to give up the Soviet Naval base in Vietnam if the U.S. left the Philippines. The Olympic torch entered Seoul, Korea, for the formal opening of the summer games. We'll have details in our News Summary in a moment. Judy Woodruff is in Washington tonight. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: After the News Summary, Hurricane Gilbert is again our lead focus. We talk with Dr. Robert Sheets at the National Hurricane Center and get a report from Correspondent Tom Bearden on the Texas Coast. Then Presidential politics. We have short excerpts from Dukakis and Bush speeches. Pollster Bud Roper will be in to sort out the latest data on where the race stands, and our regular team of Gergen & Shields analyzes the political week just behind us. Finally, the Seoul Olympics, a look at what's at stake for South Korea and a sports writer tells us what to expect from the games.NEWS SUMMARY

MS. WOODRUFF: Hurricane Gilbert slammed into the Northern Coast of Mexico this evening as residents of the Southern Coast of Texas braced for the killer storm. The hurricane has weakened since it tore a path of death and destruction through the Caribbean, but it is still expected to do serious damage on the continent. The eye of the storm hit the coast this evening South of the U.S./Mexican border close to 120 miles South of Brownsville, Texas. Its winds are now clocked at 120 miles an hour. Thousands of people have evacuated the Texas and Mexican coastal areas and those who stayed faced tornados spawned in advance of the hurricane. More than a half dozen tornados struck the Brownsville area, injuring a boy and blowing over at least two homes. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Soviet Leader Mikhail Gorbachev said today that he would give up the huge Naval base in Vietnam if the U.S. left its bases in the Philippines. That was one of several proposals Gorbachev made in a speech in the Siberian City of Krosniovs, the site of a controversial radar station which the U.S. claims violates the super power missile treaty. The Soviet leader offered to turn the radar station into an international space center. President Reagan told reporters he would study that proposal, saying, "We want to do anything we can to bring about a better relationship between our two countries." His spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, was more negative, saying to turn it into a space station or a drive-in movie theater or anything else does not respond to the need to dismantle what is a violation of the treaty. Also today Polish television reported that government officials and the outlaws Solidarity Union will open full scale talks next month.

MS. WOODRUFF: President Reagan said today that the decision to pull some U.S. diplomatic personnel out of Panama will not harm efforts to fight the flow of drugs into America. Mr. Reagan responded to reporters' questions today after the State Department announced yesterday that the U.S. would make the reductions in its diplomatic presence, but would keep the U.S. military command at full strength. Three U.S. officials told the Associated Press that the drawdowns in personnel could lead to the closing or severe reduction of regional operations of the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Justice Department and the U.S. Customs Service. Leaders of the Nicaraguan Contras announced that they have accepted a Sandinista offer to hold preliminary peace talks in Guatemala City on Monday. A spokesman for the Contras said the rebel group was pushing the Sandinistas to accept higher level talks later in the month after a set of conditions was met.

MR. MacNeil: The 1988 Summer Olympics opened in Seoul, South Korea tonight with a three hour ceremony. Jeremy Thompson of Worldwide Television News has a report.

JEREMY THOMPSON: On the streets of Seoul police say they're ready for anything from tourists to terrorists. A hundred thousand police will be on duty. Today a final briefing for the squads in blue. At tomorrow's opening ceremony they'll be watching over 100,000 people who will fill every seat of the Olympic Stadium in Seoul. The idealists at Seoul's University say their rallies will continue, though they're unlikely to upset the games. The South is taking no change though; an American carrier task for is standing by offshore. As the arrival of the torch lit up the center of Seoul tonight, South Koreans were hoping that from now on the sheer spectacle of the games will eclipse any worries about security. They've waited seven years for this moment and they intend to welcome the world in peace.

MS. WOODRUFF: Moslem kidnappers holding three Americans and one Indian released in Beirut a photograph today of two of the U.S. hostages and listed conditions under which all their captives might be freed. The Islamic Jehadfor the Liberation of Palestine issued the handwritten statement and the photo of 49 year old Allen Steen of Boston and 41 year old Jesse Jonathan Turner of Boise, Idaho. Both have been held for nearly 20 months. The statement hinted that the group would free its hostages if the U.S. Administration undertook an initiative within one week in support of the Palestinian uprising in the Israeli occupied territories.

MR. MacNeil: NASA today announced September 29th as the launch date for the space shuttle Discovery. The flight will be the first since the 1986 Challenger tragedy. The Nuclear Regulatory Agency today removed a major obstacle to operating the Seabrook Nuclear reactor in New Hampshire. The NRC voted 4 to 0 for a rule change that would let Seabrook operate at low power without an emergency siren warning system. Municipalities in neighboring Massachusetts within a 10 mile radius of the reactor had forced Seabrook officials to remove the sirens. The new rule change takes effect in 30 days.

MS. WOODRUFF: On the Presidential campaign trail today, Democrat Michael Dukakis talked about cleaning up illegal drugs. In a visit to a police academy in Los Angeles, Dukakis pledged to double the number of federal drug agents over the next five years. He also charged the Reagan Administration with using a nickel and dime approach to the war on the narcotics. For his part, Bush made fun of Dukakis's visit to a defense plant in Michigan this week, where the Governor took a short ride in an M-1 battle tank. Bush told an audience in Ohio that "You cannot fool the Soviet leadership by knocking America's defense for 10 years and then riding around in a tank for 10 minutes." And he added, "You can't fool the American people." That's our News Summary. Coming up, an update on Hurricane Gilbert, Presidential politics, and the Seoul Olympics. UPDATE - IN HARM'S WAY

MR. MacNeil: Again tonight we begin with Hurricane Gilbert which has now come ashore on the Gulf Coast. Within the next few hours, residents of Texas and Mexico will feel the full force of the hurricane that is being blamed for at least 58 deaths elsewhere. For the latest information on the course of the storm, we returned a few minutes ago to Coral Gables, Florida, to speak with Robert Sheets, Director of the National Hurricane Center. Dr. Sheets, describe the hurricane's coming ashore, just where and with what force of winds?

