Isakson, Chambliss: Obama’s Comments Reflect Fundamental Lack of Understanding of Tri-State Water Issues

Call Favoritism of Florida's Needs ‘A Clear Affront to the Residents of Georgia’

U.S. Senators Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., today sent a letter to Senator Barack Obama, D-Ill., expressing their disappointment with comments he made on Oct. 16, 2008, regarding water allocation issues in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint and Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa river basins.

The text of the letter is below:

Dear Senator Obama:

We are writing to express our disappointment with comments made yesterday by you and your campaign relating to water allocation issues in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) and Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) River basins. As you may know, these river basins serve Georgia, Alabama, and Florida. While we appreciate your recent and sudden interest in the tri-state water issues we have been working on for the past six years, the comments by you and your campaign reflect a fundamental lack of understanding of the nature of the problems in the ACF and ACT basins, a lack of understanding of the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers with regards to the ACF and ACT basins under federal law, and a cavalier disregard for the needs of the residents of Georgia.

According to your campaign’s statement, you “would direct the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct a study to assess the water availability, supply options, and demand-management alternatives that factor into ACF River System usage, as well as the impact of freshwater flow on the ecology of the Apalachicola River and Bay.” You also said “As President, I will make protecting Florida’s water resources a priority.”

As you may know, the Army Corps of Engineers is required under federal law to update the water control manuals for the ACF and ACT basins, and recently announced it would begin doing so in the ACT basin. We were pleased to hear from Secretary of the Army Pete Geren personally that the Corps is moving forward with updating these manuals, because it will allow the Corps to make smarter decisions in their management of these river systems. We have underscored to him how important this action is. As you also may know such an update would include studies to assess water supply and demand, and environmental management practices for ALL the users and stakeholder in the basins, not just those on the Apalachicola River and Bay. To ask the Corps to ignore its responsibilities under federal law in favor of the residents of Florida is a clear affront to the residents of Georgia. To state that you will make protecting Florida’s water resources a priority over Georgia’s shows that you do not care about the needs of the people of Georgia.

We have continually worked to get Georgia, Florida and Alabama together and to force the Corp of Engineers to update a 20-year-old Water Control Plan for the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa and Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basins. In 2006 we held Senate hearings in Gainesville and Columbus to implore the Corps to keep its commitment to update its outdated water control plan for the two river basins.

On August 1, 2007, we met with Secretary Geren as well as Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works John Paul Woodley, Lieutenant General Robert L. Van Antwerp and General Counsel Craig Schmauder. At the meeting, Secretary Geren indicated his desire to give mediation time to work before starting the update of the water control manuals.

When Secretary Geren gave his commitment to us that if and when mediation broke down and was not making progress, he would begin the update of the water control manuals, we held him to that promise. On September 28, 2007, after judges involved in the mediation announced that the talks had broken down, we sent a letter to Secretary Geren strongly urging him to honor his pledge to update the water control plan.

On October 18, 2007, Secretary Woodley told both of us by telephone that the Corps will start the process for updating the water control manual for the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa River Basin.

We also facilitated meetings in Washington between the Governors of Georgia, Alabama, and Florida, as well as meetings between the Governors and the Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, and Council on Environmental Quality Chairman Jim Connaughton. We continue to work with the Governors and their staffs to come to a solution so the states can take advantage of the productive talks they have had and agree on a resolution.

From Lake Lanier to Lake Allatoona, from Atlanta to West Point Lake, and from LaGrange to Columbus, we have worked to find a solution that benefits not only the people of our state, but all those who reside in the river basins. It is unfortunate that you wish to undo the good work we have done to find a solution for all the people in the river basin and instead prioritize the needs of only the people of Florida.

Sincerely,
Saxby Chambliss Johnny Isakson
United States Senator United States Senator

Americans' Confidence in Their Leaders Declines Sharply

PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- 80% of Americans believe that the U.S. faces a leadership crisis today -- up from 77% in 2007 and 65% in 2005 -- according to poll results just released by the Center for Public Leadership at the Harvard Kennedy School and the Merriman River Group.

Many Americans also agree that they are not getting the leadership they need from President Bush and his advisers. 60% say they have not much or no confidence in the leadership of the executive branch, up from 49% last year.

Despite this lack of confidence in presidential leadership, the poll results reveal important points of agreement on how the next president should lead. Moreover, Americans place great importance on the 2008 election: 77% believe it matters a great deal for the future of the country, up from 65% a year ago.

