The American Election is Still in Play
Published in Le Figaro
(France) on 17 October 2008
by Jean-Louis Turlin (link to original)
With three weeks until the election, Obama is in the lead. but he remains at the mercy of a possible foreign crisis, which would give the advantage to McCain, according to two American analysts interviewed by Le Figaro.
John McCain was not able to trip up Barack Obama in the last presidential debate on Wednesday night. But the Democratic candidate remained at the mercy of an environment out of his control. Carrol Doherty, associate director of the Pew Research Center in Washington, and John Zogby, president and founder of the polling organization Zogby international, responded to questions from Figaro.
Le Figaro- At this stage, what can change the course of this election which remains favorable to Barack Obama?
Carroll Doherty- There are still two weeks and the game isn't up. For the moment, the political environment is certainly very favorable for Obama because his campaign has been sure of its themes on the economy and more precisely on the financial crisis. But, things can change, and return to the preoccupation over the qualifications and experience of Barack Obama, an area in which he is still outstripped by McCain. Even if it is clear that his image as a leader has been reinforced in the debates, the doubts are still there. An international or foreign policy crisis could reorient the attention of the public into terrain that is more favorable for McCain. The Georgian crisis had an effect in this regard, but has recently fallen out of the public focus as the financial crisis has taken the stage.
At this point it would have to be an event which directly effected the security of the United States. Not necessarily a terrorist attack, but a foreign crisis which would directly effect American interests, a serious event in Iraq or the Middle East for example.
John Zogby. - The Georgian crisis effectively launched McCain into the lead in our polls. As for the fear of a terrorist act, remember the Bin Laden video, released the Friday before the Tuesday of the election in 2004, which was detrimental to John Kerry. In general, an event provoking an international crisis profits the party in power, which in this case would be John McCain.
Le Figaro- Has Obama's presentation in the debates not tempered the doubts about his competence?
Carroll Doherty- Obama has improved his image among the people nicely. In this aspect, McCain had a fifteen point lead in a study which we took last summer which posed the question as to the ability of the two candidates to respond to an unspecified international crisis. In the following poll at the end of September, Obama had caught up. But, on the question of personal qualifications, the discussion is always favorable for McCain: 49%-35%. Since the televised debates it is possible that the public is more reassured on the competence of Obama, a trend which has been shown in the recent polls in the New York Times and CBS. But, I continue to think that McCain retains a light advantage on this point. What counts, is that which could intervene in the global scene between now and the day of the election. The possibility of a new development exists in a campaign which consists of as many lies as predictions. But the outcome depends on whether or not John McCain has managed to change the course of the conversations in this last debate. It appears, at first glance, that he hasn't managed to.
John Zogby- In the last debate, there was neither a KO nor a change. McCain made a better presentation than in the two earlier ones; on one hand, he put Obama on the defensive, and on the other, he brought to light the differences between the two candidates over a number of questions. But the dynamic hasn't changed. At best the race remains open.
I have always thought that it would be like this. McCain aimed particularly at the center and undecided electors, of whom one doesn't know in what proportion they followed the debate. It reminds me of the scenario of 1980 in which Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter largely because of the undecided 6 or 7% who declared en masse in his favor at the last moment. It's possible to have a similar figure, or a tight ballot.
Le Figaro 6-7%, maybe this would be the margin of those polled who don't dare say that Obama's race embarrasses them.
John Zogby- I don't believe at all in the Bradley factor (Tom Bradley, the black mayor of Los Angeles of whom all the polls predicted, wrongly, to become the governor of California in 1982: NDLR). We haven't noticed any notable difference between our predictions and the results of nearly all of the democratic primaries.
It has been said that the surprise victory by Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire was proof that some of those polled had hidden their racist sentiments. But Obama's score, 36.4%, was within the margin of error: our polls had only given him 38.3%
John McCain was not able to trip up Barack Obama in the last presidential debate on Wednesday night. But the Democratic candidate remained at the mercy of an environment out of his control. Carrol Doherty, associate director of the Pew Research Center in Washington, and John Zogby, president and founder of the polling organization Zogby international, responded to questions from Figaro.
Le Figaro- At this stage, what can change the course of this election which remains favorable to Barack Obama?
Carroll Doherty- There are still two weeks and the game isn't up. For the moment, the political environment is certainly very favorable for Obama because his campaign has been sure of its themes on the economy and more precisely on the financial crisis. But, things can change, and return to the preoccupation over the qualifications and experience of Barack Obama, an area in which he is still outstripped by McCain. Even if it is clear that his image as a leader has been reinforced in the debates, the doubts are still there. An international or foreign policy crisis could reorient the attention of the public into terrain that is more favorable for McCain. The Georgian crisis had an effect in this regard, but has recently fallen out of the public focus as the financial crisis has taken the stage.
At this point it would have to be an event which directly effected the security of the United States. Not necessarily a terrorist attack, but a foreign crisis which would directly effect American interests, a serious event in Iraq or the Middle East for example.
John Zogby. - The Georgian crisis effectively launched McCain into the lead in our polls. As for the fear of a terrorist act, remember the Bin Laden video, released the Friday before the Tuesday of the election in 2004, which was detrimental to John Kerry. In general, an event provoking an international crisis profits the party in power, which in this case would be John McCain.
Le Figaro- Has Obama's presentation in the debates not tempered the doubts about his competence?
Carroll Doherty- Obama has improved his image among the people nicely. In this aspect, McCain had a fifteen point lead in a study which we took last summer which posed the question as to the ability of the two candidates to respond to an unspecified international crisis. In the following poll at the end of September, Obama had caught up. But, on the question of personal qualifications, the discussion is always favorable for McCain: 49%-35%. Since the televised debates it is possible that the public is more reassured on the competence of Obama, a trend which has been shown in the recent polls in the New York Times and CBS. But, I continue to think that McCain retains a light advantage on this point. What counts, is that which could intervene in the global scene between now and the day of the election. The possibility of a new development exists in a campaign which consists of as many lies as predictions. But the outcome depends on whether or not John McCain has managed to change the course of the conversations in this last debate. It appears, at first glance, that he hasn't managed to.
John Zogby- In the last debate, there was neither a KO nor a change. McCain made a better presentation than in the two earlier ones; on one hand, he put Obama on the defensive, and on the other, he brought to light the differences between the two candidates over a number of questions. But the dynamic hasn't changed. At best the race remains open.
I have always thought that it would be like this. McCain aimed particularly at the center and undecided electors, of whom one doesn't know in what proportion they followed the debate. It reminds me of the scenario of 1980 in which Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter largely because of the undecided 6 or 7% who declared en masse in his favor at the last moment. It's possible to have a similar figure, or a tight ballot.
Le Figaro 6-7%, maybe this would be the margin of those polled who don't dare say that Obama's race embarrasses them.
John Zogby- I don't believe at all in the Bradley factor (Tom Bradley, the black mayor of Los Angeles of whom all the polls predicted, wrongly, to become the governor of California in 1982: NDLR). We haven't noticed any notable difference between our predictions and the results of nearly all of the democratic primaries.
It has been said that the surprise victory by Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire was proof that some of those polled had hidden their racist sentiments. But Obama's score, 36.4%, was within the margin of error: our polls had only given him 38.3%