ROBERT SHEETS, National Hurricane Center: Right now it is on the coast and it is now 120 mile per hour winds. They're still there, as measured by the reconnaissance aircraft just a few minutes ago. The center of the hurricane has passed over the coast about 125 miles South of Brownsville, Texas, moving West, toward the West Northwest.

MR. MacNeil: And how wide is the storm at this point?

DR. SHEETS: The 100 mile per hour winds are over an area of maybe 30 to 40 miles wide around the eye, and then going out to hurricane force winds extending up to about Brownsville, Texas, and some of the rain bands in that area.

MR. MacNeil: So are some parts of the United States, the Texas part, are they within that eye of the storm, or is that all in Mexico?

DR. SHEETS: That's all in Mexico. The core of the hurricane is all in Mexico. When we talk about hurricane force winds, that extends up to Brownsville and that's about as far North as it goes.

MR. MacNeil: So what will the people in Texas be experiencing in the way of, what's the worst they will get in the way of winds?

DR. SHEETS: Right now they're getting those at Brownsville of up to hurricane force winds -- Port Isabelle, that's the barrier island just off of Brownsville there, they've also reported five to six feet of tides with waves on top of that. A couple of tornados have been reported at Brownsville in the last couple of hours.

MR. MacNeil: Can they expect more tornados as the hurricane moves inland?

DR. SHEETS: Yes, and also heavy rain, so we're expecting to see some flooding in that area. They've already got three inches of rain and they'll probably get about oh, maybe as much as 10 or a little bit more than that and 15 to 20 inches in the hill country in Mexico and spreading into Southeast Texas.

MR. MacNeil: Do you have any way of predicting what direction the storm will take now that it's come ashore?

DR. SHEETS: Our course is that it will move on this West Northwest Coast into Northeastern Mexico, and then recur toward the Northwest up into Central Texas over the next 24 to 36 hours.

MR. MacNeil: Now typically, do such storms lose force as they move inland.

DR. SHEETS: They lose the wind rather quickly. In other words probably within 6 hours, 6 to 8 hours, it will drop below hurricane force and then within 24 hours it will drop below tropical storm force.

MR. MacNeil: I see. Now the storm apparently did not pick up strength as it came across the remainder of the Gulf since we talked yesterday.

DR. SHEETS: That's correct. It maintained almost a steady 120 mile per hour winds all the way from the Yucatan right in to Northeast Mexico.

MR. MacNeil: I see. And how long after it's ashore does it continue to spawn tornados? How long is that a danger?

DR. SHEETS: That's a warm moist unstable layer that's probably going to be there for several days, because the system is planned or projected to move up over Texas and perhaps Oklahoma, as it moves Northward, indeed, there could be some tornados associated with it for the next several days.

MR. MacNeil: So we might be feeling the effects of this storm in the South Central United States for how long?

DR. SHEETS: It's projected to pick up its forward speed fairly fast, within 36 hours up over Texas, maybe 48 hours up over Oklahoma, and that's beyond my projections.

MR. MacNeil: I see, so roughly through the weekend anyway.

DR. SHEETS: Yes.

MR. MacNeil: But your responsibilities are over now, are they?

DR. SHEETS: Will be in about 24 hours.

MR. MacNeil: I see. Well, thank you very much for your assistance to us these last few days.

DR. SHEETS: Thank you.

MR. MacNeil: Thank you for joining us tonight.

DR. SHEETS: My pleasure.

MR. MacNeil: For more on Hurricane Gilbert we turn now to Newshour Correspondent Tom Bearden who is on the scene in Brownsville, Texas. Tom, are you there?

TOM BEARDEN: Yes, I am.

MR. MacNeil: Your responsibilities are not over.

MR. BEARDEN: Not at this point. It appears that we will still be subjected to the force of the hurricane winds for at least another six or seven hours according to the weather service people here at the airport.

MR. MacNeil: What are you feeling right now there in terms of wind and rain and everything?

MR. BEARDEN: Well, the rain comes in sheets and then goes away for an hour or so at a time and then comes back. I understand that's because the spiral arms of the thunderstorms are moving over the area. The wind right now is gusting at a peak gust of about 60 miles an hour and it will die, but pretty steadily between 35 and 40 miles an hour.

MR. MacNeil: What does it look like right now outside?

MR. BEARDEN: Very gray. Visibility is down to a bout a mile and the trees are blowing pretty substantially in the wind. There is no rain right now at this moment.

MR. MacNeil: And how noisy are the winds?

MR. BEARDEN: It varies again with the wind strength, but it's enough to rattle the windows here in the terminal at the airport.

MR. MacNeil: Have the lowered expectations about the wind strength, I mean, it didn't survive as the giant story of the century, and where it's now landed, has that caused people in Brownsville to relax?

MR. BEARDEN: Apparently there is some concern about that. I asked that question of the Mayor about a half an hour ago and he was quite concerned that people seeing the reports as you just described that the hurricane seems to have lodged its major blow against the Mexican coast, he was concerned that people would start leaving the shelters. And there are still thousands of people in the shelters and his plan was to issue some press releases to the local media urging people to stay indoors because only half the hurricane is ashore. The rest of it is still to come ashore and there will still be substantial hurricane force winds in the forecast for this area until I believe the last indication was till around 11 or 12 o'clock tonight central time.

MR. MacNeil: So you're approaching now the calm in the middle, are you, the calm in the eye of the storm?