"We hear a lot about deep political divides in this country, but this poll shows that Americans have clear ideas about the kind of leadership they expect from their presidents," said David Gergen, Director of the Center for Public Leadership.

The poll asked a demographically representative sample of 997 U.S. citizens (margin of error +/- 3.1%) to choose between alternate conceptions of good presidential leadership. Many basic aspects of presidential leadership, such as building alliances and preserving checks and balances, are favored by a majority of Americans. For example:

-- 72% say presidents should use the military only to defend America and
react to enemy attacks
-- 71% say presidents should share power equally with Congress and the
Supreme Court
-- 64% say presidents should make decisions based on fairness
-- 56% say foreign policy should focus on building alliances
-- 55% say they prefer presidents who are never willing to be unethical
or bend the rules.

The poll also revealed some key differences in the facets of presidential leadership favored by supporters of John McCain and Barack Obama. "These core debates about presidential leadership give us some clues about how the candidates' leadership profiles attract supporters," notes the study's lead author, Seth Rosenthal.

"McCain supporters have a general preference for presidents who act as independent moral agents and focus on the country's safety and strength," noted Rosenthal. "In contrast, Obama supporters seem to prefer practical presidents whose decisions are more directly responsive to Americans' opinions and needs." For instance, when asked to choose between alternate conceptions of presidential leadership:

-- 62% of McCain supporters say presidents should be willing to offend
people and make enemies when necessary, while 61% of Obama supporters
prefer that presidents always be respectful and diplomatic
-- 60% of McCain supporters say presidents should lead based on moral
beliefs about what is right and wrong, while 52% of Obama supporters
counter that presidential leadership based on practical beliefs about
what works and doesn't work is more important.
-- 58% of McCain supporters say presidents should protect the public's
safety, even if it infringes on their freedom, while 49% of Obama
supporters believe that presidents should protect the public's
freedom, even if it infringes on their safety
-- 40% of McCain supporters want presidents to reduce the government's
power to allow Americans to succeed and fail on their own, a sentiment
with which only 15% of Obama supporters agree

Moreover,
-- 70% of Obama supporters want presidents to keep religious faith a
personal or private matter, while 54% of McCain supporters prefer that
presidents express their religious faith in public
-- 64% of Obama supporters say presidents should do what the American
people think is right, while 50% of McCain supporters want presidents
to do what they themselves think is right
-- 63% of Obama supporters want presidents to ensure that America is
respected for its fairness, while 53% of McCain supporters say it's
more important for presidents to ensure that America is respected for
its strength
-- 63% of Obama supporters say that presidents should focus on uniting
people, while McCain supporters are about equally split on whether a
president should focus on uniting people or on accomplishing goals,
even if it divides people.

Crisis in Confidence

The crisis in confidence in America's leaders is clearly reflected in the National Leadership Index 2008, which presents the public's confidence in the leaders of multiple sectors of society. From 2007 to 2008, many sectors experienced their steepest annual declines in confidence since the inception of the National Leadership Index in 2005. Among the survey's key findings:

-- Confidence in the leaders of seven sectors -- business, the Executive
Branch, Congress, religious, educational, the Supreme Court, and state
government -- fell more sharply in the past year than ever before
-- Confidence in business leaders dropped further than did confidence in
leaders of any other sector
-- Confidence in the Executive Branch and educational leaders has
declined for three years in a row
-- The only sectors in which Americans have more than a moderate amount
of confidence are military and medical leadership
-- Confidence held steady from 2007 for military, medical, nonprofit &
charitable, and local government leaders
-- For the third year in a row, confidence in leaders has not increased
for any sector.

However, Americans may see some light at the end of the tunnel. A plurality, 39%, believe that things will be better after the 2008 election, while only 7% believe things will be worse.

"The American people are experiencing tremendous anxiety at the uncertain state of the nation, and they're holding those at the top responsible," said Todd Pittinsky, Research Director at the Center for Public Leadership. "The next president will face significant challenges. And one of the most important will be to take the lead in restoring Americans' confidence."

For the complete survey and report visit: http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/leadership/images/CPLpdf/nli%20report.pdf.

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

Belgian Journalists Speak on European Opinion about the U.S. Elections

Citing the current economic crisis, the war in Iraq and a need for multilateralism as reasons for Europeans to keep an eye on the U.S. presidential election, seven Belgian journalists weighed in on the candidates in a panel discussion at Georgia State on Monday.

