US presidential election blog: Now it’s really about the economy, stupid

21:35 Tue 07 Oct 2008 - Clive Leviev-Sawyer

If in a few hours’ time, John McCain follows through with his telegraphed strategy of trying to turn the televised October 7 presidential debate into a “Who is Barack Obama?” spectacle, he will be making one of the most profound mistakes of his long political career, and could shed poll points the way that stock exchanges lately have been nosediving.

The numbers are running against McCain. No, not just the opinion polls of the past two days, which have suggested an Obama lead variously between eight and six points, but also the newly-released numbers from the International Monetary Fund’s Global Financial Stability Review which now estimates losses to the US banking system at $1.4 trillion.

The US is the “epicentre”, to use the IMF’s word, of the current global financial crisis. If audiences tuned in on October 2 in the hope of a Sarah Palin Night Live comedic moment or several, the context of the Obama-McCain debate is a much more serious one. Undecided voters are certain to be much more interested in a focus on economic solutions than a magnifying glass on a rival presidential candidate’s CV.

The issue now is the damaged stock market, fears about savings and job security. Asking questions about whom Obama knew and when did he know them will not be an answer (and in any case, such questions would have to be rhetorical, because the debate rules forbid candidates asking direct questions of each other). Economic woes are generally believed to be behind the electoral map lately becoming friendlier territory for Obama. Failure by McCain to establish himself as someone with clearly articulated and workable economic solutions, rather than someone who digresses from the general to the not especially relevant particular in answering questions about the economy, could make some swing states wastelands for the McCain campaign.

One thing, frail hope for the McCain that it may be, is that the margin between Obama and McCain is not larger. Given McCain’s stumbles on the economy and the ease with which the Democrats could damn him by association with the Republican White House of the most recent two terms (that “maverick” horse is very tired and cannot go any further), Obama should be doing better. McCain has a chance to fight back by staying away from personal invective and offering substance.

After all, we have all heard by now about McCain’s preference for the very town hall format that will be used in the debate to be moderated by Tom Brokaw and that will include about a dozen questions from the audience and a handful of the reportedly six million questions that have been e-mailed in ahead of time. Even one defining moment in answering a question about the economy could help McCain.

As we have seen in the previous presidential debate and in the vice-presidential Palin-Biden show, McCain could well try to probe the perceived weakness of Obama as someone who will increase taxes; not a guaranteed success as a strategy given that Obama surely will respond about his proposed tax cuts for the middle class.

Both Obama and McCain share a weakness. Neither has adequately articulated how they will revise their long-standing campaign platforms in the light of the US’s post-bailout economy. Obama has the better chance in winning the race to link, in the public mind, the current economic trauma to the Republicans.

The rules of the debate reportedly forbid camera shots of audience questioners’ facial reactions to answers and no follow-up questions will be allowed, and nor will Brokaw be allowed to offer reality checks on assertions made by the candidates.

Pundits already have been online offering response to the respective candidates on the basis of their previous performances. For Obama, not to come across as too professorial and above all, to not use the word “agree” quite as much in responding to points by McCain. For McCain, to show some maturity and courtesy in actually looking at his opponent while Obama is speaking (expect to see this, though without the affectionate mesmerized gaze with which Nancy used to favour Ron) and most of all for McCain to keep fixed in his mind: It now really is the economy, stupid.

Comments

Comments by steve baumann - 00:24 08 Oct 2008
	Why are we not being fair about the World Economy? All I hear is no more of the last 8 years...but 2 of those years were not about a Republican Congress. Why didn't the Democratic Congress pass anything they promised they would pass? GWB could have vetoed all the bills passed but the Dem's would get my vote. The last I checked oversite was not an executive responsibility but a congressional one, and to think that the policies of the current administration are the blame, one would only have to look at the rest of the world to see that evidently the people in power, in the US, the Congress, and all over the world are all greedy and one can not run against those in power when the largest contributor to the Dem. Campaign is Wall Street! But does anyone think any of this will be discussed?
Comments by steve bauman - 03:07 08 Oct 2008
	And another thing is this. Why make $700 billion in debt? Besides we don't have money in this country to spend. There's lots of dollars overseas we could recall them all. Than we'd have some more money on the mainland, just like that! Why don't we talk about this as well? I'm just a tiger for Obama, Global Grrr! Grrr!
Comments by bjr - 04:54 08 Oct 2008
	McCain keeps talking about all that he's done while in Washington . . . where's the policy on sustainability? why are we spending so much money in Iran? He is out of touch with the American people. Please ask him to stop addressing us as "my friends" also, does he realize that $5,000 doesn't buy anyone insurance??
Comments by Adonnus - 05:25 08 Oct 2008
	In this failing economy the republican party is a sinking ship, how does changing the captain of the ship stop it from sinking ?
Comments by Karen Syracuse,NY - 16:57 08 Oct 2008
	I have to say I am young, but I am aware of our financial situation and I am aware of the policies that have been used that have failed us. What scared me about the debate last night is the fact that John McCain looks up to President Raegan and really believes, in which Bush obviously does, in his Trickle Down theory. This is the problem with our economy. True, prok barrel spending and earmarks are problems,regulation are problems, etc. But the theory that has ran our country for the last 8 years has been the Trickle Down Theory which has been put in affect by Bush and is supported about McCain. What's sad is this is a failed theory. Ceo's and high dollar companies who run Wall Street and our work force are receiving tax cuts for a reason. That reason is due to the belief that they will be putting that exrta money back into our economy to create more jobs and economic opportunity. Truth is, this isn't happening and it hasn't happened in the last 8 years. Instead of the trickle down affect, it has become the fill you pocket policy. These companies have repeatedly received millions in tax cuts,bonuses,etc. and instead of putting it back into our economy, they have realized that they can keepthis extra money and send our jobs overseas, saving them even more. McCain and Palin speak of this patriotism and this pride and faith in the American worker, but supporting this theory shows the opposite. This shows they agree with Raegan and Bush and they believe in what has caused us Americans to lose jobs and lose money. They have no faith in the average American who goes to work everyday, supports a family, and still tries to make ends meet on a weekly/monthly basis. I don't understand how this comment didn't catch the ears of so many people after last night's debate. This theory clearly supports more money for the rich and less money for Main Street. This economic position is a joke. If we can't see that as Americans who still want to have jobs, then shame on us.