MR. BEARDEN: Well, the eye is about 100 to 120 miles south of this so we won't have any calm. The rotational forces of the wind will continue to cross this area as they have since the storm began to reach this area about 7:30 this morning.

MR. MacNeil: Of course, my mistake. The eye is a long way away from you. And what is it like in those shelters where all of those thousands of people are?

MR. BEARDEN: To be honest, it's very tough. I went to a local high school which is housing about a thousand people this morning. They had about 700 last night at 11 o'clock, and the rest of them moved in as the night progressed. They're all in the hallways of that high school because they don't want to allow people to be in the classrooms. They're concerned about the windows blowing out and spraying them with glass, so they're staying in the hallways. The temperature in there has to be 85 or 90 degrees. The humidity is 100 percent. The floors are wet because of the people walking around and people have spread their blankets and bedding on the floor and it's of course damp and it's not a pleasant place to be.

MR. MacNeil: Are many people not in the shelters? Did they just defy all the advice and stay at home?

MR. BEARDEN: There appear to be a large number of people who have done just that, people who live in more substantial housing on higher ground were able to board up their windows in advance, many of them have elected to ride out the storm, however, it appears that the evacuation suggestions, because there is no law in Texas that allows the authorities to order people out of their homes, apparently at Padre and St. Isabelle, which are on the coast and in the Gulf, itself, people did evacuate.

MR. MacNeil: Okay. Thank you, Tom, very much for joining us. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: Still to come on the Newshour, we wrap up a week of politics and polls and examine what the Olympics mean to South Korea's economy and America's athletes. FOCUS - KOREA'S CHALLENGE

MR. MacNeil: We turn next to the Summer Olympics which open tonight in Seoul, South Korea. We will look at the sports events and the country in which they're taking place. Thirty-five years ago, South Korea was an impoverished and war battered nation. Today it is becoming a world economic powerhouse, and a nation that is it trying to match its economic gains with steps towards democracy. Progress on both fronts is sometimes halting, but as Special Correspondent Mary Ann Maskery reports, the games, themselves, symbolize just how far South Korea has come in just a few years.

MARY ANN MASKERY: An aeroflat plane brought the Russian team to the Seoul Olympics. The landing, itself, was a turning point for South Korea. Locked in a cold war dialogue since the Korean War, the country is now emerging on the international scene, pursuing relations with the Soviets, the Chinese, and the Eastern Bloc, all of them in Seoul for the games. That is only part of the change overtaking South Korea these last 18 months. Little more than a year ago, Seoul was immersed din tear gas amid massive demonstrations amid Chun Too Wun's authoritarian rule. Now the former strong man will not even attend the Olympic ceremony. Chun's brother has been sentenced to prison on charges of corruption. Chun, himself, is not immune from prosecution. He is expected to apologize for wrongdoings after the Olympics. Students who are still dissatisfied continue to demonstrate, but older citizens who might have joined them last year rebuke them now. Don't you remember anything, they yell. Can't you see what has happened in a short time?

CHOI CHANG YOON, Member, National Assembly: Nowadays, the citizens are quite indifferent to students' moves and their slogans. For one example, several months ago when there were students' demonstrations on the streets of Seoul, the citizens hurled the stones against the students and the citizens applauded the riot police fighting with the students. I think that this is the first time in Korean history that the citizens sided with the riot police.

MARY ANN MASKERY: Radical students still throw firebombs, but the police, dressed more like students, themselves, act mostly in defense, and in Seoul at least, they don't use tear gas. The protests are vivid but small. Otherwise, the campuses are quiet. Most of the students have gone back to school. Much of the population now shares one interest with the government, a successful Olympics. The games are supposed to be a springboard to success just as they were for Japan in 1964, presenting a country at the threshold as a developed nation. In 1988, South Korea is ready to show the world a pristine city where an established middle class enjoys prosperity, an economy booming on the kind of high-tech exports that made Japan famous, a modern structure overwhelming the past, but the change is nowhere complete. The sign of modern times and the good life have not come to everyone. In the back allies where many of the laborers live, there is harshness and even squalor. This is worker's complex. They call the rooms bee hives.

KIM HAE SOOK, Textile Worker: [Speaking Through Interpreter] It's very cold in winter and very hot in summer and the walls are so thin you can hear soft voices spoken between two friends.

MS. MASKERY: This room which is barely a yard wide costs Kim Hae Sook $18 a week. That is 40 percent of her salary. She works 78 hours a week in a textile industry where sweat shops are still the rule. Thanks to a wave of strikes in other plants this year things have improved.

KIM HAE SOOK: Before last year, it was very difficult for me to be very friendly with my fellow workers in the factory because they sort of watch us very closely. But since the last strikes, it became easier for me to talk about strikes in other factories with my fellow workers in our factory.

MS. MASKERY: On her one day off, Kim assists at the Outside the Gate of Heaven Labor Church. It is a haven for workers with grievances against the system. The church was raided regularly during the Chun years. Staff members were imprisoned. The workers' song has become an anthem used at anti-government rallies. "The day will come when we can live in freedom. Friend, the new day is coming. The liberation is coming."

PARK ILL HO, Computer Scientist: [Speaking Through Interpreter] In Korea, politics and economics are almost the same thing. If the economy continues to improve, the political situation will too.

MS. MASKERY: Park Ill Ho is a computer scientist. He lives comfortably with his wife and daughter. He backed last year's demonstrations all the way, he says, but now he's worried. Fear of repression is understandable in a republic that has seen little civilian rule in 40 years. Noh Tay Woo, Chun's hand picked successor, called for concessions only when the middle class joined the radicals. He narrowly won election against a divided opposition. It is hard now for some to believe that democracy has taken root.

KIM KUN TAE, Dissident Leader: [Speaking Through Interpreter] There have been many changes, but we can't confuse this with full democracy. President Noh is from the army and the army remains in control. Until we have a civilian government, we cannot call our system a democracy.

