What's at stake: many issues will confront whoever wins in November. But in choosing between George W. Bush and John Kerry, voters will decide what America's role in the world should be.

Almost 40 years have passed since so much was at stake in a single presidential election. In times of peace, Presidents and their challengers argue about unemployment and taxes, the future of Social Security, whether the Federal government is too big, or what rules it should set to protect the environment. In times of war, those questions are still important and will certainly be debated, but they recede to the background as voters make a gut judgment about who they trust to better protect the nation.

The battle between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat John Kerry is one of those elections. For all the talk about how this is a contest between a conservative Texan and a Massachusetts liberal, a tough-talking unilateralist versus a more moderate-sounding Vietnam veteran, in the end it is likely to be an election about the wisdom of the American experiment in Iraq and whether the nation is now safer than it was before Sept. 11, 2001.

The United States has not faced an election like this since 1968, at the height of the Vietnam War (see Times Pant, p. 22). The country is deeply divided about President Bush's tumultuous three-and-a-half years in office--a span that has covered one of the largest attacks on American soil, two American led invasions (Afghanistan and Iraqi, and endless investigations about who is to blame for intelligence failures and for the mistreatment of American-held prisoners in Iraq.

SWING VOTERS AND IRAQ

Because the divide in the country is so deep, the election may well be determined by which way a dwindling number of voters--the "swing" voters in key states who haven't yet made up their minds--decide the Iraq issue. This means, according to Andrew Kohut, who conducts polls for the Pew Research Center, that "Iraq is the joker in the deck," the unpredictable factor for both candidates.

More broadly, this election is also a referendum about whether the United States should continue to pursue what has become known as the Bush Doctrine: a willingness to execute a pre-emptive strike against any foe that the U.S. believes could pose a threat sometime in the future.

"September the 11th, 2001, taught a lesson I will never forget," Bush said to the wild cheers of his supporters at an appearance in Cincinnati on May 4, turning pre-emption into a campaign theme. "America must confront threats before they fully materialize."

Kerry views the world very differently. He says he does not disagree that the U.S. needs to battle terrorists or even that American troops need to stay in Iraq until the country is stable. Kerry voted in late 2002 for the congressional resolution authorizing the President to use military force to remove Saddam Hussein from power. But now, he argues that Bush botched the job by going to war without a broader coalition of countries firmly behind the invasion.

At every opportunity, the Massachusetts Senator casts Bush's approach to the world as "the most arrogant foreign policy" in American history, one that has isolated America from the United Nations and from allies it now badly needs to rebuild Iraq, and needlessly driven away countries that were sympathetic to the U.S. after September 11.

NUCLEAR THREATS

With the safety of the country paramount on voters' minds, the candidates disagree about whether Washington is even focused on the right threats today. While Iraq has dominated the headlines and tied up American forces--there are precious few American troops available to deal with an emergency elsewhere--Iran and North Korea have both apparently made tremendous progress in their nuclear-weapons programs. North Korea, the CIA believes, has probably created enough nuclear material in the past year for six or more bombs. The Iranians, in addition to feeding the insurgency in Iraq, have their own suspect nuclear program.

"This administration has been almost myopic in its view on Iraq itself, to the exclusion of things that are necessary to in fact make the world safer," Kerry said in an interview.

To the Bush administration, these are the critiques of a man who has never held an executive post, who has never had to decide when the risk was so high that military action was necessary. Trying to cast his opponent as irresolute, Bush has repeatedly accused Kerry of "flip-flopping" on important issues, citing as an example his Senate vote in support of the Iraq invasion, followed by his later doubts. Seeking to fuel this perception of Kerry, Vice President Dick Cheney said during a July 3 speech in Parma, Ohio, that Kerry, seems "to shift with the political winds."

Cutting through the campaign rhetoric on both sides, the election can be viewed as a referendum on how the U.S. should conduct itself in the world: as a victim of terror that will use its power to crush threats, or as an enormously powerful country that believes it can secure the peace only by operating tinder rules supported by its allies and the U.N.

SIMILAR BACKGROUNDS

Oddly enough, these very different approaches to American power are being debated by two men who have led surprisingly parallel lives. They were both born in New England, though Bush said during an interview at his ranch that he thinks of himself as "very much a product of Texas," as is clear to anyone who listens to him talk. They were just a few years apart at Yale in the 1960s, and after college, Kerry volunteered for Navy service in Vietnam, while Bush joined the Texas Air National Guard. As a Senator, Kerry has spent years studying the fine points of foreign policy. Bush, once considered a novice in that area, has probably done more to re-invent American foreign policy than any other President in two generations.

As the campaign heats up this fall, it's those swing voters, particularly in battleground states like Florida, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio, who may cast the decisive ballots. And the fight there is intense.

Partly, that is because those states have lost the most manufacturing jobs during the economic downturn of the past three years, and have not yet felt many benefits of the recent upturn. In those states, the "outsourcing" of jobs overseas and the rising trade deficit are huge issues, looming much larger than those questions do on the coasts. So do gas prices, which rose above $2 over the summer (see Sticker Shock at the Pump, p. 25).

