Can McCain Win if There’s a Recession?
Updated on 3/7/08: Zogby just came out with a poll on the issue of the election and the economy. McCain does OK:
As concerns grow that the U.S. may be facing a recession, likely voters view Hillary Clinton (26%) and John McCain (25%) as the presidential candidates who could best handle the economy, just edging out Barack Obama (21%), a recent Zogby International telephone poll shows. Among Democrats, nearly half (48%) believe Clinton would best handle the economy, compared with 35% who believe Obama would do a better job.
The last time we had a recession during an election year was 1980. Jimmy Carter's pitch—"elect that kook Reagan and things will get even worse"—turned out not to be a huge vote getter. Thinking not so wistfully of Carternomics reminds me of a great scene in the film Ed Wood about the notorious producer of schlock like Plan 9 from Outer Space. One of his financial backers phones Wood and tells him that his latest production was the worst film the moneyman had ever seen. But the always-chipper Wood quickly replies, "Well, the next one will be better! . . . Hello?"
That attitude doesn't usually fly with voters, either. We tend not to have much patience with economic failure on the part of our elected leaders. Indeed, those fancy economic models that political scientists use to forecast elections all tend to severely punish candidates from the incumbent presidential party when there are sharp downturns in election-year economies. Ray Fair, a political scientist at Yale University, figures that Democrats will win 55 percent of the two-party vote if the economy does slip into recession. Pretty much a blowout. So should John McCain keep his day job? Maybe not. A few caveats here:
1) As my colleague Michael Barone has pointed out, plenty of voters have never experienced a truly nasty recession and thus may not totally freak out as their Depression-era parents did whenever the economy dipped. Many people today assume a growing economy is the natural state of things and any downturn will probably be brief. Thus, they may be more patient with the incumbent political party—or be equally disgusted with both parties. McCain's maverick image could help him here.
2) Foreign policy—an issue that cuts both ways for Democrats and Republicans—will most likely play a big role in the election, as it did in 2004 when many, if not most, of the forecasting models picked John Kerry to beat President Bush.
3) We have had only one election since 1900 where there was no president or vice president on the national ticket and also there was a recession in the year of election. That was 1920, and the incumbent Democratic Party did lose in a landslide. But that is a single data point. Will voters this time around blame John McCain for a recession or lousy economy caused by a collapsing housing bubble? I doubt too many people blame Bush for that. Last time I checked, both Congress and Bush had terrible ratings as soaring gas prices, the falling dollar, rising unemployment, and the collapsing housing market make it seem as if the U.S. economy has gone off the rails. And none of the remaining candidates have a reputation as an economic expert.
4) McCain's push for budget cutting may be seen as a proxy by Americans for sound governmental management. Big deficits—whether trade or budget—can look like signs of incompetence. This could serve McCain well. He could say, "The president's job isn't to manage the economy. It's to manage the government so it doesn't hamper the economy," or some such. Yet he also needs to tell people about his plan to grow the economy—and believe in the plan, even though it includes tax cuts he once opposed.
5) If the economy is coming out of a recession as we head into 2009, I'm not sure Americans will see higher taxes and more government spending as the right economic medicine. Indeed, that potential combo could cause Wall Street to sell off sharply as Election Day approaches and the stock market vigilantes cast a nay vote. Yet I am sure either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would employ the Clinton defense as a shield against such criticisms.
Bottom line: Whoever has the more credible, optimistic vision will probably win on the economy.
Tags: presidential election 2008 | recession | John McCain
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (14)
Reader Comments
Fantasy Land spreading out of DisneyWorld
Apparently FantasyLand has burst its borders and engulfed the media. George W. Bush, our ruling Republican has spent more money in office on totally indefensible garbage like the war in Iraq, than any Democrat ever did and now we should elect McCain who supports a 100 year war effort? You are mad as a hatter. If McCain does get elected it will only hurry the economic destruction of this nation begun in earnest by this Yale and Harvard graduate who can't even express himself as well as a 5th grader.
You tell me these are the best candidates our once great nation can muster? You tell me these are my only choices, yet you tell me the system isn't rigged? We have a president who can't eat a pretzel without choking himself and getting a black eye in charge of our nuclear missiles. We have a vice president who shot a lawyer in the face while "hunting" possibly for another beer.
