Suchergebnisse

In the Caribbean region multiple political configurations of non-sovereign territories coexist which link to the metropolises of France, the United States, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. In 2017, several of these territories were devastated by the Hurricanes María and Irma. These events put their relations with the metropolises to the test and showed that paradiplomacy has a fundamental role in responding to natural disasters. Using the critical incident method this research analyzes primary documents published months after the hurricanes to analyze the variations in the use of paradiplomacy. It shows that while the American territories did not use paradiplomatic networks, the British territories, such as the Virgin Islands, achieved greater international participation. This allowed them to secure funds and technical assistance from various regional and international organizations. These differences between paradiplomatic experiences require further theorizing, in which the impact of structures versus the agency of the leaders of each territory is analyzed as a possible explanation. This work then discovers the need for a historical-institutional analysis of the evolution of Caribbean paradiplomacy in particular and paradiplomacy in general. ; En el Caribe coexisten múltiples configuraciones políticas de territorios no-soberanos ligados a las metrópolis de Francia, Estados Unidos, Países Bajos y el Reino Unido. En el 2017, varios de estos territorios fueron devastados por los huracanes María e Irma. Estos eventos pusieron a prueba sus relaciones con las metrópolis y mostraron que la paradiplomacia tiene un rol fundamental en responder a desastres naturales. Mediante el empleo de la técnica del incidente crítico, esta investigación analiza documentos primarios publicados meses posteriores a los huracanes para analizar la variación en el empleo de la paradiplomacia. Muestra que mientras los territorios americanos no utilizaron redes paradiplomáticas, los territorios británicos, como las Islas Vírgenes, agenciaron una mayor participación internacional. Esto les permitióasegurar fondos y ayuda técnica de distintas organizaciones regionales e internacionales. Estas diferencias entre las experiencias paradiplomáticas, requieren una mayor teorización, en la cual se analice el impacto de las estructuras versus la agencia de los líderes de cada territorio como posible explicación. Este trabajo descubre entonces la necesidad de un análisis histórico-institucional de la evolución de la paradiplomacia caribeña y la paradiplomacia en general.

Se analizan las concepciones e ideas de pobladores adultos sobre las afectaciones sufridas por el huracán Karl en 2010, en el municipio de La Antigua, Veracruz. Los datos se obtuvieron de entrevistas a informantes claves y grupos focales, además de la revisión de notas periodisticas. Se observa que las concepciones e ideas sobre el origen del desastre las adjudican a las fuerzas naturales, espirituales o religiosas sin reconocer la responsabilidad de las autoridades encargadas de elaborar politicas públicas en la materia y en la falta de previsión social y personal frente a sus devastadores efectos. Esta concepción dificulta la prevención, mantiene a la comunidad en situación de vulnerabilidad e impide o imposibilita la integración, la cohesión social y la acción colectiva.

Puerto Rico has experienced a structural, political and economic-social crisis for several years that precede the critical moments of the last three years. Since September of 2017, several natural and health events have been covering the experience of the inhabitants of Puerto Rico without coherent spaces of truce. The proposed reflective exercise will present various notions of order and visibility of the temporal space of the disaster, from the perspective of volunteer works, field work and community self-management and the integration of health professionals into these. The writing aims to cover from Hurricane María to the coronavirus pandemic that is being experienced at the time of this writing. Conclusions will be tied for emotional and community health and that of the exercise of psychology itself. This work will provide a space for reflection and planning for future situations that affect our people. ; Puerto Rico vive desde hace varios años una crisis estructural, política y económica-social que preceden los momentos críticos de los últimos tres años. Desde septiembre del 2017, varios eventos naturales y salubristas vienen arropando la experiencia de los habitantes de Puerto Rico sin espacios coherentes de tregua. El ejercicio reflexivo propuesto presentará varias nociones de orden y visibilidad del espacio temporal del desastre, desde la mirada del trabajo voluntario, de campo y la autogestión comunitaria y la integración en estos de profesionales salubristas. Las autoras pretenden abarcar desde el huracán María hasta la pandemia del coronavirus que se vive desde marzo 2020. Se atarán conclusiones para la salud emocional, comunitaria y la del propio ejercicio de la psicología. Este trabajo proveerá un espacio de reflexión y planificación para futuras situaciones que afecten a nuestro pueblo.

