Hurricane Gustav to Sway US Pres. Election?

[Pangloss]

I am somewhat on the fence in posting this, because it is some rather obvious fodder for partisan comment, but frankly it's just too interesting a political story. What I'm referring to, for the benefit of our friends overseas who may not have heard (?), is that a major hurricane, about the same strength (possibly even stronger) of the now-infamous Hurricane Katrina, is barreling down on New Orleans.

 

And it's due to hit just as the Republican convention is getting underway in Minnesota. In fact it's expected to make landfall at almost the exact moment that President Bush is scheduled to give his speech. No. Really.

 

The irony here is astounding. The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina was a political turning point for the present administration -- an shocking exposure of weakness and failure that even staunch conservatives didn't feel traitorous in complaining about. For another one to appear just as the Republican convention gets under way, reminding us all of Katrina, well heck, Michael Moore and Spike Lee couldn't have scripted it better if they'd tried.

 

If I were prone to anthropomorphism I'd have to wonder if Mother Nature were weighing in for Obama!

 

Unsurprisingly, Republican organizers are in a mad scramble to see if they can postpone the convention (Bush has already told the press he is likely to postpone). The problems with postponement are legion -- everything from delegates with already-purchased plane tickets to major facilities with scheduling conflicts in upcoming weeks. I have a feeling they can't postpone this thing even if they want to. Any postponed convention would likely be a pale shadow of the planned one.

 

And we're not just whistlin' Dixie, here. The post-convention poll bump is a well-known phenom. We'd be looking at a situation where the candidates went from a statistical tie to a massive Obama advantage due solely to his post-convention bump and McCain's lack of one. The numbers are that significant. And the conventions were particularly late this time around -- we're only two months from election day.

 

I'm just amazed by the whole thing, from the irony of the timing to the untenable position Republican planners suddenly find themselves in. What do you all think?

 

(edit: Amusingly, just as I posted this, a feeder band from Gustav knocked out my power.)

Edited August 31, 2008 by Pangloss
multiple post merged

[iNow]

Makes me laugh MAO at all those people who prayed for rain to ruin Obama's acceptance speech at Mile High last week.

 

 

Woo Hoo! Go Power of Prayer! Yeah! This proves that not only does god not love you, he doesn't love republicans.

[Sisyphus]

 

Woo Hoo! Go Power of Prayer! Yeah! This proves that not only does god not love you, he doesn't love republicans.

 

Nah. When the weather works out in your favor, it's theology. When it turns against you, it's just meteorology. Confirmation bias is a powerful tool.

[bascule]

Makes me laugh MAO at all those people who prayed for rain to ruin Obama's acceptance speech at Mile High last week.

 

Let me just say... having been there, the weather was beautiful.

[iNow]

I imagine like a rock concert. Hope you had fun.

 

 

To the point in the OP, I have a small concern that this hurricane could actually be used in republicans favor if they play it right. They have the opportunity to somewhat "right" the "Katrina wrong." They can show how McCain would be better at this than Bush give himself some much needed distance from the current administration.

 

Also, it means that Bush/Cheney won't be speaking at the RNC. I'm quite saddened by that, as I wanted to really hear what they were going to say. It also allows the RNC to focus almost purely on McCain and Palin, instead of being a four day party.

 

As much as the devastation likely to occur is something that troubles me, and the sympathy I feel for the people having to evacuate and prepare and be afraid, this could turn out to be a huge boon for the Republicans... Much like people were saying that McCain would benefit from an international crisis, I think he has a real opportunity to benefit from this climactic crisis.

 

A few caveats. They have to be extremely cautious that this isn't seen as them playing this as a benefit because a lot of people will be suffering. It underscores the climate debate since this is yet another very intense hurricane and the new republican VP doesn't believe in man-made warming. It speaks more about our need to stop running everything on so much oil (whether our own or from the middle east), since the rigs are being impacted, oil could leak into the ocean (although that's highly unlikely here since they've sealed it all off well in advance), but workers had to be evacuated from the drilling platforms and the money loss will hit us all at the pumps in the next few days.

