Will The Economic Crisis Have A Lasting Effect On Election 2008?
Posted Sep 29, 2008 at 9:47 AM by Maurice Berger
Yesterday's PollTrack daily tracking average gave Obama a significant 6.3% edge. These results suggest that last week was a bad one for John McCain. His assertion that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong"--just days before the full gravity of our economic crisis became clear did not help his numbers. Surveys last week also indicated that the electorate is inclined to blame Republicans for the economic mess. Additionally, Sarah Palin took a hammering in the media as did McCain's effort to suspend his campaign. The big question: has the economic crisis--and McCain's response to it--provided Obama with an opening? Do Obama's numbers indicate that the tide is turning in election 2008? Or will the pendulum swing back in the coming weeks? October is a tricky month in presidential campaigns, a time when voter sentiment can harden, but also a period in which the debates, political strategies, and unexpected news events have made a difference (to wit, the expression, "October Surprise"). Al Gore began October 2000 with an large deficit in the polls. By month's end, he was tied with his opponent, winning 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush on election day. Conversely, in October 1988, a series of withering Republican campaign commercials and weak debate performances by Democrat Michael Dukakis resulted in a durable Republican advantage that carried George H. W. Bush well across the finish line. Yet, in 1980, the one--and only debate--between Reagan and Carter in late October shook up a heretofore tied up race and yielded the Republican a stable and significant lead. One major qualifier: US presidential elections are not decided by the popular vote (as 2000 dramatically confirmed). In this sense, neither candidate has come anywhere near sealing the deal. In fact, from an electoral perspective, the race is closer to a tie than Obama's modest national lead might suggest. More later.
