Why McCain lost

2008-11-06 00:00

For Bill Clinton in 1992, it was the economy, stupid. For John McCain in 2008, it was the stupid economy. Exit polls showed that 62% of the electorate said that the economy was the most important issue. But when, precisely, did John McCain lose the narrative on the economy? Was it last July when economic adviser Phil Gramm, discussing the “mental recession”, noted that “we’ve sort of become a nation of whiners”? Perhaps it was in December 2007, when McCain said: “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” Or was McCain’s economic goose cooked long before the campaigns started? Ray Fair, the Yale professor who plugs macroeconomic data into an election-predicting model, said that “since November 2006, the model has consistently been predicting that the Democratic candidate would get about 52% of the two-party vote”.

McCain managed to give Barack Obama a run for the money through mid-September. The polls began to turn (decisively, it turns out) against him when the global financial system suffered a run on the money. And with the acuity bestowed by six weeks of hindsight, I think it’s possible to pinpoint three dates — September 15, September 24 and October 15 — that mark crucial turning points in the campaign.

On September 15, Lehman Brothers, having failed to convince the government that it was worthy of a bail-out, filed for bankruptcy. The same day, McCain proclaimed: “I think, still, the fundamentals of our economy are strong.” A twin killer. Lehman’s failure triggered a ferocious and unpredictable series of events — the freezing of money-market funds, a global credit seizure — that made it clear that, a) the fundamentals of the U.S.economy were anything but strong and, b) volatility was there to stay. McCain’s ill-timed line, a long-time presidential staple, showed that he had no intuitive feel for how to talk about the economy at large or about the crisis at hand. On September 24, as talks about a Washington bail-out intensified, McCain announced that he would suspend his campaign and fly to Washington. The theory: McCain would put country first, force Obama off the campaign trail, forge a bipartisan compromise and alter the dynamics of the race. But McCain didn’t have a game plan to triangulate effectively between the Republican gentry (the Bush administration, Wall Street, corporate America), who ardently demanded a bail-out, and the pitchfork-toting peasants (House Republicans) who opposed it. He ended up leaving town and resuming campaigning without an agreement in place.

While McCain seemed detached, Obama caucused with financial greybeards and kept his campaign plane on the tarmac to get updates from his new speed-dialling buddy, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Self-serving? Yes. But very successful. And the passage of the bail-out bill, which McCain grudgingly supported, neutered the increasingly ideological economic warfare McCain waged in the closing weeks. At a time when the Bush administration was nationalising big portions of the (grateful) financial services sector, charges that Obama was a socialist, the redistributor-in-chief, the second coming of Eugene V. Debs [U. S. political activist], failed to gain traction.

The third fatal date? October 15, when the third debate took place. Throughout the U.S. autumn, Obama had rounded up financial icons such as former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker and Warren Buffett to serve as surrogates. They could reassure Wall Street and Main Street that Obama could steer the nation through treacherous financial waters. Rather than enlist a respected businessperson such as Mitt Romney or former eBay CEO Meg Whitman as his chief economic surrogate, McCain turned to an unlicensed plumber from Ohio. McCain mentioned “Joe the Plumber” seven times in the October 15 debate. In the ensuing weeks, McCain routinely trotted out Samuel J. Wurzelbacher’s economic folk wisdom as gospel.

Warren the Investor and Paul the Central Banker vs Joe the Plumber was never going to be much of a fair fight. Given the macro-economic backdrop of recent years and the microeconomic disasters of recent weeks, neither was the presidential campaign, which is why Obama has won the White House. — Slate.

Join the conversation!

24.com encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.

24.com publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
0 comments
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

 
/Sport

Book flights

Compare, Book, Fly

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.
 
English
Afrikaans
isiZulu

Hello 

Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.


Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.

Settings

Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.




Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.