MS. MASKERY: In the past, fear of the Communist North and tension of the DMZ just one hour from Seoul strengthened the hand of the military. The radical students don't share that fear. They're ready to risk confrontation to get the army out of politics. They want American troops out too and immediate reunification of the country.

KIM DAE HI, Seoul University Student Leader: [Speaking Through Interpreter] We must illuminate foreign influence. We can make a federal government of South and North, and in that government develop together the right way to reunification.

MS. MASKERY: The people may not agree exactly with the students but there is sympathy on the basic issues, especially reunification.

PARK ILL HO, Computer Scientist: People do not want the students to be violent, but they understand what causes the students to act that way.

MS. MASKERY: President Noh's close friend, Minister Hyun Hong Ju says reform will continue.

HYUN HONG JU, Cabinet Minister: Of course it will continue, and we want to be seen as a country and not only economically strong, but also a politically democratic government and that is one goal all Korea and whole Korean people have committed themselves to, so there will be no turning back. So we'll continue as a democratic country and reform will take root. That's how I believe and how how President Noh believes.

MS. MASKERY: Undeniably, the atmosphere has changed. The government has loosened control. The Olympics are now an occasion to celebrate. The general mood seems to be halfway between hope and fear, fear of a return to military control, hope that the gains already made will continue, and realization that the country has come a long way. FOCUS - GOLD RUSH

MR. MacNeil: Now to a preview of the athletic competition. Charlayne Hunter-Gault has more. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: After tonight's opening ceremonies in Seoul, South Korea, competition begins tomorrow in boxing, diving, and volley ball. For the first time since the 1972 gains in Munich, nearly all of the world's countries will participate, and for the first time in 12 years, U.S. and Soviet athletes will compete head to head. Here to tell us more about what we can expect from the Americans in the upcoming games is Peter Carry, Executive Editor of Sports Illustrated Magazine. Peter, after the winter games, there was a lot of disappointment over the American performance. Did they carry that baggage into this Olympics?

PETER CARRY, Sports Illustrated: Well, of course, our summer team will do far better than the winter team simply because we're more of a summer sports country, but I think we will be impressed with the success for our team if we keep in mind that the tremendous number of medals won in Los Angeles was not realistic for exactly the reasons you mentioned the Soviets and the East Germans weren't there. And I think the USSR and the United States will win roughly the same number of medals, with the East Germans winning slightly fewer. If you keep score by nation, which you really shouldn't do in the Olympic, the Russians would probably win narrowly.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: In case there are a few people here who haven't picked what events they plan to watch, let's go through some of the probable highlights that American viewers might want to tune in, starting with how, the area where you expect the Americans to do the best.

MR. CARRY: Well, I think one of the unique things is that you can expect a greater diversity of medals won by a greater diversity of countries in various areas, so that almost anything you watch you might see an American being a contender, but I think certainly the sprints in track and field will be one of the most notable areas, both for men and women.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: All right. Let's start with the men.

MR. CARRY: Carl Lewis, who won four gold medals in Los Angeles, will not be one of those people affected by the return of the Soviets and the East Germans. He'll probably win four gold medals again. The question is whether the American public will clutch him to his breast after he's done so. He turned out to be sort of a persona non-grata after the last Olympics for reasons that are very difficult to understand.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And the other competitor there.

MR. CARRY: I think another person, tremendous, would be Edward Moses who will be going for his third gold medal in the 400 meter hurdles, and another one will be Butch Reynolds who this summer broke the 400 meter record, which is the oldest record in track and field. He is a young man from Ohio.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: All right. What about the women? I read somewhere today that's the event where the world's greatest sister-in-law could upstage the world's greatest woman athlete. Tell us briefly about that.

MR. CARRY: The world's greatest woman's athlete is Jackie Joyner Kersee who is the world champion of the heptathlete and will probably win the gold medal there and is favorite also in the long jump.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Heptathlete meaning?

MR. CARRY: That's the female version, if you will, of the decathlon, and it's a seven event event, if you will, and her sister-in-law is Florence Griffeth Joyner who's favorite in the 100 meters and could well win the 200 meters also, and she's quite a show woman. She wears one legged skin tight suits and what you and is quite, wears quite elaborate fingernail paintings and what have you, and I think that she's going to be a real crowd pleaser at the games.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Competes in style and grace as well as charm and talent?

MR. CARRY: Absolutely.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Then there are the gymnastics where Americans have always done pretty well, right?

MR. CARRY: Well, actually we did very well last time, but this is the one area where our results were a little bit overstated because of the absence of the Soviets and the East Germans. This time I don't think we're going to win any medals in gymnastics.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is that right?

MR. CARRY: If we do, we might win one medal in the women's area. The Soviets will dominate. They have a man named Dimetri Bilozerchev, who is the reigning world champion, won his first world championship at 16, which is very young for a gymnast, then broke his leg in 44 places, his left leg, in an automobile accident, recovered from that, startlingly enough. They almost thought they were going to have to amputate the leg, and they were able to save it, and he's back and he should dominate on the men's side with perhaps as many as four gold medals.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: That's one we really want to watch.

MR. CARRY: Absolutely. And there's a Soviet woman named Elaina Shushunova, who may do just as well on the women's side.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And what about swimming?

MR. CARRY: Swimming will probably be the best sport for the U.S., as it often is. I could see us winning as many as 11 gold medals there. On the men's side, Matt Biondi, who's a very versatile free styler and butterflyer could win seven medals. Now don't get him confused with Mark Spitz who won 7 golds.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: That was in, what, '72?

