RSS

Yogi Berra once said that predictions are hard to make, especially about the future. Not surprisingly, political scientists usually try to avoid such predictions, especially when the outcomes of elections are concerned. However, a bet on the outcome of the US presidential election is considered a rather safe one at the moment: McCain's chances to win are slim.

One could point to current polls to show that Obama is ahead by a large margin. But the polls only portend a probable defeat; they don't explain the reasons for it. Inevitably, the question arises why McCain, who took the Republican nomination in an early landslide without having to fight a bruising battle in the primaries like Obama had to, has fallen hopelessly behind. True, McCain had been dealt a bad hand. Simply belonging to the party of a president whose approval ratings are the lowest since Richard Nixon was forced to resign in 1974 does not make for a head start. And although he has tried hard, McCain has never been able to fully distance himself from George W. Bush. In late September, in a poll conducted by PEW, 45% of the respondents believed that McCain would continue Bush´s policies. Among one-word impressions associated with the Senator from Arizona, "old" and "Bush-like" were two of the most frequently mentioned. McCain can hardly be blamed for these two attributes; however, McCain and his advisers should have seen this obvious desire for change during the Democratic primaries, when Hillary Clinton was running on experience and lost. One can certainly argue that it would have been hard for McCain to campaign on change due to his background, but to campaign on experience first and then shift to change was a most doubtful strategy.

The nomination of Sarah Palin as an expression of demonstrating "change" must be mentioned in this context. The surprising and rushed decision to pick her only reflects the sudden change in McCain´s campaign strategy. The Republican base initially greeted Palin warmly, but with the passing of time, many dark spots in her past as well as her lack of abilities have become evident. Many of those could have most likely been discovered had a more profound "background check" been done, which was neglected because of the sudden change of direction - the only "change" clearly observable in McCain´s campaign. The consequence is a simple one: In early October, 52% of voters saw Palin as not qualified to serve as President, whereas only 16% did so in the case of Joe Biden.

The McCain campaign also seems to have missed out on other important election issues. The Republican campaigned too long and too hard on foreign policy issues like the war in Iraq and the war on terror. Hoping to gain advantage from "hammering" on Obama´s lack of experience with regard to international issues, the McCain team forgot that it was the economy that mattered most to the American voter. What is the purpose of firing off at Obama for "being wrong about Iraq," when 58% of the voters see the economy as most important issue, followed by health care reform? Obama, for his part, spent a limited time on improving his foreign policy credentials and placed far more emphasis on domestic issues like the economic crisis.

Finally, McCain may be a war hero who withstood many attacks, but to concentrate his campaign advertising on attacking Obama was a shot in his own foot. 56% of the American voters now believe that McCain has been "too personally critical," while only 26% did so in June. True, Obama has much more money available for TV ads, recently outspending McCain 2:1, and can air many positive ads and still match McCain on the negative ones, but six out of ten Americans still believe that McCain has unfairly attacked Obama, while four out of ten believe the opposite. McCain´s "all negative strategy" has evidently backfired.

Overall, McCain has fallen behind on all counts, be they personal traits or the handling of specific policy issues. Old soldiers may never die, but this time they face an uphill battle - one that seems too steep to climb.

Dr. Matthias Fifka is assistant professor at the University Erlangen-Nürnberg and deputy director of the German-American Institute Nürnberg. He is doing research on US politics and US foreign policy as well as on international organizations (NATO, WTO, EU) and Corporate Governance.

Related materials from the Atlantic Community:

• James Joyner: American Foreign Policy Bids Farewell to Neoconservatism
• David Neil Lebhar: Presidential Elections Will Not Shape US Foreign Policy
• Jan Ross: The United States: Heroes of the Retreat