Economic Crises, War, and the U.S. Election

Lessons from History

The 2024 U.S. presidential election, taking place against the backdrop of a longshoremen strike disrupting supply chains and the imminent threat of a war between Israel and Iran, adds a potent mix of economic and geopolitical uncertainty a month out from Election Day. Historically, these types of crises have profoundly influenced election outcomes by shifting voter sentiment, often amplifying concerns or perceived weaknesses about leadership and economic stability.

Economic Impact on Elections

The longshoremen strike, halting operations across major East and Gulf Coast ports, echoes the 1980 election when Jimmy Carter faced a deteriorating economy marked by stagflation and the 1979 oil crisis. Just as Carter struggled with rising inflation and supply disruptions, President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris are at risk of facing voter backlash if inflation spikes again due to supply chain disruptions from the strike.

This is reminiscent of how George H.W. Bush was ousted in 1992 amid a recession. Although Bush had strong foreign policy credentials, voters were more concerned with the economy—famously summed up by Bill Clinton's campaign slogan, "It's the economy, stupid." If the Biden-Harris administration cannot contain economic impacts from the strike, it risks similar voter discontent.

The Geopolitical Impact of War

The looming possibility of war between Israel and Iran brings another layer of uncertainty, reminiscent of past conflicts shaping elections. The 2004 election saw George W. Bush secure re-election largely because of his strong response to the 9/11 attacks and the ensuing Iraq War. Voters, although divided over the war, chose to stick with an incumbent they perceived as strong on national security.

Conversely, Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968 did not seek re-election largely due to the Vietnam War’s deep unpopularity. Johnson's failure to manage the war undermined his standing, leading to a chaotic Democratic convention and the election of Richard Nixon. If the Israel-Iran conflict escalates and is perceived as mismanaged, it could similarly hurt Harris, especially if oil prices spike and global instability grows.

Voter Sentiment in 2024

In 2024, voter sentiment will likely pivot on a mix of economic and geopolitical concerns. The longshoremen strike is already threatening the economy, while war fears in the Middle East are adding to global instability. These issues compound an already difficult election landscape for the incumbent administration, echoing Carter's 1980 predicament.

However, Kamala Harris faces an even more challenging road. Unlike the Carter or Johnson presidencies, the Biden-Harris administration must navigate these crises while facing deep political polarization and shifting demographic landscapes. Should Harris fail to project both economic competence and national security strength, it may open the door for Trump to capitalize on fear and uncertainty, as Ronald Reagan did in 1980.

Conclusion

Historical precedent suggests that economic instability and the threat of war often lead to electoral upheavals, particularly for incumbents and incumbent-party candidates. Harris must balance the impacts of the longshoremen strike, the Israel-Iran conflict, and their resulting economic disruptions to stand a chance of winning. Drawing lessons from Carter and Bush Sr., Harris needs a clear and effective strategy to address voters' economic anxieties while projecting strength on the world stage at a time where she’s running behind Trump on these issues. The timing could not be worse for Harris and Democrats as they are no doubt aware of many preceding incumbents who were undone by crises they were unable to control.