 

A lot of it just depends on how it's played by the McCain camp, and how Obama responds. It could be very good for Republicans, but it's a super fine line for them to walk.

[Pangloss]

It underscores the climate debate since this is yet another very intense hurricane

 

Well, remember there's no link between hurricanes and global warming at this time, but yes, I'm sure a lot of people will see it that way. I'm actually okay with hurricane events helping to spur interesting in global warming if it means more funding for studying hurricanes, but even if we solve global warming hurricanes will still happen, and so will the human tragedy that so often follows in their wake. The real focus should be on preparation, emergency response, and improved predictability. IMO all three of those things have improved immeasurably in the last 10-15 years, though some of that was fought by the Bush administration prior to Katrina, with tragic results.

 

Getting back to the subject of the thread for a moment, it looks like Gustav sped up rapidly in the gulf and will hit much earlier and probably weaker than thought. Republicans have canceled the first day of their convention (which I thought was a little odd coming on Labor Day anyway), and will start on Tuesday.

 

With Gustav missing a direct hit on New Orleans and being weaker than expected, and with all the preparation in terms of evacuation, etc, Republicans may tout this as a victory. Unfortunately the reality here is that the preparations undertaken in New Orleans this week were extremely inefficient and vastly expensive. In short, they were not the kind of long-term preparations that coastal communities need to undertake so that they are actually prepared for hurricanes year after year. They were the kind of preparations undertaken when you don't want another public relations disaster on your hands, and it's not your money you're spending. (sigh)

[CDarwin]

I think iNow hit on something. This gives Bush and Cheney an excuse not to show up now, which allows the convention to be pointedly focused on McCain without playing into the Democrats' strategy of associating him with Bush. You know any endorsements of the former by the latter at the convention would wind up in dramatic voice-over in some Democratic attack ad. I don't think Bush could do much of anything for McCain with an audience as broad as the RNC's at this point. You just can't exclude a sitting US President of your party from speaking at a convention.

[iNow]

Well, remember there's no link between hurricanes and global warming at this time,

 

Actually, there is. It's about intensity, but is off topic for this thread. Here you go:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=420183#post420183

 

(I also shared data in post #174 and others in that thread, and here's a more recent pdf I read just last month.)

Edited August 31, 2008 by iNow

[Pangloss]

Well we could go back and forth with various articles pro and con, but I think we can short-circuit that argument and come to a consensus ourselves, which is that there may be a link, and that the science seems to be developing very rapidly in the direction of a link. Just a couple of years ago nobody would dare suggest a link, but now quite a number of scientists make the connection.

 

And I think we can also agree that hurricanes would exist without global warming, and solving global warming won't stop them from being potentially every bit as intense as they are today. According to this article, impact on intensity is either 'trivial' or '6-8%', depending on whom you ask.

 

So clearly it would be a bad idea for us to use hurricanes to play political games, trying to get everyone on board with doing something about GW. It would be a major disservice to people living in coastal regions. At the very least we need to be clear that it's a bad idea to just ditch the SUV and hope the next hurricane will be weaker. There's a lot of serious work to be done on preparedness, emergency response and predictability. (Which, as I say, is a point I think we can all agree on.)

[iNow]

And I think we can also agree that hurricanes would exist without global warming,

Yep. That is certain.

 

 

and solving global warming won't stop them from being potentially every bit as intense as they are today.

I can't say that I agree at all with that part, though. Warming heats the oceans. Warmer waters feed the storms. That feeding makes the storms more intense. We stop the warming, the oceans cool, and the storms lose power.

 

I guess the thread to which I linked in my post above wasn't to your liking? We could discuss it instead here then at this other thread on the same topic:

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34648

 

 

(I don't think it's appropriate for me to give you a tutorial on climate science and how it pertains to hurricane activity here in the Politics forum).

