Will the Americans elect a dark-skinned president with quite a «problematic» middle name Hussein?

PanARMENIAN.Net - The American system of voting is rather bulky and archaic, and on the whole it can hardly be called purely democratic. Rather than directly voting for the President, United States citizens cast votes for electors. Voters cast ballots for a slate of electors of the U.S. Electoral College, who in turn directly elect the President and Vice President. The number of electors from each state is determined by its population, plus two votes of senators. Washington D.C is given a number of electors equal to the number held by the smallest states, i.e. three electors. Two states, Maine and Nebraska, select one elector within each congressional district by popular vote, and additionally select the remaining two electors by the aggregate, statewide popular vote. Most states allow voters to choose between statewide slates of electors pledged to vote for the presidential and vice presidential tickets of various parties; the ticket that receives the most votes statewide 'wins' all of the votes cast by electors from that state. That is why U.S. presidential campaigns concentrate on winning the popular vote in a combination of states that choose a majority of the electors, rather than campaigning to win the most votes nationally. Thus candidates other than those representing the two main parties have hardly any chance to be elected, though from time to time they introduce people to their political and economic views. Besides the names of Barack Obama and John McCain, another four independent candidates are included in the ballot-papers of 2008. However, most of the electors do not know them at all. About 55 million Americans support the Republicans, 72 million - the Democrats, while 42 million are independent in their preference. These are rough estimates however. The last democrat in the White House used to be President Bill Clinton, and now, if we should follow the unvoiced tradition, after Republican George Bush, the United States is to have a democrat president. On the other hand, the proved method of the current President may be used, i.e. when George Bush became Head of State by the decision of the US Supreme Court.

To some extent repetition of this scenario is unlikely, but anything can be expected from America lately. Though the financial crisis seriously shook the confidence of Americans in the current Administration, there is no guarantee that they will not elect a Republican for the mere reason that he is white, fought in Vietnam and his Vice-President is a woman, who will play some role in public organizations like «Women for equal electoral rights», and the like.

Meanwhile, on October 17 the Los Angeles Times, The Chicago Tribune, The San Francisco Chronicle and the largest and oldest Spanish-language daily newspaper in New York City El Diario/La Prensa endorsed Barack Obama in their issues. «Obama is educated and eloquent, sober and exciting, steady and mature. He represents the nation as it is, and as it aspires to be»,- reported Los Angeles Times.

The Chicago Tribune, which usually backs up Republican candidates in its Friday issue, endorsing a Democratic presidential nominee for the first time, expresses "tremendous confidence" in Obama's "intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, and careful decisions." «He is ready»,- the paper concludes. In its turn, The San Francisco Chronicle compares the behavior of the two major-party candidates at the time of the economic crisis, and concludes: "Barack Obama is the right president for these troubled times". Earlier such influential US papers as The Washington Post, The New Yorker, The Financial Times and Rolling Stone had announced about their endorsement of Obama.

Such a rare unanimity may really help Obama win. We shouldn't also forget about the powerful Armenian Community in the US. The organization "Armenians for Obama" founded by the Community, has directed its activity not only to Armenians, but to other ethnic groups as well. It is only the European lobby that is against Obama, but as a matter of principle it may still review its position.

«Armenian Community in the US has the same problems as all the Americans do, but alongside with these problems Armenian-Americans attach great importance to the recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. Of course, this issue is not the most central concern, but it is neither secondary»,- said Arpi Vartanian, Country Director for Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh in the Armenian Assembly of America.

As far as Senator McCain is concerned, he is quite reluctant to recognize the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire and is relatively indifferent towards bilateral relations between the United States and Armenia. However, the present stance may seriously hurt McCain, at least in the states with a substantial Armenian-American presence, such as California, New Jersey, Michigan, and Nevada.

In its most recent edition The Atlantic Monthly focuses on the Armenian vote in the upcoming elections in an article entitled "McCain's Armenia Problem". As the article claims McCain is the first presidential candidate in the past two decades who is on the record as opposing genocide recognition without already being a member of the incumbent Administration. In 1990, McCain voted against a recognition resolution that was sponsored by then-Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole. In 2000, campaigning for the Republican nomination in California, McCain confirmed that he would not support such a resolution. "I don't see what this resolution does to improve this situation one iota," said McCain. The Senator has stuck to his position also in 2008, attracting widespread criticism from Armenian groups. By contrast, Obama has pledged that his Administration would recognize the 1915 extermination as an act of genocide. His campaign released two statements on this issue on January 19 and on April 28. "The facts are undeniable," his statements said. Obama's January 19th statement also pledged to maintain Armenian foreign aid and to move toward a resolution of the Karabakh conflict that would respect the "principle of
self-determination" - a language close to Armenian demands.

Presidential candidates are usually inclined to forget their pre-election promises, especially on such «embarrassing» issues as recognition of the Armenian Genocide or the right of Nagorno-Karabakh people to self-determination. Will Barack Obama break this tradition?

Karine Ter-Sahakyan