“If you would have an election in Europe with the two candidates, you would see Barack Obama win 80 to 20 percent,” said Jorn De Cock, foreign affairs writer for De Standaard and Het Nieuwsblad/De Gentenaar. “But there is a real feeling in Europe that we should not express an opinion so it will not backfire over here.”

Guy Van Vlierden, foreign desk coordinator at Het Laatste Nieuws, said that although Europeans see Obama as a more favorable candidate, it’s still anybody’s game.

“It’s a constant surprise,” he said. “It’s crystal clear for us Belgians and Europeans: Barack Obama is the most interesting. I think John McCain will win at the end, I don’t know. It’s still a constant surprise.”

Jurek Kuczkiewicz of daily newspaper Le Soir said that in talking to Americans, it’s evident that U.S. foreign policy and global image are becoming an issue for voters, and many on the panel expressed apprehension about vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s foreign policy experience.

“The first issue anybody mentioned was and still is the United States’ image abroad,” Kuczkiewicz said. “I was very surprised. I think that as foreign media, we contribute to the American people learning about what effects their action abroad has.”

Panelists also said that after eight years of George W. Bush’s presidency, Europeans are ready for change, whatever the outcome of the election may be.

“There’s the economic problems, but besides that, the Iraq situation, the arrogance of people like Dick Cheney,” De Cock said. “The United States is our main ally, and we need each other. We haven’t really been behaving like allies in the past few years.”

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

News to Use in Fayetteville, Atlanta, Savannah, Peachtree City and all of Georgia

Emory University: McCain's Call to Halt Campaign Risky, Unprecedented

Two Emory University political scientists say Sen. John McCain's request to suspend campaign activities, delay the first debate with Sen. Barack Obama and concentrate on the economy is unprecedented, with no predictable outcomes.

"I have never heard of anything happening like this. I don’t see how McCain's decision to suspend his campaign and his desire to delay the debate are going to have an affect on the economy," says Emory political scientist Alan Abramowitz. "People really want to hear what the candidates have to say, and although foreign policy is supposed to be the topic, they can use the debates to talk about the economy."

"This is completely new territory, very interesting, high stakes politics,” says Emory political scientist Merle Black. "McCain's absence from the first debate, if it occurs, would be unprecedented and risky. It would give Barack Obama an opportunity to speak directly to Americans without opposition for 90 minutes."

"McCain's priority this week is helping resolve the current financial crisis rather than debating his opponent. His absence would indicate that a bipartisan bill that satisfies sufficient members of both parties has not been struck," Black says. "If McCain can help bring about a resolution of the crisis before Friday night, he is likely to appear in Mississippi and claim credit for leadership that transcends partisanship."

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

Emory: Presidential Debates: Expect Talking Points, Gaffe Avoidance

The first in a series of Presidential debates is set for Friday, giving the American public an opportunity to hear directly from the candidates, Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Senator Barack Obama. Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz weighs in on what to expect.

"The debates are overrated in terms of their impact on the electorate. Polling data the past few decades has shown that the net impact is very small, only a couple of points," says Abramowitz, a renowned expert on polling, national politics and elections.

"Generally people react to debates along party lines and already have their minds made up," Abramowitz says. "Undecided voters are less like to watch the debates to begin with, and even those who do are generally not influenced by them very much." In 2004, Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry was perceived as the winner of all three debates, "but that didn't help him much," he says.

"I wouldn't expect or look for anything dramatic," says Abramowitz, noting the intensive preparation the candidates are undergoing. "Both candidates will stick to their talking points, so we're not likely to hear anything new or different, although with the state of the economy they're like to stray off course from talking about foreign policy."

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

On Anniversary of 9/11, Interfaith Summit Calls For Action to End Torture

By: Bob Perkins

Speakers on the first day of the inaugural National Summit on Torture at Mercer University’s Atlanta campus Thursday told the more than 200 participants that “this summit affirms our values as Americans.”

Organized by Dr. David P. Gushee, Distinguished University Professor of Christian Ethics at Mercer, the summit is titled “Religious Faith, Torture, and Our National Soul.” The event is cosponsored by Evangelicals for Human Rights, Mercer and 13 other organizations represented by three major faith groups.

“This is an interfaith gathering,” said Gushee, who also serves as president of Evangelicals for Human Rights. “It began as a Baptist and evangelical event and I’m really happy to say it evolved. I think that’s profound. I think it’s terribly exciting. We do share this country. We need to learn each other’s name. I’m excited about the interfaith aspect of this gathering and I believe that only religious belief provides the grounding that we need to pull us out of our worst self.”