THE DOMESTIC FRONT

As these voters weigh votes for Bush or Kerry, they may also consider how the men differ on other hot-button domestic issues. With several U.S. Supreme Court Justices well past 70, whoever is President may have the opportunity to appoint several Justices, possibly affecting the direction of the Court for decades. Other issues that are sure to confront the candidates during the campaign include gay marriage, education, abortion, and the use of stem cells from human embryos in scientific research.

But Iraq will loom large in swing states, in part because so many young people from those states--many of whom had a hard time finding jobs--signed up for the military or the National Guard, and now find themselves fighting a violent Iraqi insurgency. Their families, polls show, are deeply patriotic; but they are also attuned to the dangers of keeping such a large troop presence in Iraq.

So in the last two months of the campaign, Bush and Kerry (and Vice President Cheney and Kerry's running mate, North Carolina Senator John Edwards) will visit those swing states repeatedly, targeting undecided voters. For Bush, his key arguments come down to this: that under his watch, an economy battered by the September 11 attacks and by corporate scandals came back, and America is in a stronger position to fight terrorists than it was under President Clinton.

For Kerry, the challenge is to convince voters that it is worth the risk to change horses in the middle of a war. The reality is that events neither man can control--say, another large-scale terrorist attack on U.S. soil, or the capture of Osama bin Laden--may drive the election's outcome more than their political rhetoric. "If Bush or the course of events--with regard to the handling of the economy or Iraq--can make the country comfortable again, he can win this election," Kohut, the pollster, concludes. "If either of those go wrong, it's Kerry's to take away."

Who's Got the (Electoral) Votes?

As a result of population changes in the 2000 Census, 18 states gained or lost votes in the Electoral College. (The Constitution says a candidate must win a majority of electoral votes to become President.) This map shows the results of the 2000 erection, the number of electoral votes each state has in 2004, and the states that have gained or lost electoral votes since 2000.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

LESSON PLANS

Bush and Kerry have very different views about America's role in the world, and how best to fight terror and protect the nation.

TEACHING OBJECTIVES

To help students understand what the key issues are likely to be this fall, particularly in the areas of national defense and foreign policy, and where Bush and Kerry stand on them.

ISSUE RESEARCH: Have students monitor TV, radio, and print ads for Bush and Kerry, and make charts on which they identify the focus of each ad. For example, what does each say about Iraq, the environment, the economy?

INTERVIEWS: Students can survey voting-age friends, relatives, or neighbors on issues in the article. They should start by asking if interviewees are more concerned about foreign or domestic issues, and then turn to specifics.

Why do interviewees think President Bush or Senator Kerry has a better position on Iraq? Fighting terror? The economy? The environment? Interviewees should identify those issues that will most influence their decision on who they'll vote for.

GRID GUIDE: Students might also design their own grid guide, a large box with three vertical lines inside, creating four columns. List Bush pluses and minuses in the two left-side columns and Kerry pluses and minuses on the right.

A few possibilities: Kerry Plus: fought in Vietnam; Bush Plus: a strong leader; Kerry Minus: no executive experience; Bush Minus: mishandled postwar Iraq.

Students should also list all issues found in the article and identify them as pluses or minuses for Bush or Kerry. You might also have students do some brainstorming to see if they can come up with other issues that interest them.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

* David Sanger says the election is likely to be about "the wisdom of the American experiment in Iraq." Was the U.S. right to to go war in Iraq? Why or why not?

* Who would you like to see elected President in November? Why?

WEB WATCH: For campaign news from the Republican perspective, go to the Republican National Committee Web site at www.rnc.org; and for Democratic perspective, the Democratic National Committee Web site at www.democrats.org.

(QUIZ 3)

1. One area in which President Bush and Senator Kerry agree is

a the role of government in environmental policy.

b the need for the U.S. to stay in Iraq for now.

c taxation policy.

d that the U.S. is winning the war on terror.

2. Senator Kerry says the U.S. is so focused on Iraq that it has not paid sufficient attention to threats from Iran and North Korea, both of which

a have Large armies.

b have well-developed nuclear weapons programs.

c are major sources of illegal drugs.

d are training terrorists.

3. The best description of the so-called Bush Doctrine is

a using diplomacy to get support for American military action.

b using America's economic power to influence other countries' trading policies.

c forming military coalitions with other countries.

d a willingness to use pre-emptive strikes against any foe that could be a potential threat.

4. All of the following are not domestic issues, except

a stem-cell research.

b extended school years.

c appointment of Supreme Court Justices.

d gas prices.

5. Which of the following is one of the "battleground" states in the November election?

a Delaware.

b Florida.

c Kentucky.

d Mississippi.

6. A key economic issue is outsourcing, which involves

a a rise in exports of U.S. goods to other countries.

b the purchasing of goods from other countries.

c the depletion of natural resources.

d the movement of American jobs abroad.

Answer Key

1. (b) the need for the U.S. to stay in Iraq for now.

2. (b) have well-developed nuclear weapons programs.

3. (d) a willingness to use pre-emptive strikes against any foe that could be potential threat.

4. (b) extended school years.

5. (b) Florida.

6. (d) the movement of American jobs abroad.

David E. Sanger is White House correspondent for The New York Times.