Tide running against Kennedy campaign

Press, 16 February 1980, Page 14

Tide running against Kennedy campaign

The American presidential campaign promises to be an unusual and exciting contest, different from any previous campaign, according to a visiting American political scientist. The difference lies in the influence of Che United States’ foreign policy on public opinion, says Professor Harry Lazer, associate professor of political science at the City University of New York. “It is a very abnormal United States election in that policy and international rela-tions seem to be in the forefront of the American public, because of the Iranian hostage crisis and Russia’s intervention in Afghanistan,” Professor Lazer told a meeting at the American Centre in Christchurch. Most presidential elections have been fought on domestic issues, he says. Even presidents who were later known for their foreign policy, such as Eisenhower or Roosevelt, won their elections on domestic issues. However, this year, domestic issues such as inflation and energy have been superceded in the public’s mind by concern for the American hostages, and by the Russian presence in Afghanistan. “If this was a normal year, the Republican candidates would have zeroed in on inflation, which is running at 13 per cent. That may not be high by New Zealand’s standards, but we certainly regard it as high.” President Carter’s failure to have a comprehensive energy programme passed by the Congress would also have been an issue as the United States was now pay-

ing for the lack of such a - programme. Professor Lazer said. Although foreign policy had been uppermost in people’s minds, there had not been a “fully-fledged” public-debate on the issue. Candidates had shied away from the issue because of the delicacy of -the situation, particularly as it concerned the hostages. American public opinion was more united on a single issue than it had been since the war years, he _ said. There had been a shift in public opinion since the end of America’s involvement in Vietnam, and President Carter appeared to have strong public suppor-t for the stand he has taken on Iran and Afghanistan. The Iranian crisis also appeared to have influenced the chances of presidential hopefuls of gaining their party’s nomination. Kennedy had suffered a “remarkable” shift in public opinion, from which Carter had benefited, said Professor Lazer. “I’m not Machiavellian enough to suggest that! Ayatollah Khomeiny is working in Carter’s camp, but, next to President Brezhnev, he is by far its best advocate,” he said. Edward Kennedy’s popularity had suffered the moment he announced his candidature, he said. Chappaquiddick had never' entirely been erased from the public’s mind, and it was inevitable that it would be raised. But Kennedy, known as a stimulating public speaker, had suffered from some very “ineffectual” speeches and public appearances in the early stages of the campaign. “If he loses in New

Hampshire, I feel that one chapter in American history will be finished,” Professor Lazer said. The present campaign also reflected other changing trends in the presidential contests. The primaries were more important than they

used to be in selecting candidates, and some seasoned campaigners, such as Ronald Reagan, had done their prospects a lot of harm by failing to challenge strongly in the early stages of the campaign.

But the candidates were

not alone in failing to adjust to the new trends: foreign observers and t' ' American people were also somewhat confused, said Profesor Lazer. Another trend tha'J was emerging was that people were identifying less strohg-

ly with a particular political party. Only 33 per cent of voters now said they supported a particular party over another, said Professor Lazer. This 'trend reflected the public’s disillusionment with politicians since the Vietnam war. ■