MR. CARRY: Correct. Biondi could win as many as four golds and his main competition will come from his very good friend, a West German named Michael Gross. On the women's side, in fact, the only swimmer probably in the whole world who's not an East German who will win a gold medal is a young teenager named Jeannette Evans who is the world record holder at 4, 800 and 1500 meters. There is no 1500 event in the Olympics, so she should win the 400, the 800 and maybe the 400 individual medley, which is a combination of four strokes.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: And very briefly, we have a familiar name coming back in diving, right?

MR. CARRY: Well Greg Louganis is probably making his swan dive here, if you will, and he's won, he swept in Los Angeles, and he would have swept in Los Angeles regardless of who had been there and he should do that again with the Chinese women dominating on the female side.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Finally this year's games include professional tennis players. There's going to be Steffie Graf and Chris Everett who will be competing. What does this do to the amateur nature of the competition?

MR. CARRY: Well, the Olympics have really become an open event. It has been widely noted by people who are only casual friends of sport, but as well as Steffie Graf may live with her tennis winnings, I would submit that Edwin Moses probably lives nearly as well from his track winnings. They're just disguised a little bit differently. Hers are not disguised at all and his are pumped through a mechanism they have for getting money to these people without appearing to be direct winnings.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How do you think the tennis players will do in a word?

MR. CARRY: The U.S. could win both doubles. That's as well as it will do.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, I'll see you on the tennis court. Peter Carry, thank you very much for being with us and we'll be watching with you. FOCUS - '88 - THE WEEK THAT WAS

MS. WOODRUFF: We turn next to Campaign '88 and Presidential politics. We'll get our regular weekly analysis from our team of Gergen & Shields plus a professional's look at the week's contradictory polling data, but first we hear from the Presidential candidates, themselves, as we continue our series of campaign trail stump speeches. George Bush spent the day in Ohio. His first stop was a steel company in Columbus. In a speech to employees there, he attacked the Massachusetts prison furlough program under the Dukakis Administration.

VICE PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH, GOP Presidential Candidate: I disagree with him on that program they had in Massachusetts to furlough murderers who had not even served enough time to be eligible for parole, and you remember the case of Willy Horton in the Reader's Digest, the guy was furloughed, murderer, hadn't even served enough time for parole, goes down to Maryland, and murders again, and Maryland wouldn't even let him out to go back to Massachusetts, because they didn't want him to kill again. I don't believe in that kind of approach to criminals. He opposes the death penalty for every crime. And I'm sorry, I think when you kill a police officer in a drug-related murder, the death penalty should be paid, and so we've got a big difference on that, and these issues he will not talk about and I will. I happen to think we should appoint more judges who have a little more compassion for the victims of crime and a little less for the criminals, themselves. And he says, "I'm a card carrying member of the ACLU." I am not a card carrying member of the ACLU. And you've read the debate about the pledge of allegiance. Look, he presented a bill to sign, to have the teachers lead the kids in the pledge of allegiance. I would have signed it. He doesn't sign it. I'm not questioning his patriotism; I don't do that. But I question his judgment. I would have signed that and I think it's good for these kids in these schools across the country to open the day with the pledge of allegiance, and I noticed that that debate got going so that even Congress the other day stood up, you know, stood there saying the pledge. There's nothing wrong with that. It seems to me that that's a good thing. And so we've got all these differences but the big one -- and this is one again that whether you're Democrats or Republicans or how you agree with me or not on these issues that I do think we agree with, because I know Ohio, my grandfather did work here, and my dad grew up here. I know middle America. My father was born in Columbus, and I know the values on national security -- and in foreign affairs, the only way to preserve peace and freedom around the world is to keep the United States of America strong, and this is no time to elect a man that has opposed every single weapons system that's come along. I keep saying, the only weapons system he seems to like is the slingshot. Look, we're dealing with tough guys in Gorbachev. I've met the man. He is white, he is powerful and he is strong, and he's different than the elder leaders, I'll tell you that. I mean, he's got a Western style about him, but he is no push over and to come into this office of President talking about cutting the major defense systems in this country I think it is short sighted and I want to build on this record of getting more arms control agreement, but you don't do it, you don't do it if you walk in there from a position of weakness, and so my appeal to you all is, if we differ on some of these issues, fine, but elect somebody who has had experience in foreign affairs and someone who knows that to carry the peace, you have got to keep the United States of America strong.

MS. WOODRUFF: Michael Dukakis spent today campaigning in Southern California. This morning he was at the Los Angeles Police Academy talking to recruits about how he would wage the war on drugs. Here are excerpts from that speech.

GOV. MICHAEL DUKAKIS, Dem. Presidential Candidate: Two days ago in San Francisco, Mr. Bush said that he is almost haunted by the lives being led by the children of our inner cities, but he went on to say that he didn't think government could solve their problems, and that he hoped as President he could be a gentle persuader to rally our people to help our children. My friends, American children do not need our pity. They need strong leaders and first rate law enforcement officers and dedicated teachers and community leaders and parents. They don't need a change of heart in Washington; they need a change of leadership. First, we're going to give state and local law enforcement officers the money they need to fight the war, the money that Congress has appropriated to fight this war. We're not going to nickel and dime you to death as the current Administration has done, because it's not the guys in Washington who are on the front lines in this fight. It's you. You're the ones who take the risk, you're the ones who make the busts, you're the ones that bear the costs of this war, and you deserve the best equipment and the best communications and the best training we can give you. Second, we're going to double the number of DEA agents in this country and we're going to do that over the next five years, and we are going to send the first 100 of those new recruits to Southern California, because you can't win this war without the troops to fight it, and the costs for these DEA agents can be paid for in forfeitures alone. Each of these DEA agents on average would produce at least as much as it costs to train them, pay their salaries, to provide them with the support they need. Third, we're going to hire more federal prosecutors and we're going to send a team of the best people we have to help federal an local prosecutors already on the scene. They're going to make sure that the drug dealers that you pick up on the street today won't be back on the streets tomorrow, to make sure that if they're peddling drugs to our kids, they're going to be put in jail for a long long time. Fourth, we're going to wage an all out effort to hunt down, to freeze, and to seize drug profits wherever we find them. And I'm not just talking about within our borders. We're going to go after their Swiss and their Panamanian and their Bahamian bank accounts, and we're going to send the message to the drug kingpins that as far as Mike Dukakis is concerned, there's nowhere you can run, there's nowhere you can sail, there's nowhere you can hide, there will be no safe haven for dope peddlers and drug prophets anywhere on this earth. Fifth, we're going to use our new law enforcement muscle to take automatic weapons out of the hands of street gangs and drug dealers not only in Los Angeles County but in urban neighborhoods all across this country. And finally we're going to expand the role of our military forces of this war against drugs and they're going to be deeply involved in identifying drug smugglers in the air and at sea. But we've also got to understand, as I'm sure you already understand, that all of the law enforcement in the world won't be worth a plug nickel if we don't do something about the demand for drugs here at home.