Open at the Taller Boricua, located in the heart of the New York neighborhood, the exhibition Archivos, Visiones Y Premoniciones [Archives, Visions and Premonitions]hosts the works of twelve artists united by their ties with Puerto Rico. The political, social and economic vicissitudes that are lived on the island, especially after the polyhedral disaster that Hurricane Maria aroused, are the trigger for both incisive criticism and nostalgic glances, which lead us to question what will be of the present and the future within of its borders. ; Abierta en el Taller Boricua, situado en el corazón de El Barrio neoyorkino, la exhibición Archivos, visiones y premoniciones acoge las obras de doce artistas unidos por sus lazos con Puerto Rico. La vicisitudes políticas, sociales y económicas que se viven en la isla, especialmente después del poliédrico desastre que despertó el Huracán María, son el detonante tanto de incisivas críticas como de nostálgicas miradas, que nos llevan a cuestionarnos qué será del presente y del futuro dentro de sus fronteras.

"En el contexto de los terremotos, "una réplica" describe las sacudidas que se sienten después del sismo inicial. Ningún desastre es un acontecimiento singular. Las réplicas del desastre examina los efectos duraderos del huracán María, no sólo del viento o la lluvia, sino de lo que siguió: el fracaso del Estado, el abandono social, la capitalización de la miseria humana y el trauma colectivo producto de una respuesta incompetente y fracasada."--Back cover

In September 2013, the city of Chilpancingo was hit by the passage of hurricane Ingrid and tropical storm Manuel; the damages in infrastructure, housing and equipment were of great magnitude, which galvanized the federal government into formulating a reconstruction plan. The interventions exhibited serious failures, recreating with greater intensity the socio-territorial conditions that caused the disasters. Faced with that panorama, this work aims to identify the elements that contributed to the disaster and the failures in the repair of damages; at the same time, it suggests other modes of action to promote the improvement of the living conditions of those affected. Preliminary results indicate that although there were economic resources and government agencies to coordinate reconstruction, personal interests, corruption, opacity in information, insecurity and disregard for the needs and demands of citizens characterized the process. ; En septiembre de 2013, la ciudad de Chilpancingo fue azotada por el paso del huracán Ingrid y la tormenta tropical Manuel; los daños en infraestructura, vivienda y equipamiento fueron de gran magnitud, lo que generó que el gobierno federal formulara un plan de reconstrucción. Las intervenciones exhibieron serias fallas, reeditando con mayor intensidad las condiciones socioterritoriales que propiciaron los desastres. Ante este panorama, este trabajo pretende identificar los elementos que contribuyeron al desastre y a los desaciertos en la reparación de los daños; al mismo tiempo, sugiere otras modalidades de acción que incidan en el mejoramiento de las condiciones de vida de los afectados. Los resultados preliminares indican que a pesar de que existieron los recursos económicos y las instancias gubernamentales para coordinar las acciones de reconstrucción, intereses personales, corrupción, opacidad en la información, inseguridad y desatención a las necesidades y demandas de la ciudadanía caracterizaron el proceso.

In Puerto Rico, there is evidence of two earth constructions for the 16th century. The technique used was rammed earth. This knowledge did not proliferate or evolve, in fact, today there are no modern constructions made on earth. The average of Puerto Rican does not know about earth constructions and due to this inexperience there is much skepticism about the frequency of hurricanes, high precipitation and being prone to earthquakes / tsunamis. The relevance of finding historical precedents in Puerto Rico would help to understand their behavior over time. Countless research indicates that these constructions have been effective in places with similar conditions those the island. In the era of climate change, it is important to obtain this ancestral knowledge of materials that have solved the need for housing with a low environmental impact. After the passage of the last hurricane Maria, Puerto Rico faced the reality that exists when we understand the dependence on fossil and non-renewable energy, the importation by ship of building materials and the exercise of recovering from the government (top to bottom), It is very fragile and susceptible. Through a search of the documentation in Historical Archives, it was possible to locate and obtain information on the earth construction. According to several sources of scientific research, it is possible to face environmental problems based on the knowledge that empowers from the town and with adjustments in our lifestyle, it was understood that the limitations are in the ignorance. ; En Puerto Rico existe evidencia de dos estructuras de tierra en el siglo XVI. La técnica que se utilizó fue la tapia. Este conocimiento no proliferó ni evolucionó. De hecho, hoy día no existen construcciones modernas hechas con tierra. La gente puertorriqueña promedio no conoce sobre las construcciones de tierra y debido a esa inexperiencia existe mucho escepticismo por la frecuencia de huracanes, la alta precipitación y la propensión a terremotos y maremotos. La pertinencia de encontrar precedentes históricos en Puerto Rico ayuda a entender el comportamiento de éstas a través del tiempo. Un sinnúmero de investigaciones apunta a que estas construcciones han sido efectivas en lugares con condiciones similares a las de la isla. En plena era del cambio climático es importante obtener conocimiento ancestral de materiales que han resuelto la necesidad de vivienda con un bajo impacto ambiental. Luego del paso del último huracán –María–, se enfrentó la realidad que existe cuando entendemos que la dependencia de la energía fósil y no renovable, la importación de los materiales de construcción por barco y el ejercicio de recuperarnos desde el gobierno (desde arriba), es muy frágil y susceptible. A través de una búsqueda de documentación en archivos históricos se pudo llegar a localizar y obtener información sobre la construcción con tierra. Según varias investigaciones científicas es posible enfrentar problemas ambientales a través de saberes que empoderan desde el pueblo y con ajustes en nuestro estilo de vida para entender así que las limitaciones se encuentran en el desconocimiento.

