A Son of the Rock

This US Presidential race may be for possession of a poisoned chalice. Whoever wins will potentially face a challenge unlike any since the 1930s. Back then, FDR won and served for over twelve years but the worst of the crisis had unfolded before he became President. That is not the case this time.

The new President risks having the economic situation totally unravel on his watch. The seeds may have been sown earlier but he is where the buck will stop when all the redundancies and foreclosures come in.

It is possible we’re looking at a one term Presidency – especially if McCain wins. In 2012, if he doesn’t succumb to ill-health before then, he’ll look and possibly be worn out. As for Obama, will the voters be forgiving if the bad times roll in in a big way? (It is certain that Republicans will be vociferous in their denunciations if things are anything less than rosy.)

So is this a good election to lose?

In retrospect, Labour’s loss in Britain in 1992 ensured their landslide wins in 1997 and 2001. The problems that beset Major’s Government put voters off the Tories for at least a decade. Arguably they still haven’t recovered.

If Labour had won in 1992, joined the ERM, and suffered the same fortunes with it as the Tories did, then we in Britain might have had John Redwood or an unreconstructed Michael Portillo as PM in 1997 and a harder-nosed Thatcherism instead of the Blair version. Gordon Brown might now be ganging up with Vince Cable in opposition to a David Cameron chancellorship.

A similarly troubled Obama Presidency might see the Republicans entrenched for the foreseeable future from 2012 on. On the other hand I can’t see McCain (still less Palin if the worst happens) charting a way out of the financial mess we all seem to be in. In which case the Democrats would be sitting fair for 2012 and beyond.