MR. MacNeil: Now we're going to examine the bewilderingly different polls voters have had thrown at them in the last week or so. What sense are we to make of it when the ABC/Washington Post Poll has 3 percent ahead of Bush, the Gallup Poll has Bush 8 percent ahead, and the Los Angeles Times has them even, or when the CBS/New York Times Poll has Bush 8 percent ahead and Roper has Dukakis 8 percent ahead. To find out why they differ so much and what it means we have Burns Roper, head of the Roper Organization which has been conducting political polls for 52 years. Bud Roper, is this showing volatility in the electorate or a difference in poll taking? What do the polls say first of all about the electorate?

BURNS ROPER, Roper Organization: I think it's showing some of each, Robin. I think it's partly, opinion is really so loosely formed, really to call it formed is overstatement and I think it's shifting a lot and it's very subject to differences nuances in methodology.

MR. MacNeil: We'll come to the methodology in a moment, but staying with what it shows about the electorate at the moment, some politicians are saying the reason the polls are so volatile this year is that it's dealing with two candidates who are relatively unknown. Do you buy that?

MR. ROPER: I buy that and I think it's two candidates that neither one of which turns that many people on. They're as much characterized by negatives as positives. And so the public is having trouble deciding. It's having trouble getting to know these two candidates, on the one hand, and then to deciding between them on the other.

MR. MacNeil: Do a sizable number of voters really swing from Bush to Dukakis or Dukakis to Bush within a two week period, as the polls might suggest?

MR. ROPER: Well, they swing in their answers to the question, but I think to call it an opinion, whichever way it is is an overstatement. I don't think people really have formed an opinion yet.

MR. MacNeil: So these aren't yet public opinion polls, because the opinions aren't fixed.

MR. ROPER: That's right.

MR. MacNeil: It's more a public answer of the moment poll.

MR. ROPER: Public reaction.

MR. MacNeil: Public reaction poll. Let's talk about the different techniques, how different poll taking techniques might affect the result, first of all the way the representative sample of the electorate is chosen, how can that affect the result?

MR. ROPER: Well, it can affect it if you don't have a representative sample of the entire population, but I don't think that's the principal problem. I think that most of the polls are selecting their basic sample the same way. Whether they make extensive call backs on the people that they target or move on to other people --

MR. MacNeil: Explain that. Make extensive call backs.

MR. ROPER: Some people you have a method which says you're supposed to find out let's say who in the household that you reach has had the most recent birthday and you use that as the way of designating the person that you're going to talk to, so that it's a random selection, or who in the household over 18 has had the most recent birthday, and you ask to speak to that person, he is not at home, you can call back and call back a second time and a third time to try and reach that person. Or you can get a person who says I don't want to be interviewed, and you can even call back, have a different interviewer call back the next day and try and persuade him to reconsider. That's what I mean by call backs.

MR. MacNeil: And is that a more reliable technique than saying, okay, forget it, we'll move on and find another person of that age?

MR. ROPER: That is considered the more reliable method. It has the drawback that it can't be as close to the reporting time as one where you move on, because you've got to wait till tomorrow to call back and then the next day and that kind of thing?

MR. MacNeil: What about the issue of determining who a voter is? Most of these polls say by a sample of 1100 people who say they will probably vote in the election. How do you determine reliably who is a likely voter?

MR. ROPER: Well, it's done different ways and some people have more complex methods than others. I think everybody requires that the person say he is now registered to vote. Again, there are nuances in the way that question is asked. We say, are you already registered to vote here where you live, or is that something you still have to do? But if they say, no, I've got to do that next week, we still don't count them as registered.

MR. MacNeil: I see.

MR. ROPER: And then we use a scale. We've adapted our 5 point scale which we use on personal interviews to a 4.1 for telephone, and it's four statements about a likelihood of voting, intensity of feeling about voting, and we only include people who pick the fourth statement as potential voters. So they have to be both registered and certain they're going to vote.

MR. MacNeil: So polls can vary in how stringent they are in exacting information about intention to vote.

MR. ROPER: Yes.

MR. MacNeil: Now, what about the way the questions are asked, how can that affect --

MR. ROPER: Well, the conventional way is to say if the election were being held today, who do you think you would vote for, and then some of them mention the Vice President, some of them don't mention the Vice President, but they ask them. This year we were concerned because of the flip flops in polls. We split our sample. We asked about the Dukakis ticket first and the Bush ticket second of half the people and we asked it just the other way around of the other half, mentioned the Bush ticket first and the Dukakis ticket second.

MR. MacNeil: And what happened?

MR. ROPER: On the likely voter group it made very little difference. We got 2 points bigger lead for Dukakis when he was first than when he was second, but that's really within sampling error and I don't know that that's significant, but on the total public, the results you put up, the 8 point lead, we had a 6 point lead among likely voters. The 8 point lead was very much affected. That's when we included non-voters, all adults.