Tesis (Maestría en Ciencias, especialista en Desarrollo Rural).- Colegio de Postgraduados, 2014. ; En el presente trabajo se describen las experiencias de dos localidades impactadas por el huracán Karl en septiembre de 2010. El objetivo de la investigación es analizar la respuesta institucional e identificar las condiciones de vulnerabilidad y acciones de respuesta ante el huracán Karl considerando diferencias de género, edad y pobreza entre la población de la localidad de Nicolás Blanco y la colonia de desplazados (as) Huitzilapan del municipio de La Antigua, Veracruz. Se utilizó una metodología mixta. Por medio de entrevistas, talleres y una encuesta se abordaron las preguntas de investigación. Se identificaron las acciones de respuesta al huracán y las que se han desarrollado actualmente; se analizaron las diferentes condiciones de vulnerabilidad de la población; así como las estrategias desarrolladas por el gobierno y la percepción de las personas sobre estas estrategias. Los resultados indican deficiencias en la respuesta institucional. Se concluye que los roles de género fueron determinantes para la toma de decisiones para afrontar el huracán. Los hombres asumen más riesgos que las mujeres por lo que exponen su integridad física, mientras que las mujeres resultan más afectadas emocionalmente. Las y los menores de edad y adultos (as) mayores dependieron de otras personas para salvarse. Las personas de escasos recursos resultaron mayormente afectadas por el huracán y hasta la actualidad no logran recuperarse debido a las dificultades que implica la reubicación. _______________ GENDER, AGE AND POVERTY AS DETERMINANTS OF VULNERABILITY AND ADAPTATION IN DISASTERS: THE IMPACT OF HURRICANE KARL IN LA ANTIGUA, VERACRUZ. ABSTRACT: The experiences of two localities impacted by Hurricane Karl in September 2010 are described in this paper. The objective of this research is to analyze the institutional response and identify the vulnerability and response actions to Hurricane Karl considering gender differences, age and poverty among the population of the locality of Nicolás Blanco and displaced people from the colony Huitzilapan municipality of La Antigua, Veracruz. A mixed methodology was applied. Research questions were addressed through interviews, workshops and a survey. Response actions to the hurricane were identified as well as those which have been now developed, different conditions of vulnerability of the population were analyzed as well as the strategies developed by the government and the perception of these strategies by the people. Results indicate deficiencies in the institutional response. We conclude that gender roles were crucial in making decisions to address the hurricane. Men take more risks than women so exposed their physical integrity, while women are more affected emotionally. Infants and elderly people depend on other people to survive. Poor people were mostly affected by the hurricane and until nowdays have been unable to recovered due to the difficulties of relocation.

