Commentary on the economy, the markets, and business

Which candidates get a boost from economic troubles?

Jonathan Cohn (via the guy with the office next to mine, who for some reason hasn't been around much lately) has a piece in The New Republic in which he explains that Mitt Romney's economic message seems to be resonating with Michigan voters more than John McCain's (or Mike Huckabee's, for that matter). After New Hampshire, we all need to put the emphasis on seems (and Cohn does), but it's an interesting point:

[Romney] emphasizes his economic ideas, and while they may not add up to more than the usual supply side shibboleths--making tax cuts permanent, eliminating the capital gains tax, reforming lawsuits--he does at least offer the Bain Capital/Winter Olympics/passing-health-care-in-Massachusetts resume that's relevant to the discussion.

The contrast with the image McCain has promoted lately couldn't be more striking. McCain has been on the air in Detroit with his own television spots for the last two weeks--seemingly as much as Romney, which is no small feat given the latter's personal fortune and apparent willingness to spend it. But the TV ad that I've seen the most simply features McCain speaking directly to the camera about his character and record. He boasts about taking on special interests, questioning Rumsfeld's strategy in Iraq, and fighting pork barrel spending. "I've made a lot of people in Washington angry," he says. He's right about that, for sure, but there's nothing in the ad that speaks directly to the concerns of, say, the 200 workers laid off from a local parts plant a few days ago.

In Michigan, which has been mired in a recession for at least a year now, voters care a lot about the economy. And that seems to help Romney, because whatever his specific proposals Romney seems to care a lot more about and know a lot more about economic policy than McCain (or Giuliani or even FairTax Mike) does.

The question is whether gloomy economic news elsewhere will put voters in a similar frame of mind. That would be good news for Romney on the Republican side. In the Democratic primaries it should help Edwards, and probably Clinton too. I mean, Obama seems reasonably smart about economics. But that's not what his campaign has been about.

In the general election, recession definitely hurts the Republicans. How do I know that? Because Ray Fair says so.

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (2)
Post a Comment »
  • 1

    On the GOP side, I think that Huckabee will benefit most from a recession. It may have taken a few extra shot to the head with the 2x4 reality board, but by now even Republicans are figuring out that "Tax Cuts for the Rich" means "Tax Cuts for the Rich" --- and Huckabee is the only GOP candidate who seems to be communicating that more than "Tax Cuts for the Rich" are needed to help the economy, and the middle class.

    On the Democratic side, Edwards should get the most help, because the first thing that everyone wants to do is cast blame, and the second thing people want to do is make sure that the solution is someone else's problem. With Edwards 'blame the special interests for everything including the fact that your child needs braces' approach to the campaign, he's in a perfect position to blame the special interests for the recession, and a solution that doesn't hurt 'average americans', just the 'special interests. But since the media despises Edwards, and ignores him, it probably won't help.

    Which leaves Hillbama -- and this is an obvious gimme for Hill. The words "good economy" and "Clinton" are practically synonymous, so Obama doesn't have a chance. (The media hates Clinton but doesn't despise her, so rather than ignoring her, they prefer to torture her, but on this issue she'll come out on top anyway.)

  • 2

    Hellary for sure!

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Curious Capitalist Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's The Curious Capitalist in your inbox and never miss a day.

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
LORI HAAS, whose daughter was wounded in the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings, on a new report finding that officials warned their families more than an hour and a half before the rest of the campus and released locked-down students who were later killed