Dr. Karen Greenburg, executive director for the Center on Law and Security at New York University, told those attending the morning session that the seeds of the U.S. torture policy were planted in the days following Sept. 11, 2001, but public awareness wasn’t raised until photos of abuse surfaced from Abu Ghraib prison.

“Those photos alerted us to the fact that there was some sort of abuse and torture going on,” Greenberg said. “Those photographs raised the following questions: were the people conducting the acts rogue elements or was it policy? The answer is it was both.”

Greenberg said since the photos were released, at least 12 reports were commissioned by various government organizations that outlined in detail the methods used in secret prisons established after Sept. 11.

“Reading these reports was like being transported to Mars,” Greenberg said. “It was an unbelievable document, but it was what the government telling us what happened in these places.”

Greenberg reminded attendees that Sen. John McCain was himself a prisoner of war, and endured torture as best as he could.

“John McCain said he went to Viet Nam with a love of his family, a love of his church and a love of his country,” Greenberg said. “When he returned home, he said he learned under torture that he loved his country more, his family more and his religion more. When you’re talking about victims of torture who are not John McCain, do you really want them to become more impassioned about their universe?”

For this reason, Greenberg said, she does not believe that torture makes our country safer.

Dr. Ron Mahurin, vice president for academic affairs at Houghton College, said no one should doubt what happened at Abu Ghraib actually happened.

“What strained moral argument will we use to justify the use of torture?” Mahurin asked. “The facts are no longer in dispute. We should never equivocate. Torture is wrong. It is undeniably, morally wrong. If our nation is not haunted by the question, ‘is torture never wrong?,’ then we bear the same responsibility of those people who carried out those acts on behalf of our government.”

Steve Xenakis, retired U.S. Army brigadier general and adviser to Physicians for Human Rights, said nothing claimed in the name of defending our country can justify the cruel and degrading treatment of another man or woman.

“The indefinite incarceration of prisoners from Afghanistan barely drew the level of discontent from Americans,” Xenakis said. “Our country was paralyzed with fear from seeing the World Trade Center vaporize. Most Americans didn’t blink an eye when our officials argued ‘roughing up a few prisoners could save American lives.’”

Xenakis said sometimes decent people get caught up in indecent acts. “This summit affirms our values as Americans,” Xenakis said. “Much has improved since the dark days of 2002 in the minds of many. But our nation’s image around the world has diminished. I fear our image of the Statue of Liberty has been replaced by that poor prisoner in a hood with his arms out-stretched. It is time to right these wrongs, and we all have a collective duty to do so.”

Another perspective on the torture issue is its effects on survivors. Douglas Johnson, executive director of the Center for Victims of Torture, said besides healing from the physical wounds of being tortured, victims often battle the rest of their lives with the mental wounds from torture.

“One survivor stated, ‘I didn’t mind the physical pain so much as I did listening to the cries of other prisoners being tortured,” Johnson said. “Some forms of torture include forcing a parent to watch a child being tortured. This not only brings about the feeling of the pain of the child for the parent, but the feeling the pain of failing as a parent.”

Johnson said the body is merely a weapon against the mind, because the ultimate goal of torture is to break the soul. “Just because we don’t see our actions through those lenses, doesn’t mean the rest of the world doesn’t view us that way.”

Johnson said the death of Jesus has been so sanitized that people don’t always remember that he was tortured until death.

In an afternoon session titled “What the Torture Debate Reveals About American Christianity,” Gushee said white evangelicals have proven susceptible to being blinded on the matter of torture because of a strict interpretation of Romans 13:1-7, “Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established (NIV).”

“This is related to a broader evangelical authoritarianism, especially in our most conservative quarters, that elevates the role of the man over his family, the male pastor over his church, the president over his nation and our nation over the rest of the world,” Gushee said. “The kinds of checks and balances provided by democratic constitutionalism, the wisdom of other nations, and international law are devalued.”

Gushee said because the George W. Bush administration has altered longstanding American policies on torture, there is reluctance among white evangelical to criticize a Republican administration, especially when Bush himself is a white evangelical.