The following article present an ethnographic and historical analysis of the main political, economic and social problems of Puerto Rico. In addition, the article present an ethnographic description of the main problems related to poverty and urban gentrification that affect the living conditions of the marginalized communities. The communities where the data were obtained were: Los Filtros, Municipality of Guaynabo and La Perla, Municipality of San Juan. At the theoretical level, will be discussed a series of community ethnographic research focused on the analysis of poverty, development and political project of Puerto Rico. Such as: La Vida: A Puerto Rican Family in the Culture of Poverty by Oscar Lewis (1967). The following concepts will also be analyzed: "Innercity" by Phillipe Bourgois "In Search of Respect" (2010), and Urban Gentrification from the anthropological perspective by Conrad Phillip Kottak and Kathryn A. Kozaitis (2012). Finally, the article present a reflections of the current economic crisis and the most important events during the recovery process after the impact of the Hurricane Maria in 2017. ; ResumenEl siguiente artículo presenta un análisis etnográfico e histórico de los principales problemas políticos, económicos y sociales por los que atraviesa Puerto Rico. En adición, se describen los conflictos relacionados a la pobreza y la gentrificación urbana que afectan las condiciones de vida de las comunidades marginadas de la Isla. Las comunidades donde se obtuvieron los datos fueron Los Filtros, municipio de Guaynabo y La Perla, municipio de San Juan. A nivel teórico, se discutirán una serie de investigaciones etnográficas comunitarias enfocadas en el análisis de la pobreza, el desarrollo, y el proyecto político de Puerto Rico. Entre ellas está el libro La Vida: A Puerto Rican Family in The Culture Of Poverty, de Oscar Lewis (1967). También se analizarán los siguientes conceptos: "Innercity", discutido por Philippe Bourgois en su libro En busca de respeto (2010), y "Gentrificación urbana", desde la perspectiva antropológica, de Conrad Phillip Kottak y Kathryn A. Kozaitis (2012). Por último, en este artículo se presenta una reflexión de la crisis económica actual y los eventos más importantes sobre la reconstrucción tras el impacto del huracán María, en 2017.AbstractThe following article present an ethnographic and historical analysis of the main political, economic and social problems of Puerto Rico. In addition, the article present an ethnographic description of the main problems related to poverty and urban gentrification that affect the living conditions of the marginalized communities. The communities where the data were obtained were: Los Filtros, Municipality of Guaynabo and La Perla, Municipality of San Juan. At the theoretical level, will be discussed a series of community ethnographic research focused on the analysis of poverty, development and political project of Puerto Rico. Such as: La Vida: A Puerto Rican Family in the Culture of Poverty by Oscar Lewis (1967). The following concepts will also be analyzed: "Innercity" by Phillipe Bourgois "In Search of Respect" (2010), and Urban Gentrification from the anthropological perspective by Conrad Phillip Kottak and Kathryn A. Kozaitis (2012). Finally, the article present a reflections of the current economic crisis and the most important events during the recovery process after the impact of the Hurricane Maria in 2017.

A study of the social and physical forces impacting territorial vulnerability in Guatemala, including physical design, strategy, poverty, migration, and the impact of the major earthquakes, droughts and hurricanes of the late 19th & early 20th centuries

"This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning…I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal…"And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true."Martin Luther King Jr." I have a dream speech" (March on Washington, August 28, 1963)On Wednesday August 27th, at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado, before a crowd of 20,000, Barack Obama became the first biracial man to be officially nominated as presidential candidate by a major party. When the turn came for the delegates from the state of New York to vote, Obama had received 1,549 and Hillary Rodham-Clinton 231. Hillary then made a motion to suspend the roll call vote and select him by acclamation:"With eyes firmly fixed on the future in the spirit of unity, with the goal of victory, with faith in our party and country, let's declare together in one voice, right here and right now, that Barack Obama is our candidate and he will be our president."The night before, Hillary had made a gracious and persuasive speech in support of Obama, calling on her supporters to vote for the man that would bring health care to all Americans and restore the country's standing in the world, thus tacitly acknowledging that their platforms are one and the same. She had also reminded the audience that the (presidential) "glass ceiling now had 18 million cracks", a reference at the number of votes she received and a reminder of how close women had come this time around to win the Presidency, a white male domain until now. That was her way to give comfort to her female supporters, some of which have avowed to vote for McCain in the Fall. Then on Wednesday night it came up to Bill Clinton to put the proverbial final nail in the coffin of the bitter conflict that had bitterly divided the party up to then. He did it with a masterful, authoritative speech, in which he reassured the audience that Obama was just as ready for the Presidency as he himself had been in 1992. The clarity of his ideas and the perfect delivery reminded us all of why he will go down as one of the greatest Presidents in this country's History.Already