When a hurricane hits the US in the middle of the election campaign, candidates are forced to show that they can be great leaders in times of crisis: Good management can have a great political reward, but minimizing the disaster can cost them dearly.
According to the criteria of
The United States faces this Wednesday the arrival of the powerful Hurricane Milton along the west coast of Florida, just two weeks after Hurricane Helene left 232 dead and a trail of devastation of 800 kilometers in several states, including Georgia and North Carolina .
Both the vice president, Democrat Kamala Harris, and her rival for the November 5 elections, former Republican president Donald Trump (2017-2021), are aware of the impact that natural disasters have had on elections for decades and the importance of define the narrative around them as soon as possible.
Duel of disaster strategies
Trump, an expert in managing media attention in his favor, was ahead of Harris and the president of the United States himself, Joe Biden, after Helene, being the first to visit an area affected by the disaster: the state of Georgia, key for the elections.
He immediately dominated the media with false claims, claiming that the federal government was not responding to the governors’ requests and alleging that the Federal Emergency Agency (FEMA) was not assisting the victims because it had spent its funds helping migrants. .
For her part, Harris has opted for an institutional approach, calling for putting politics aside to focus on those affected. However, he has taken a more visible role than on other occasions, visiting devastated areas in Georgia and calling governors directly.
In addition, Biden announced this Tuesday the suspension of his trip to Germany and Angola due to Hurricane Milton. It wouldn’t have been a good look for him or Harris to be overseas while the hurricane hit Florida.
The reality is that, although hurricanes are beyond human control, voters often scrutinize how politicians offer help and may even change their vote.according to John Gasper, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University, who has studied these events.
Lessons from the past
The 1992 campaign exemplifies this phenomenon. Hurricane Andrew hit Florida in the final stretch of the presidential elections and the chaotic response of the then president, George HW Bush, could have cost him re-election. In fact, his advantage in Florida went from 22 points in the 1988 elections to just two in the elections after the disaster.
His son, George W. Bush, learned his lesson. So when Florida faced four consecutive hurricanes during his re-election campaign in August 2004, he immediately toured the hardest-hit neighborhoods to show that the situation was under control.
The effective federal response allowed him to win Florida by 381,000 votes, a notable advance compared to the tight 537 votes in 2000.. However, this political capital vanished the following year with the disastrous handling of Hurricane Katrina, a blow from which it never recovered.
In 2012, another hurricane, Sandy, also rocked the campaign. Democrat Barack Obama was running for re-election when the storm hit New Jersey, a state then governed by Chris Christie, a staunch defender of the policies of Republican candidate Mitt Romney.
After the disaster, Obama traveled to New Jersey, where Christie greeted him at the airport with a handshake, while the president placed his hand on her shoulder.
That gesture, interpreted as a “hug,” provoked criticism of Christie within his party, but benefited Obama, projecting him as a leader capable of transcending partisan divisions. The efficient federal response also consolidated his image as a strong politician capable of responding to moments of crisis.
The story is yet to be written on how hurricanes will affect this presidential campaign. For now, Florida awaits the arrival of Milton, which has already forced thousands of people to evacuate.
#Hurricane #Milton #emergency #influence #presidential #elections