How We Decide
By Richard Stengel, Managing Editor
Here's the question that has obsessed more than a few political experts since the beginning of the presidential campaign: Why does Barack Obama consistently poll behind the generic Democrat in the 2008 race? What that means in regular speech is that when voters are asked whether they would prefer a Democrat or a Republican, the generic Democrat has scored as many as five points higher than Senator Obama does.
This question is often asked in a whisper. Why? Because so many people believe the answer is an ugly one: bias, prejudice, racism--take your pick. Some attribute it to something less distasteful: Obama's unfamiliarity, his "exotic" background, his comparatively recent emergence on the political stage. The doubters--they would call themselves realists--often assert that these are just euphemisms for prejudice, a way of camouflaging what lies beneath.
I don't think anyone is without prejudice of some kind. But for many, I would say, this is more in the nature of stereotypes we hold or assumptions we make that are not based on knowledge or experience. For a long time, I've wanted to get to the root of this issue. In our special report on race and in our annual America by the Numbers franchise, we look at the role race is playing. No one can say for certain what is in people's hearts. But what we found is a very American answer: people are pragmatic and seem willing to evaluate the candidates on the merits of their character and ideas. And, yes, Obama is still unfamiliar to plenty of voters--but what we also discovered is that anxieties about the economy are trumping anxieties that some people have about Barack Obama.
To get to the bottom of all this, editor at large David Von Drehle--who makes his home in Kansas City, Mo.--took off in his family's dented minivan for a 750-mile (1,200 km) trip across the center of Missouri. Missouri, he notes, has backed the winner in every presidential election in the past 100 years except one. "I've done this sort of rolling interview before," he says, "and what struck me as different this time was that everyone seemed a little nervous to be talking politics." In general, David found a good number of blue collar white voters who said they plan to vote for Obama because of the economy, and some who say they plan to vote against him because they disagree with his policies. But he found little evidence that race will be a determining factor either way. Accompanying David's piece are provocative essays on Obama's candidacy by TIME contributors Peter Beinart and Ta-Nehisi Coates.
For the third year in a row, graphics director Jackson Dykman has been the impresario of our America by the Numbers franchise. This year we look at You: The Voter. Most polls tell you what voters are thinking but not how they've made up their minds. Our new national poll uses what Jackson calls "feeling thermometers"--that is, questions that go beyond yes-or-no answers to get at how voters arrive at their decisions. Jackson explains that most voters rely on their emotions and that as many as 28% of voters pick the candidate who does not share their policy goals. He also reveals that the "swing voter" is a psychological phenomenon that cuts across all demographic boundaries, debunking the idea that any one voting bloc has the power to turn the election. And finally, look for the divine Elizabeth Gilbert--author of Eat, Pray, Love--on the back page writing movingly about the political battle in her own family.
Richard Stengel, MANAGING EDITOR