“Government has incredible power and must be watched vigilantly and resisted forcefully when it strays, and evangelicals are not very good at that,” Gushee said. “We must recognize that the gracious Savior whose forgiveness we claim is also the sovereign Lord who demands our entire lives, our setting aside of all ideologies, loyalties and fears that hinder our faithfulness to his will, and our embodied love for the enemy, the alien and the abandoned of the earth.”

At the evening session, Gita Gutierrez, an attorney with the Centre for Constitutional Rights, shared stories about the abuse and ill treatment for detainees being held by the U.S. in Guantanamo prison. Gutierrez was one of the first lawyers to meet with prisoners there, and she said it is important for people to know the stories of detainees.

“The system in Guantanamo has been set up for us to fail,” Gutierrez said. “Professionally, we have to recognize as lawyers that we play a very small role. But it’s time that more people learn about what is going on down there.”

Gutierrez represents detainee Mohammed Al-Qatani, who has been featured in TIME magazine and by other news organizations as one of the first detainees to undergo the “first special interrogation plan,” a regime of torture and inhumane treatment authorized by the Secretary of Defense.

“Everyone is someone’s child,” Gutierrez said. “Mohammed’s elderly, sick father went to meet with lawyers from the Centre for Constitutional Rights and filled out papers so his son could get legal representation.”

Gutierrez said Al-Qatani has been imprisoned at Guantanamo since 2002 and his torture so extreme that he wouldn’t even agree to meet with her on her first visit. She went back to her hotel that night and called her home church to ask for prayers for her and Al-Qatani that he might open up and allow her to meet him.

“The next day, he was tricked into meeting me in a very tiny cell,” Gutierrez said. “He was curled up in a corner and he was so terrified that the interpreter in the room kept having to ask him to pull his arms away from his mouth so they could understand what he was saying.”

Gutierrez said in many ways, she’d have the same meeting over and over for years with Al-Qatani until she finally gained his trust.

Gutierrez said in her view, we have moved backwards has a nation. “We have two threats. One is the threat of our democracy and lost freedom,” she said. “The other is we have learned to dehumanize people based on race, religion or beliefs. We have developed the capacity to see other human beings as less than human.”

Mark Denbeaux, professor of law at Seton Hall Law School, compiled profiles on all of the detainees housed at Guantanamo and discovered some fascinating statistics.

“We found that 55 percent of all of those detained at Guantanamo are never alleged to committed a hostile act,” Denbeaux said. “My students call them enemy civilians. One student found that the only reason one detainee was there was he was listed as an assistant cook for al-Qaida.

“How could this happen,” Denbeaux said. “Guantanamo is the equivalent of the perp walk. It’s a public relations gesture. If you don’t believe me, look at the evidence that the government has collected.”

Earlier in the day, Rich Killmer, executive director of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture said he hopes this historic meeting will have a positive outcome. He hopes one day to be able to tell his grandson good news. “Our task moving forward is to be able to say that, yes, we once used torture techniques, but we don’t do that anymore.”

_____
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

Election Forecast Predicts Obama in November

Abramowitz is a nationally known expert on national politics and elections and the author of "Voice of the People: Elections and Voting in the United States." His expertise includes election forecasting models, party realignment in the United States, congressional elections and the effects of political campaigns on the electorate.

Emory University political scientist and polling expert Alan Abramowitz has crunched the numbers for his presidential election forecast and has found in the data a potentially decisive win for the Democrats. His "time for change" model predicts that Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama will win the majority of the national major party popular vote: 54.3 percent vs. 45.7 percent for Sen. John McCain.

A popular vote margin of this magnitude would almost certainly translate into an overwhelming majority in the Electoral College, Abramowitz says. His forecast has correctly predicted the popular vote winner within two percentage points or less in every presidential election since 1988.

Three key factors form forecast

The state of the economy, presidential approval ratings and the number of terms a party has been in power are the three key factors Abramowitz uses in his "time for change" forecasting model.

"While factors outside of the model, such as rising partisan polarization and resistance to an African-American candidate by some white voters may result in a somewhat smaller popular vote margin for the Democratic nominee, the combination of an unpopular Republican incumbent in the White House, a weak economy, and a second-term election make a Democratic victory in November all but certain," writes Abramowitz in the forthcoming October issue of "PS: Political Science and Politics."

"The good news for Democrats is that 2008, unlike 2004, is a time-for-change election -- one in which the president's party has controlled the White House for two or more terms," Abramowitz says. Based on the assumption that a presidential election is fundamentally a referendum on the performance of the incumbent, the model factors in:

The presidential approval rating in the final Gallup Poll in June (which ran 33% for President Bush);
The change in real gross domestic product during the second quarter of the election year; and
A variable based on whether the president’s party has controlled the White House for only one term or longer.

