Analyzing Paterson's decision

With Gov. David Paterson's announcement last week that he will not seek re-election in November's election, his political saga looks to be nine months from an end. And although the governor said he withdrew so he could focus his attention on serving the state, some experts are convinced that Paterson buckled after The New York Times released a story linking him to a domestic abuse case involving one of his aides.

"It's the straw that broke the camel's back," CAS politics professor Christine Harrington said. "The role that he may have played, or...is alleged to have played, in swaying a victim of domestic violence for perhaps not showing up in court as a plaintiff, is really outrageous."

Harrington called the governor's actions an act of intimidation.

Though fellow CAS politics professor Lawrence Mead agreed that the case contributed to Paterson's decision to drop out of the gubernatorial race, he did not feel the scandal should be held against the governor.

"It's not clear to me that anything was done improperly," Mead said, "Until that's clear, I'm a little surprised that it should be held against the governor."

But both professors disapproved of Paterson's performance in office.

"One would've thought he'd put in more practice when he came into office with a bit of steam and moral support because of [former Gov. Eliot] Spitzer's problems," Mead said. "But he hasn't been effective."

Harrington said Paterson's abuse of power was especially detrimental to the state.

"The police have been called upon by the governors and that's inappropriate," she said. "It's a form of intimidation and power that aligns itself with patriarchy and is against democracy."

Harrington predicts Paterson will resign, but Mead disagreed.

For now, only one thing is certain: The spotlight is on Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

"I think Andrew Cuomo has already put together a bit of a war chest," Harrington said.