This whole nation is mad, but it is you who pretend to see normalcy and hope where in fact lies only ruin and despair that makes me wonder what they are smoking in the media these days!
John McCain indeed, you couldn't tase me to vote for that fellow and I'm a registered Republican, or was.
Fantasy
This is a manufactured "economic crisis" - kind of like our "global warming crisis", our "health care crisis" our "housing crisis" and a host of other crises that liberal depend upon to remain competitive economically and ultimately rule us as the elites they are.
4q 07 had strong economic growth, then the media looked at the political calendar and realized that to help "Hillary" they had to make it seem like the worst economy since Hoover. Kind of like her slimy, lying husband beat George Bush 41 saying the economy then was the worst since Hoover -- and not one media figure called him on that lie.
Everyone I talk to in business is busy. My consulting company is sold out. Headhunters are calling me weekly. Railroads are carrying record freight.
Who is in a downturn? Cable Stations - Lenders who made stupid loans - Newspapers-. To our information elite, there is a bad economy and significant layoffs. Perhaps if they changed their business model from syncophancy to the DNC to telling the truth, people would by newspapers and news magazines again.
As for Bush's education, he beat John "reporting for duty" Kerry like a drum --- it wouldn't even have been competitive if the media hadn't carried Kerry towards the finish line -- , owned the Congress for 6 years, and yes, liberated millions of Afghani's and Iraqis. Hillary doesn't sound as smart now that she is fighting for the presidency with an unknown Senator from political cesspool Chicago. "Oh - he wrote a kindergarten essay about being President - he's a power monger" Talk about the pot calling the Kettle off white.
Thomas
I'm a life-long Democrat, but I confess that I can't vote for the Democrats this time. How many times can they promise me socialized medicine and an end to these wars for oil in Iraq and Afghanistan before I learn?
There is a recent analogy that indicates that this old rule of thumb might not be so ironclad: 2000. In 2000, the dot-com bubble was bursting, stocks were heading south, and I recall it being well understood that the country was heading into a recession. Indeed, it was an issue in the election - that's why Bush ran on tax cuts.
So what was the result? Superficially, the rule was vindicated. The incumbent party lost the White House. But we all remember how close it was. The electoral vote went to Bush by the narrowest of hanging chads, and the incumbent party famously won the popular vote such that many partisan Democrats still claim 2000 as a win. The rule, if it functioned at all, functioned very weakly. One less sigh and roll of the eyes by Gore and we might have been saying now that the rule was dead.
Well...
"I mean, is there anything in the political history of the past 50 years that suggests recessions are NOT really bad news for the presidential candidate of the incumbent party?"
Well...Bush won in 2004 despite the recession. Oh wait, there wasn't a recession in 2004. There was actually record growth. The old-print media was just obsessing and twisting over non-existent economic problems to get the Democratic nominee elected. Huh.
Republicans have done much to undermine their reputation as the party of fiscal responsibility, but most people understand that, fundamentally, raising taxes and creating new entitlements isn't going to "fix" the deficit *and* it might very well cost them a job as those dastardly rich have less money to invest.
Truth
While many of us are complaining and using unhumorious comments to talk about the canidates, we should look at the root cause of many of our problems. We as a country has allowed the most horrible silent war to take more lives than any other war in US history. Abortion is destroying innocent lives every minute. Our own parents were prolife because we are even able to be her to give our opinions. The blood is on our hands and we don't even seem to care. We are only worried about ourselves. We vote democrat and millions more babies will be killed. The blood is on our hands. Jesus is the answer. He shows us how to love one another.
Only election?
Neither Eisenhower nor Stevenson were presidents or vice-presidents
The Maverick Tag Could Help McCain
If the economy is in recession on Election Day, voters will probably blame Bush and the former Republican Congress. They will probably be right.
The public has already dumped the Republican Congress, and Bush's approval ratings are low. Nevertheless, voters might not hold McCain accountable. His maverick reputation might let him escape pigeonholing--the Democrats will try--as Bush's wannabe successor and a member of the rejected Republican Congress.