Power hard to hold after multiple terms

"Economic conditions have a substantial impact on the outcomes of presidential elections. For every additional one percentage point of real annual GDP growth during the second quarter, the candidate of the president's party can expect to receive an additional 0.6 percent of the vote. Thus, the difference between running with a stagnant economy and running with a booming economy is substantial," Abramowitz explains in his paper.

The final variable, the time-for-change factor, plays a critical role in the model.

"A candidate from the president’s party running in a second- or later-term election suffers a penalty of more than 4 percentage points compared with a candidate running in a first-term election… Regardless of the popularity of the president or the state of the economy, it is simply much more difficult for the president’s party to retain its hold on the White House," Abramowitz says.

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page

Challenges and Opportunities for McCain, says Emory Scientist Black

The Republican National Convention – back on track after Hurricane Gustav and revelations about the personal family life of vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin – provides an essential opportunity for the McCain campaign to make its case to the American public, says Emory University political scientist Merle Black.

"Palin's first impression in Ohio was terrific. She has definitely brought a lot of energy to the campaign," Black says. The disclosures about Palin's family issues "seem to have produced a rallying of the conservative base around her," he says. However, "these revelations have hurt her and McCain among independents and Democrats."

Wednesday and Thursday will be make-or-break-nights for Gov. Palin and Sen. John McCain: "They both need to have really strong speeches," says Black. "Palin is now under great pressure to show strong leadership, to take a beating and keep on trucking. That is part of McCain's appeal as well, and if they can display that strength, they will make a good impression on Republicans and independent voters."

Black, Emory's Asa G. Candler Professor of Politics and Government, is a renowned expert on national politics and the foremost authority on politics in the South. One the nation's most incisive commentators, Black is coauthor of “Divided America: The Ferocious Power Struggle in American Politics.” The groundbreaking work details, for the first time, the country's distinct regional differences to assess the driving forces of partisanship in national politics.

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Emory's Political Scientists Comment on Upcoming Election

The 2008 election season now kicks into high gear with the coming announcements of vice-presidential picks, followed by the Democratic and Republican conventions. Renowned Emory University political scientists Merle Black and Alan Abramowitz take a look ahead at what voters can expect as Senators Barack Obama and John McCain head in to the final heats of an historic campaign.

Don't Trust the Polls Just Yet

"I wouldn't put much weight at all on the polls right now," says Abramowitz, the Alben W. Barkley Professor of Political Science. "Polls are not a good predictor until we're past the conventions and into the main part of the campaign. You should see a bump in the polls for both candidates after their conventions." Start watching the polls a week or two after the Republican convention, he says.

Red States, Blue States

Black sees the electoral map looking very similar to 2004, with the Northeast and the Pacific coast solidly Democratic, and the South still going to the Republicans. "Obama has the best chance of turning over Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada," says Black, the Asa G. Candler Professor of Politics and Government.

Abramowitz expects more of a shift in potential battleground states. "Obama seems to have almost all of the states Kerry won in 2004 locked up. That's not true on the Republican side, which puts states like Virginia, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Indiana, Montana, Nevada and even Alaska into play," he says.

"The polls also don’t reflect the tremendous amount of resources the campaigns are deploying in battleground states, and in this case, the Obama campaign is way ahead of McCain's," Abramowitz says. "They're putting a lot of money into the ground game to register people to vote and get out the vote. If Obama can get his supporters out to the polls, he'll win."

The Conventions and the VPs

Both Abramowitz and Black say that Obama's and McCain's choice of running mates is not nearly as important as it seems. People vote first and foremost for a president, so unless a highly unusual nominee is picked, that person tends to not have much impact on the outcome of the election.

The conventions, on the other hand, provide "the best opportunities for both candidates to shape their images. It's a clear shot at a very large audience. Both parties want to put on the best show possible," Abramowitz says.

Black cautions that for the Democrats, "there is a danger for Obama to act like he has already won, and coming on too much like a celebrity, especially given the setting for his speech in a football stadium. Some voters like that, some don't. What's interesting is that in a year where the Democrats appeared poised to win everything, the presidential race is still tight. Presidential politics essentially comes down to voters looking at two individuals and choosing one. It's a very personal preference, more so than other elections."

-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
www.fayettefrontpage.com