by Wednesday night there was a sense of fulfillment and relief, since the unification of the Democratic Party was perceived by most Democrats as the Convention's main objective. The party had been divided since the 1970s, when the moderate, blue collar workers and Southerners became disgruntled with McGovern's socially liberal platform and voted for Nixon. Ten years later they would become known as the Reagan democrats, and the label would stick. Bill Clinton was able to bring them all back to the fold by focused policies and his ability to connect both with white and black blue-collar workers. But in the last eight years the divisions have reappeared, as it became plain during the primary: Obama appeals strongly to the black community and to white college educated youth but has been unable to extend that appeal to older women and white workers. That is why Hillary got 18 million votes. That is also why Obama's choice of Vice President is a solid one. Senator Joseph Biden, with his Catholic, blue-collar background, his toughness and his 30 years of experience in the Senate, and his wisdom and knowledge of foreign affairs, has added weight and credibility to the ticket. The expectation is that this formula will reunite the fractured party once again.This has been a historic Convention in more ways than one: the first African-American to win the nomination, the first woman to come so close to winning it, the passing of the torch to a new generation of Americans by Ted Kennedy, the brilliant speech by Bill Clinton which by all measures restores his stature within the party. But more than anything else, this Convention is historic because, as Clinton said, Barack Obama is "the twenty first century incarnation of the American Dream", and a reaffirmation of Ted Kennedy's proclamation on the first day of the Convention, that "the Dream Lives on" in Obama.The climax came on Thursday night with Obama's long awaited acceptance speech at the closing of the Convention. It was a carefully choreographed affair, overlaid with symbolism. Delivered before a crowd of 75,000 at the INVESCO open-air stadium at Mile High, against a background evoking the pillars of the Lincoln Memorial, it was watched by a TV audience of around 40 million and ended with fireworks across the Colorado sky. Barack Obama is also the first candidate since John F Kennedy to choose an open-to-the public venue to deliver his acceptance speech. There were some risks to this venue, from security to climactic. But more than anything else, his greatest challenge on this historic night was to communicate to his huge audience and the American nation at large, that he is not just a great orator but that he understands their woes and has the fortitude to fight for them; that he is ready to battle ahead and bring about the change he so brilliantly articulates in his speeches, and that this young man standing before them, half preacher, half professor, is also a practical politician, able to back his ideas with concrete and feasible plans. As Richard Haas says in his latest article on the Foreign Affairs Journal, the next president must confront "the reality of the country's expectations" and he must do so by "identifying meaningful yet achievable goals and lay them out before the nation…and then achieve them through leadership skills that will be tested by pressures unimaginable to anyone who has not held he job." Obama passed this difficult test on the first two requirements. The third is awaiting him, if elected in November.By most accounts, the speech was an overwhelming success. Obama presented a complete blueprint on how he will govern if elected. He first listed all the issues Americans are dissatisfied with, starting with the economy and ending with Iraq. He then outlined his specific policies to solve these problems. He subsequently gave examples of how McCain is closely aligned with George W. Bush's failed policies, thus demolishing his opponent's claims of independence from the incumbent. Finally, he presented himself as open-minded and pragmatic, willing to find middle ground on the so-called culture wars issues (gays, guns, abortion) that are frequently framed as false choices to elicit emotions, not rationality, from the part of the voters. He re-introduced himself to the public as a common man, with personal accounts of his childhood as son of a single mother, who raised him with the help of her parents and at times had to use food stamps to take care of him; of his admiration for his grandfather, a WWII veteran who went to college on the GI bill and taught him hard work, pride and love of country. Looking straight into the cameras, he humanized his message and connected with people. He was able to turn the tables on John McCain, who he presented as elitist, out of touch and thus, less trustworthy. His move to the middle ground on cultural issues ("We can withhold the Second Amendment and still get AK 47s out of the hands of criminals") and his calls for greater civic and parental responsibility ("Government cannot replace parents in educating their children…") gave consistency to his claim of post-partisanship.By asserting that America is the best hope for the world, he rejected the notion that only Republicans are patriotic ("Democrats can own that, too."). He also defied the fallacy that Democrats are weak on foreign policy ("We are the party of FDR and JFK, so don't tell us Democrats that we cannot defend the country…and restore the moral standing for all who fight for freedom."). And he did all this not so much with the soaring rhetoric of his earlier speeches, but with a tone of strength and defiance. He took the fight to John Mc Cain, promising to debate him not on petty issues but on who has the "judgment and the temperament" to be Commander-in-Chief. He thereby injected