McCain can't attack his own party's legislative and executive performances, but he can't run on those records either. The maverick tag might let him attract independent voters without alienating the core GOP constituencies.
That precipitous path might be McCain's only way to my vote. (After leaning strongly toward the GOP for 30+ years, today I consider myself a true independent.)
BIASED MEDIA BIGGEST THREAT TO LIBERTIES
Media polls are only good for measuring one thing, how brainwashed people are by the propaganda beings spewed by a left-tilting media. Is it any wonder that people and even a good number of financial "experts" believe we're on the cusp of a recession since that's about all the liberal media has been pounded out on its drum for the last two or three years?
Sometimes perception preceeds reality and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I work for a vendor who does big business with a domestic motorcycle manufacture and all the talk has been the last six months is to "recession proof" your business ... blah, blah, blah. Yet just this week business is booming and the boss is saying, "Where's that recession."
BTW, it's interesting how the liberal media (see the December 2005 UCLA report on media bias titled "A Measure of Bias -http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm)
Isn't it interesting how the liberal media failed to report the three quarters of economic recession which happened right before Bush was inaugurated in 2001. There was also the dot.com bust which the media gave only cursory coverage. Yet here we are now, the media finding "experts" who say we are in recession and now it only takes two quarters of economic downturn to equal a recession. Well, how can we now be in a "recession" if we haven't been suffering an economic downturn of six months much less nine months which is officially a recession?
I used to think the threats to our liberties and way of life can only come from a despotic left-wing government. Now I'm fully convinced, given the power of persuasion even a severely discredited liberal media still has, a biased national media largely controlled by leftist activists editors and journalists pose an even greater threat to our liberties because these fifth columnists have a far greater impact on public perceptions and opinions than does government. The only time an entity can pose a public threat to the liberties of a free people is if it has a larger public mouthpiece than its competitors. And if anyone thinks the national media leans right and has been the lap dog of a "right-wing" government instead of the lap dog of the radical leftists in the Democratic party has smoked one too many reefers.
Regards,
Hank from the People's Republic of Illinois
Yes, only one election.
OF, try reading the whole sentence.
"We have had only one election since 1900 where there was no president or vice president on the national ticket and also there was a recession in the year of election."
Note the words after "and also".
Now note that there was no recession in 1952.
WHAT HAVE THE DEMS DONE SINCE LAST ELECTION?
Why put ALL the blame on the president (Bush)? Have the Dems any responsibility for helping the economy tank, e.g. energy (lack of) policies, taxes (increasing), spending (you think the Republicans were bad), and increased entitlements (yes, vote-buying)?
ANSWER: Yes, they do. McLain in 08!
Has The Prospect Of Dems Controlling All Three Branches Caused A Recession?
Notice that the downturn didn't start until the Democrats took control of the House and Senate.
I imagine that the prospect of the Democrats also winning the White House and being able to enact their extreme left legislation is frightening to people in business.
To quote that great philosopher, Betty Davis, "Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be an bumpy ride."
Keep your passport current and your assets liquid.
bs......diebold will decide.
last election.....diebold voting machines were proven to be fraudulent and the company had to shell out over 2 million, this was proven by a paper trail. Now they changed there name and are still being used in primaries and the election. Guess what....the difference this time around was that largely the paper vote receipt was eliminated, no way to prove fraud now, how convienent. This government is corrupt and in my opinion guilty of commiting terrorism against it's own people...killing more then 3000. We are no better then N Korea....were just talk a good game. Things are going to get alot worse....better research concentration camps in america and chip implants......and that will start you down the road of horrifying facts and discoveries.
Add your thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our comment guidelines.advertisement
Idol worship
Where exactly does US Snooze get these right-wing, Republican-inclined McCain-loving columnists? Trolling the sewers beneath the American Enterprise Institute?
I mean, is there anything in the political history of the past 50 years that suggests recessions are NOT really bad news for the presidential candidate of the incumbent party? Could this dimwit have twisted more artfully to ignore the overwhelming evidence that this is true? I think not.
Next up: Why a giant asteroid hitting the earth would be GOOD for Republicans.
Mar 07, 2008 16:58:00 PM [permalink] [report comment]