 

There's a lot of serious work to be done on preparedness, emergency response and predictability. (Which, as I say, is a point I think we can all agree on.)

 

That truly is a non-partisan issue on which we can all agree. Yes, sir.

[D H]

There's a lot of serious work to be done on preparedness, emergency response and predictability. (Which, as I say, is a point I think we can all agree on.)

While Fay and Edouard seemed to vex the forecasters this year, the predictions on Gustav have been very consistent. I suspect there is no more low hanging fruit to pick on the severe weather forecasting tree. Fortunately, the lower quality forecasts appear to me to be correlated with weaker storms. It looks like the major hurricanes are more predictable. The problem is not paying attention. Katrina, like Gustav was not a surprise storm. There was plenty of warning for both.

 

This time around the response this time appears to be very good. City, state, and federal governments are working together rather than against one another. People are thinking rather than squabbling. New Orleans even used their school buses to help people evacuate this time, and there are no plans to pack people into a sports stadium as a last ditch effort. Police and National Guard are on hand to stop looting. 95% of the population of greater New Orleans has evacuated the city. Time will tell. One toubling sign: Some cities haven't done so well. 90% have evacuated Houma, which is much closer to the predicted landfall.

 

The problem area is preparedness. One big problem in New Orleans is the levee system. It is based on protecting against a "100 year storm". New Orleans has been subjected to four 100+ year storms in the last forty years, one of them a 500 year storm. Something is wrong with this definition. Even if the definition was correct, there is still something quite wrong in protecting against even a 500 year storm. In it's External Panel Review of Katrina (http://www.asce.org/files/pdf/erp_letter_4-15-08_FINAL.pdf), the American Society of Civil Engineers notes that Netherlands designs their coastal defenses against a 10,000 year storm, and goes on to say

"In addition to the risk to human life, the risk to property and the quality of life for the people of New Orleans is very high. The probability for this level of flooding, once per 500 years, is equivalent to a ten percent probability that it will be exceeded one or more times in the next 50 years.

In our opinion, a one-in-ten chance every 50 years of catastrophic flooding of a city and loss of property, life, and life-style is unacceptable as a design basis for an engineered system. Nevertheless, this appears to be the reality of the current situation

, and that reality must be properly communicated and managed until improvements are made."

[Pangloss]

and solving global warming won't stop them from being potentially every bit as intense as they are today.

I can't say that I agree at all with that part, though. Warming heats the oceans. Warmer waters feed the storms. That feeding makes the storms more intense. We stop the warming, the oceans cool, and the storms lose power.

 

We are in agreement. Frequency and intensity of hurricanes may decrease with a lowering of emissions.

 

 

I guess the thread to which I linked in my post above wasn't to your liking?

 

On the contrary, it's a good thread; I think I've participated in it myself. And there's nothing wrong with a little cross-post advertising.

 

 

While Fay and Edouard seemed to vex the forecasters this year, the predictions on Gustav have been very consistent.

 

Unusually so. A quick look on the other side of Florida at Hannah's meandering path will show you a more common scenario of our current level of tropical storm predictability.

 

But it's not a criticism -- the forecasting has seemed to improve quite a lot just in the last ten years or so that I've been following it.

 

There may be something to your point about weaker storms being less predictable. It would make sense; they're more susceptible to sheering and steering.

[iNow]

Over at A Blog Around The Clock:

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBJpXS09Mdo

 

When Republican delegates check-in to their hotel rooms in St. Paul this week, they will receive a "thank you" message on their televisions. An ad called "Thanks For The Memories," produced by Campaign for America's Future, will broadcast unforgettable moments from the last eight years that conservatives wish the country would forget.

With Hurricane Gustav on the nation's mind, the ad reminds viewers of the bungled response to Hurricane Katrina. It also highlights skyrocketing gas prices, soaring home foreclosures, the infamous "mission accomplished" banner and tells conservatives, "You've done a heckuva job!"

 

The ad begins playing this week in 365,000 hotel rooms across the country.