the question of McCain's short temper into the Fall campaign. The speech ended with an evocation of Martin Luther King's I have a dream speech delivered on this same day forty-five years ago at the Lincoln Memorial, and a pledge to once more "March forward together."Memories of the Democratic National Conventions and the momentum created by this brilliant speech were not, however, destined to linger for long in the American psyche. They were shattered by two events, one man-made, one natural. On Friday, August 29th, John McCain made an announcement that caused quite a stir in the media and public alike. He chose as his Vice president Mrs. Sarah Palin, the little-known first-term female governor of Alaska, a no exceptions pro-lifer who believes that Creationism should be taught in the schools alongside Evolution, and whose thin political résumé is startling to most observers. After they recovered from the initial shock, some pundits were able to articulate the intriguing yet-to be-answered question: was this the brilliant decision of a crafty tactician or the insane choice of an impulsive, overly ambitious politician? Is this a masterful stroke or a risky gamble? Only time will tell.That same day, Mrs. Palin had to share the limelight with Gustav, an impervious hurricane that was making its way toward the Gulf Coast at vertiginous speed and strength. Plans for the Republican National Convention to start on Monday had to be scrapped, while McCain and Palin made their way to Mississippi, turning this into an opportunity to distance themselves early on from Bush's fiasco during hurricane Katrina two years ago. Most Convention events were suspended for Monday and Tuesday and replaced by a bare-bones schedule of committee meetings, while the crucial events (vice-presidential speech and nomination vote) start this Wednesday and culminate Thursday with McCain's acceptance speech. This could turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Republicans. Courtesy of Gustav, now downgraded to a grade one hurricane, speeches by Bush and Cheney were cancelled. The President, who hastily made his way to New Orleans, may still speak for a short time via satellite on Wednesday, which will give him an opportunity to amend the terrible legacy of Katrina by replacing those images in the minds of the public with a much improved disaster relief response to Gustav.Palin is expected to give a good speech at the Convention. As a young political reformer who has fought corruption in her home state, she has energized the campaign. As a social conservative with deep convictions against abortion she has galvanized the conservative Evangelical base of the party. She is attractive and warm, and connects easily with the public, one of the few advantages of her political experience in Alaska, a sparsely populated state that requires extensive face-to-face contact with voters. An active hunter and life-long member of the NRA, she may be able to connect with the kind of independent blue-collar and rural voters that Obama has not been able to appeal to. But Palin has never been under the extreme national scrutiny that the next few months will bring, nor has she had to answer any unscripted questions about a wide variety of topics from the often vicious national press. Mc Cain picked her over men with extensive experience in economic matters (Mitt Romney) and in homeland security (Tom Ridge), both of whom had been extensively vetted. His choice of Palin as running mate is even more surprising if we consider that his main campaign theme against Obama was the latter's lack of executive experience. In contrast with Palin, Obama has had his trial-by-fire in the primary debates and through 18 months of campaigning. He has run against formidable candidates in the Primary, has been repeatedly tested by the media, and has emerged as the choice of Democratic voters. Palin, on the other hand, has one year of executive experience and a gaping lack of foreign policy knowledge. She is the choice of one man, John McCain, who has only met her twice. What will be the public's perception of Palin's credibility and readiness to step in as President should something happen to McCain? Did McCain, always the maverick, abdicate in his duty to the people by not choosing someone manifestly ready for the presidency? We may have some answers to these questions in a week or two.For those that expect Hillary's women to flock to the Republican side just because of McCain's Vice-presidential pick, think again. If there is one principle those women activists care about is the protection of the Roe v Wade Supreme Court decision, so they would be loath to vote for a strongly anti-abortion candidate such as Palin. Nevertheless, Obama does need to worry about the white blue-collar workers' vote. He has been consistently ahead in the polls but the margin has narrowed somewhat. He is now 6 percentage points ahead in the polls (47% to 41%) but so far has been unable to break the 50% barrier. Given the byzantine workings of the Electoral College in a presidential election, even a sliver of independents and Reagan democrats here and there (especially in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan) can win this election for McCain. The long-awaited Autumn of Freedom would then become for many, the Winter of Discontent.Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia

After two weeks of drama and excitement, the Democratic and the Republican National Conventions have drawn to an end, and an exhausted American public will now have to focus on the home stretch of the presidential campaign. There is general agreement that both candidates achieved their most important convention objectives. Obama re-introduced himself to America as an ordinary man, a down-to-earth candidate who understands their problems and proposes solutions, while McCain moved away from George W. Bush and re-emerged as his party's maverick: the independent, likable and trustworthy reformer that puts "the country first". In spite of the truncated schedule of the Republican National Convention due to the hurricane that hit the Gulf Coast, McCain's surprise announcement of his running mate, and his acknowledgement of his own party's mistakes in the last eight years, appear to have taken some of the wind from under Obama's wings.The most recent Gallup poll has Obama leading 44% to 40 % in voters' approval ratings, while a CBS poll has them at 40% each. It is clear that the race is now in a dead heat and that McCain has been on the rebound, narrowing down the eight percent margin that Obama had before the Conventions. Taking into account that Obama has already had his post-convention bounce, the direction of this change favoring McCain will continue. Historically, after Labor Day and the end of the two conventions, poll numbers appear to hold pretty steadily all the way up to the election, which means that, barring an "October surprise", the outcome of this election will again be too close to predict.This is an enormous accomplishment for McCain, whose candidacy was given up for dead by pundits mid-way trough the primary last year. Americans love survivors, and both his life story and his political narrative fit this characterization perfectly. Credit is given of course to the candidate himself, but also to his campaign director Rick Davis, who had the audacity to take a 180-degree turn and recast him as the candidate of change. How he did it will be a textbook example for campaign strategists in years to come.First, McCain came into the Republican Primary as too independent, too secular and too much of a critic of George W. Bush, to be chosen as the Grand Old Party's nominee. In the course of the primary campaign, he moved closer to the President, repeatedly reminding voters that in the Senate, he had voted in favor of the President's initiatives 90% of the time. A clip of this acknowledgement is being used by the Obama campaign with glee in a TV commercial that plays several times an hour in the network stations. After a terrible start, and after firing several top advisers and restructuring his whole campaign plan, he regained the confidence of the Republican voters, mainly because he was the most credible, experienced and likable of the Republican presidential candidates. These may be the same attributes that put him today in a dead heat with Obama, in spite of the lowest numbers of approval ever for the Republican Party he represents.Second, serious campaign strategic thinking went into in his choice of Vice-president and in planning the timing of this announcement. Sources close to the campaign have confirmed that, to counterbalance the perfectly choreographed Democratic Convention, the choice of Joe Biden for Vice- presidential candidate, and Obama's acceptance speech, McCain wanted to recast himself as the bipartisan candidate that reaches across the isle, and regardless of the disapproval of Republican Party stalwarts, pick Democrat Joe Lieberman, his very close friend, as his running mate. It took some serious coaxing by his staff for him to pick Sarah Palin, the little-known governor of Alaska, instead. This has so far proved to have been a very shrewd decision. With the announcement made on the next morning after Obama's acceptance speech, McCain's campaign was able to take away the momentum and the headlines from the Democrats. It was all about the Republican ticket from then on, with the Obama campaign having been unable so far, to regain the initiative. Palin's speech on the convention floor was watched by almost as many people as Obama's. She came out swinging and directly attacked Obama for his lack of experience. Her delivery was flawless, she was relaxed and funny, and the public loved her. She electrified the Republican base and injected new imagery into the Republican tableau: that of a young working mother with a family of five that enamored the pro-life voters by having knowingly had a baby with Down syndrome. The case for family values was somewhat blurred twenty-four hours later when her campaign confirmed rumors that her seventeen-year old daughter was pregnant. But Palin was able to turn this in her favor by presenting herself as a no-exceptions pro-life candidate, and thus pre-empted the avalanche of criticism that would have surely come her way from all sides. Asked for his reaction, a circumspect Obama said that the candidates' private lives should not be a topic for the presidential race and asked reporters to "back off". Finally, there was John McCain's acceptance speech that rounded up what turned out to be a positive, yet odd, week for the Republican Convention. This was the first time that an incumbent President did not attend his party's convention since Lyndon B. Johnson skipped the violence-ridden 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago. Indeed, George W Bush made only a short appearance via satellite on the second day of the convention. His parents were there the first two days, but were conspicuously absent during McCain's speech. Vice-president Cheney was also absent throughout the three days. Senator McCain is a good communicator for smaller, town hall settings where he can speak directly to supporters, but strongly dislikes reading prepared speeches from the teleprompter to big audiences. The Convention hall was thus rearranged for his speech, to give the impression of a smaller venue, with the Republican delegates closer to him. But it was a fifty-minute long speech so he did have to read it. Although not a magnificent speaker, he came across as sincere and credible. Some have acclaimed it as the best