MR. MacNeil: And how -- describe how it was done.

MR. ROPER: We had a 4 point lead for Dukakis when he was second, we had a 12 point lead for Dukakis when he was first.

MR. MacNeil: That's extraordinary, isn't it?

MR. ROPER: It certainly is. So here people are selecting the President of the United States, the leader of the free world, and which one did you mention first, that's the one I'm for.

MR. MacNeil: Given all of these differences we've seen, is there, nevertheless, some common reality in the five polls we showed at the beginning, does it show where the momentum is now, has it shifted?

MR. ROPER: I think the five together say something.

MR. MacNeil: What do they say?

MR. ROPER: I they say that public opinion is very unformed, unstable, in the process of trying to get to know these people and make a decision.

MR. MacNeil: Should it be comfort to either candidate at the moment?

MR. ROPER: Well, as compared -- now, there was a point a while ago where it looked like Bush was well in the lead, so this should be a comfort to Dukakis to know that Bush isn't well in the lead. Earlier than that, Dukakis was well in the lead and that should be a comfort to Bush to know that Dukakis isn't well in the lead. It's not a comfort in the sense of either one of them thinking they've got it wrapped up, because I don't think either one of them do yet.

MR. MacNeil: In a word, what is the professional opinion taker's advice to voters bewildered by seeing a different poll every day in the newspaper?

MR. ROPER: Not to believe everything you read or hear. One of these -- these polls are going to get more accurate as they get closer because people's opinions are going to be made up more clearly as we get closer and then they'll start to mean more. I think that they should be looked at with interest and not with blind faith.

MR. MacNeil: Bud Roper, thank you very much. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: To put the polls and other political news of this week into perspective is our team of Gergen & Shields, that's David Gergen, Editor at Large of U.S. News & World Report, and Mark Shields, Syndicated Columnist with the Washington Post. He joins us from studios in Los Angeles. Mark, you just heard Bud Roper explain some of this conflicting information we're getting from the polls. What does the fact that so many voters' minds are not made up yet, what does that say to the candidates about the kind of campaign they ought to be conducting?

MARK SHIELDS, Washington Post: I thought there were two fascinating things that Bud Roper offered among many. One was, Judy, that how soft that support is when just the switching of the names, Michael Dukakis having a 12 point lead when he's first and with an 8 point difference when he's second. I guess it says that neither candidate is really getting his message across about why he wants to be President of the United States. There's an old line in politics about the difference between the grown-ups and the adolescents. Grown-ups run for President to do something; the adolescents run for President to be something. And I'd say up to now based upon the poll information and the softness of the electorate, we've got two people who want to be something.

MS. WOODRUFF: David, does the fact that so many people are still apparently undecided, does that affect the way these candidates are running right now?

DAVID GERGEN, U.S. News & World Report: Well, first of all, I think the size of the soft vote is what's surprising to all of us. By Bud Roper's own estimates, I talked to him yesterday, he finds that as many as 40 percent of the electorate are still soft. They're either undecided totally or they're tentative in their views and could easily switch.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that unusually large at this point?

MR. GERGEN: That's the largest any of us can remember at this stage of the campaign. What it really means, of course, is that voters are only now beginning to focus and the events that are to follow, particularly the debates, but mistakes that may follow are going to have an enormous impact. In such a fluid situation one thing; if it's in effect a pond that's quiet, one rock thrown in the pond could change everything.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is there anything in the polls, Mark, that the campaigns are particularly focusing on or worried about, other than just the sheer numbers?

MR. SHIELDS: There sure are, Judy. First of all I think the polls are fluid, but they're fluid for George Bush. I'm out here in California where Michael Dukakis had a 16 point lead at the end of July, and in what Mervin Field, the Director of the California Poll, calls a phenomenal reversal, they are now tied, so there is a fluidity, but the fluidity has flowed toward Bush if I could say that. What Dukakis did this week, how he spent his time, was a direct reaction to the polls and the bad polling information he had had and the attacks that the Bush campaign had made upon him.He did his strength week. This was Michael Dukakis's Nautilus Week to prove that he was committed to a strong national defense, that he was comfortable talking about weapons systems and as we saw today that he was comfortable and more than supportive, enthusiastic in the presence in urging, in exhortation to police officers.

MS. WOODRUFF: David, is the message that Dukakis tried to get across this week on defense and foreign policy and crime and drugs that we just heard, is that getting across do we think?

MR. GERGEN: I think nationally Gov. Dukakis this last week had his best week since Atlanta. He's been struggling. He's had a stumbling campaign. I think he regained some of his footing this week. He was more thoughtful in his defense speeches. He finally got his position staked out. I think he looked a little better except for that one day when he was out on the tank and it looked like a Woody Allen caper when he put himself in a tank with a hat on. I think we may see that again in some Republican advertising before it's over. But I think it was actually a good week for Dukakis, but I want to go back to the point Mark made, because I think there are two different kind of polls to look at. One is the national poll which Roper and others are measuring, but what's also very important is what's happening in individual states, but what really counts is what's happening in key states. The Dukakis campaign, it seems to me, is running a national campaign. The Bush campaign has been focusing much more on key states. While Dukakis is going national with his ads, Bush is going into five key states. And right now, all of those key states are moving in Bush's direction and the electoral outlook for Bush is looking much stronger than it is for Dukakis right now.

MS. WOODRUFF: So you're saying that's a smart move on the part of the Bush Campaign?

