The Search for Someone to Believe In

Some apathy. Considerable cynicism. A restless quest for serenity. A rising concern over spiritual and moral values. Continuing distrust of institutions, but increasing confidence in the future.

Those are among the crosscurrents revealed by the presidential primaries. Bedeviling as they may be for the candidates, the primaries serve a function beyond winnowing presidential contenders: they probe and test the American mood. There is in that mood a disturbing negative attitude toward politics and politicians. Princeton's Opinion Research Corp. finds that only 30% of those polled express "high trust and confidence" in "the office of the presidency," and only 20% have high trust in Congress. "We've got a disbelieving mood," observes Harry O'Neill, executive vice president of Opinion Research Corp. "People are upset about a lot of problems, and they don't give very good grades to the institutions that are supposed to be grappling with them."

To many analysts, however, the sourness is less a matter of outright hostility toward Government, politics and institutions than an impatience with turmoil in American life. After years of fighting over race, drugs, sex, Viet Nam, Watergate and recession, voters are seeking some kind of normality. "There is a hunger to get away from crisis, stridency, hysteria, a rejection of any kind of extremism," reports TIME'S public opinion analyst Daniel Yankelovich. Agrees Alan Baron, a liberal Washington Democrat: "This country wants an overall amnesty. Everybody wants to rest." To Frank Mankiewicz, a director of George McGovern's emotional campaign in 1972, the attitude toward Government now is "not so much like 'Bring us together' as it is 'Leave us alone.'

As voters seek to escape fevered controversy, there are also positive qualities in the prevailing mood. Even though only a third of the voters tell Gallup pollsters that they are thinking "a lot" about the election, the primary voting turnout is only slightly down from 1972. Rather than abandoning politics, voters seem to be demanding more from the candidates.

The "Metaissue." "People are very much searching for someone they can believe in," observes Joe Grandmaison, the 1972 McGovern campaign director in New Hampshire. This quest puts a new emphasis on intangible qualities of leadership. Contends George Reedy, the astute former press secretary to Lyndon Johnson: "The real issues in the campaign are spiritual rather than economic and social. The average American today is lost. He doesn't know what to believe, where to go, what to do." Marquette University Sociologist Wayne Youngquist calls these spiritual concerns collectively a "metaissue--an issue above issues. It involves tone, honesty, decency, truthfulness, morality, religion."

Though there is still great worry over the economy, the TIME-Yankelovich surveys show a remarkable increase this year in the percentage of voters who expect that the economy will get better rather than worse. This, explains Yankelovich, helps those candidates who "have something positive to offer" and hurts those who "articulate discontent" and project "the gloom issue."

There are inner conflicts in a mood that rejects politics-as-usual, yearns for something new but also seeks a quiescent normality. Yet some generalizations can be drawn about which candidates so far have benefited most from the emerging mood:

> President Ford is doing well because he does not incite strong feelings, seems unlikely to revive the old schisms, and represents normality. The economic recovery works in his favor, and Yankelovich's surveys show that he has won heavy support from people who are optimistic about the nation's future. He is, moreover, seen as an honest, undevious, trustworthy man. A Ford handicap in the current anti-Washington mood is that he is considered one of the run-of-the-mill, "institutional" politicians.

> Ronald Reagan, by contrast, gains from his freshness on the national political scene. He has done unusually well for a challenger to an incumbent President. Reagan has benefited from a trend by more moderate Republicans to consider themselves independents, leaving the party more conservative than it was in 1972. Yet his pitch may well be too strident for what is widely seen as a year of moderation. He also gains his strong support from the discontented and the fearful, whose numbers are declining. The movie-star background and polished delivery have a stagy quality ill fitting the current accent on candor.

> Among the Democrats, the shrillest voices are not finding much of an echo. On the left, Fred Harris has all but dropped out; on the right, George Wallace is virtually eliminated. Challenged by Jimmy Carter in North Carolina and Florida, he has failed to win even in the South. Part of the change must be attributed to his health, but it also has to do with the new mood that no longer responds to Wallace's old appeal of discontent. Henry Jackson won in both Massachusetts and New York, but his pugnaciousness may not wear well nationally as the debate sharpens. The easygoing Mo Udall fits the nation's low-key leaning, and he is widely seen as one of the most likable and honest of all the candidates. His problem is that he remains relatively little known, is tagged as too liberal for the current voter mood and is a 15-year veteran of the unpopular Congress.

> Carter has either adroitly capitalized on the electorate's mood--or come along with natural qualities at just the right time to meet its demands. The TIME-Yankelovich surveys show that Carter, like Ford, draws most of his support from voters who are confident about America's future. The soft accent, the moderation on issues, the emphasis on "Trust me," even his fundamentalist religiosity, seem attuned to the times. "Jimmy Carter is a positive and upward and loving candidate," observes former Mississippi Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Gil Carmichael. "His spiritual issue is probably one of the best gut issues." Yet Carter's course is also hazardous. He has so stressed his honesty, freshness and reasonableness that any slip into a clear deception or another heated controversy might seem a betrayal. His "ethnic purity" remark was a precarious slip, but he seems to have weathered that mistake (see story page 16).

> Hubert Humphrey, of course, has not yet faced a fresh test in the current mood. Always ranking high on decency and personal warmth, he is now seen as a rather comfortable old shoe--which fits the desire for serenity but not the search for new leadership. However, Humphrey is also seen as experienced in world affairs. If international concerns should arise to overshadow the economic issues amid continued recovery, the national mood would favor the most experienced veterans: Humphrey among the Democrats and Ford among the Republicans.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.