Republican speech since Reagan's at the 1984 Convention. It drew the strongest interest of all speeches so far this election year: it was watched by 38.9 million people, more than Obama's (38.4 million) and Palin's (37 million). It was well-structured and aimed at delivering a convincing yet circumvoluted message of change. It started with a long narrative of his life experiences as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war, then went on to offer a candid confession of his party's long list of mistakes in the last eight years, and culminated with his re-introduction to the American public as the bipartisan candidate that can find solutions, bring about change and lead the country into a more secure and prosperous future. He presented in detail a forceful narrative of his life: the son and grandson of admirals and an Annapolis graduate, he became a fighter pilot and fell prisoner of war in Vietnam. He survived the "Hanoi-Hilton", was rescued, married an Arizona heiress and became Senator for that state for thirty years. Even if nothing new, this biographical portrait reminded the audience of his patriotism, his commitment to the country, his all-American upbringing and his strength, all of which makes him a fully vetted, trustworthy, and, by implication, a better candidate than his counterpart.What surprised many observers was what an NBC analyst called his "Declaration of Independence" and later "McCain's divorce" from the Republican Party and from George Bush. The latter was mentioned only once during the speech, and even then not directly by name, when McCain thanked "the president" for his leadership after the September 11 attacks. After that came a litany of mistakes the Republicans have made in the last few years, delivered in a contrite tone and followed by very weak applause by the audience. ("We were elected to change Washington and we let Washington change us. We lost the trust of the American people when some Republicans gave in to temptations of corruption."). It was as if he had directly responded to the beckoning of the British journal The Economist who had him on its cover a week ago with the title: "Bring the Real McCain back", an allusion to the fact that during the Primary season, many of his economic and national security policies looked like another term of George Bush. The Economist preferred an earlier version of McCain that was much more independent and acceptable to their point of view. In acknowledging the errors and missed opportunities of the previous years, the "real" McCain, the maverick, was back. He recognized the corruption and the hubris of his party, and, taking a page from the Democrats' platform, promised to govern for the American people and not for private interests or lobbies: "And let me just offer an advance warning to the old, big-spending, do-nothing, me-first, country-second crowd: change is coming… to Washington."McCain had a tactical tightrope to walk: during the whole primary season, his campaign had been aggressively courting the support of the conservative, Evangelical Republican base. Having cemented that support with the choice of ultra-religious Palin, he used the opportunity of his acceptance speech to appeal to a broader audience. He broke free of the Bush legacy of budget deficits and a failed foreign policy, recast himself as the candidate of change and made his pitch for the center of the political spectrum, the independent voters and disgruntled Reagan Democrats. In the most arousing part of his address, he presented himself as the Republican leader that will bring the Grand Old Party back to its original path and restore its unity, its pride and its principles. He also stressed his bipartisanship and delivered a strong blow to Obama's claim to that same mantel, by saying," Again and again I have worked with members of both parties to fix problems…and I have the record, and the scars, to prove it. Senator Obama does not." He ended by stressing his national security experience and courage to confront enemies: "We face many dangerous threats but I am not afraid.I am prepared for them."This speech may not have been the most dynamic of the Republican Convention (Sarah Palin took the kudos for that), and it was by no means a policy speech. Instead, its greatest value was the tone in which it was delivered and the level of comfort McCain awakened in the voting public. He focused on patriotism and on reforming Washington's bad habits; he communicated a sense of confidence, credibility and competence that may have reassured many undecided voters and that made him look almost Reaganesque. While Barack Obama insists that this election will be decided based on the issues (the economy, the unpopular war), McCain contends it will be decided on which candidate has the better judgment to move the country forward. In the fifty-some days left before the election, both campaigns will focus on the "battleground states" (Ohio, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Michigan), so their messages will be narrowly tailored to those constituencies. But all voters will have another chance to take a new look at the candidates side by side on three upcoming debates, and then decide on who is better suited to lead the country in such difficult times. They will vote based on their pocketbooks and on gut feelings, on rational interests and on irrational emotions. Considering the closeness of the race, the complexity that the Electoral College injects into the process, and the fact that all political thinking is biased toward the thinker's own wishes and emotions, it is only fair for this writer to abstain from predicting the outcome. Senior Lecturer, Department of Political Science and Geography Director, ODU Model United Nations Program Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia