This is a good article by Joseph Nye discussing something we probably know but don’t want to admit:
Bin Laden’s Potential “October Surprise”
By my count, here’s how the debate went:
1) On the basis of trade issues, Obama locked up Iowa and made big gains in Ohio, Missouri and Florida. The first rule of domestic trade politics is you don’t speak out against the interests of a concentrated faction in a key electoral constituency. That is precisely what McCain did by speaking out against ethanol subsidies (very popular in Iowa, probably popular in Missouri and Ohio) and sugar subsidies (an important component of the Florida economy).
2) McCain locked up the key Joe Wurzelbacher vote. If he loses the election, at least McCain will have gained a friend.
The NAFTA stuff was FINALLY brought up by McCain, about 2 years too late to have any solid impact, and Obama did enough to toe the line that he would be pro-free trade without casting aside unions. I do think he is right to re-evaluate our enforcement of trade agreements, although he’s opening up a pandora’s box where other countries can start looking at our unfair trade practices. Target #1 will be Obama’s most aggregious piece of pork, the farm bill. I still think McCain has been publicly right on trade: for example ethanol and sugar subsidies are highly distorting in the world economy and I would speculate that ending them could have the greatest immediate impact on increased energy efficiency and independence from Middle-East oil out of any action taken by the government (for reasons why, read up on Brazilian sugar ethanol). However, I also think Obama is bluffing on trade. The president plays a different role in trade politics than that of a Senator: the president is supposed to understand and promote trade due to the good it will do for the county as a whole, while a Senator is supposed to represent it’s constituents’ interests in any trade agreement. It may be a somewhat baseless assertion, but given Obama’s uncanny ability to understand his role, I am confident he will adjust his conduct smoothly and accordingly if he reaches the White House.
Still, I really don’t like the fact that Obama continually refuses to get behind sensible free trade agreements like with Colombia. His reference to the targeting of Colombian trade unionists is a completely baseless accusation: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/29/opinion/29schumacher.html?_r=1&oref=slogin.
So I’m incredibly disappointed in Obama for rehashing this favorite excuse of protectionists. Plus his support of the Farm Bill, one of the most horrendous pieces of legislation in recent years, and his stance on Midwestern ethanol (a sinkhole for federal funding if there ever was one) are appalling. He should know better.
If McCain wants my sympathy (if not my vote, which he won’t have courtesy of Sarah Palin), he should hammer Obama on these points: [1] Free trade, [2] Farm Bill, and [3] Energy policy.