MR. GERGEN: It's a bit of a risk, but let's take the state. Bush has now moved ahead in Texas. He has a nice healthy lead in Texas. He's moved even in California, as Mark just said. Three key other states, Michigan he's now even, Ohio he's ahead, New Jersey, he's slightly ahead. If he can pull those states into the Bush column, he's going to win the election by a very healthy margin. Those are really important states. The electoral outlook, what's happening at the state level, is just important, in fact, more important I think that looking at the national polls.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mark, do you see it the same way? Is that a smart move for the Bush people?

MR. SHIELDS: It's a smart move just like the choice of Lloyd Bentsen is a shrewd move if Lloyd Bentsen and Michael Dukakis carry Texas, and it is a shrewd move if it does work for George Bush. I think George Bush feels more comfortable in adopting that sort of a strategy after the results in the South. The South has gone bad for Michael Dukakis, and that's really where the pledge of allegiance and the defense issues have cut against him and the Bush campaign has emphatically and persuasively made their case.

MS. WOODRUFF: Has Dukakis written off the South? I mean, he hasn't really spent any time campaigning down there, other than in Texas.

MR. SHIELDS: It won't say they've written off the South, but other than Arkansas and Texas, Florida is gone. I think that's conceded, acknowledged in both camps and by neutral observers as well. One of the problems that Dukakis has is that when Michael Dukakis was ahead in the polls and enjoying the salad days of late July and the middle of the summer. He was saying nothing or not engaging in controversial issues, talking about competence, talking about jobs at good wages. He didn't excite passions. He didn't crack jokes. But then he continued to do that and people said, my, how shrewd he is to avoid those controversial thorny issues. He started to slip and he continued to do the same things, talk about good jobs and good wages, competence, not excite passions, and all the rest of it, and now he's being barraged, bombarded with advice and counsel, you've got to change, you've got to excite people, you've got to get them going, you've got to stand for something, take some stands, and so that's the position he's in. What Bush has been doing has been working for him.

MS. WOODRUFF: David, let's talk about Bush because he spent the week, I was with him for several days, attacking Dukakis, rather than trying to get out what seemed to me to be a positive message of his own. Does that mean that they feel now so comfortable that they have gotten their message out that they can virtually spend most of their time going after their opponent?

MR. GERGEN: No. I think they have found thought that the attacks are working. The pledge of allegiance issue, while it's offensive to many say in the Northeast, is working wonderfully for them in the State of Texas. It's one of the issues that's really bumped him up. The question of crime, they've started, the Bush campaign is starting running an ad on crime, which I'm sure Mark has seen in Los Angeles. It is running heavily in Orange County, and it's accusing Dukakis of being weak on crime. It's a very negative ad. They're getting a big bump in Orange County, so much so the prospects in California are rising, so so far they've found that the negative and the tough attacks are working. I assume at some point Bush is going to -- he's mixed it up a little bit, but I assume at some point he's going to get back on the high road and let this advertising do some of the attacks for him.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mark, are we at the point where the negatives, the attacks and so forth, could hurt Bush, or can he still get away with this for a number of days to come?

MR. SHIELDS: I think George Bush is getting close to running out the string on the negatives, Judy. At some point there has to be a sense of why he wants to be President of the United States, instead of an occasional soliloquy about a gentler nation and a gentler man and how he listens. I mean, there has to really be some sense. And for Michael Dukakis, it is absolutely crucial that he do that because he has to get this debate into the future about what we are willing to do in this country, what we're willing to do to invest in our future to make it better for our kids, and to remedy the problems that are on the horizon in an otherwise tranquil country.

MS. WOODRUFF: I can't let you both get away without talking about so call gaffs this week from Bush and from Quayle. David, we were talking about this a minute ago.

MR. GERGEN: The Bush campaign, Quayle in particular, have gotten into some verbal fumbles this week. I mean, yesterday Quayle asserted at one point that the Nazi Holocaust in Germany was "an obscene period in our nation's history", in other words, in American history. He seemed sufficiently mixed up and in trying to explain it when people asked him about it, he sort of excused himself. He said, "I didn't live in this century." Well, people are wondering, well, what is he talking about? As you know, today he was heard saying, well, you know, when I make these verbal fumbles, my handlers want to send me to the room, and he was sort of joking about it. But I don't think the people will joke about this very long. They really want to know just how serious a man is this and how much judgment and knowledge does he have, and so I think there is going to be a lot of tension on Dan Quayle.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mark, we seem to ask this question every week, but is there any more evidence this week about whether Quayle is a plus or a minus for Bush?

MR. SHIELDS: I think there is evidence that he's a minus, Judy, and I think David is absolutely right about the problem that he presents. George Bush did two things. First of all, he devalued the office in my judgment, the office that had been elevated to considerable importance in the post war era. I mean, whether you're talking about Jerry Ford or you're talking about the fact that Fritz Mondale and George Bush were a different definition of what a Vice President had been. Dan Quayle is still not seen as fitting that, as reaching up to meet those standards that previous Vice Presidents have occupied. The second thing that I think really becomes a problem for Quayle was revealed in the New York Times/CBS Poll this week, people were asked, would you be comfortable or worried if a President Dukakis, something happened to him, and he had to turn over the reins to Lloyd Bentsen, by 2 to 1 people were confident with Lloyd Bentsen as President. By 2 to 1 people were worried and anxious about Dan Quayle as President.

MS. WOODRUFF: Got to leave it at that. Thank you both, Mark Shields, David Gergen. RECAP

MS. WOODRUFF: Recapping the leading news stories this Friday, high winds and seas are pounding the Gulf Coast as Hurricane Gilbert comes ashore south of Brownsville, Texas. Mikhail Gorbachev offered to give up the huge Soviet Naval base in Vietnam if the U.S. gives up its base in the Philippines, and the Olympic Torch was carried into Seoul, Korea, for the opening of the Summer Olympics. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Judy. That's the Newshour tonight. Have a nice weekend. And we'll see you on Monday night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.