Prior to the recent US presidential election, I doubt you would have been able to find many people that could have predicted a correlation between a tropical storm and electoral success.  In hindsight, we now know that Hurricane Sandy, the media coverage it generated, and more specifically the light this story cast both candidates in, arguably ended up playing a pivotal role in the outcome of the election.  This unexpected twist on the campaign trail represents a prime example of one of the unpredictable events that often can mean the difference between a candidate’s ultimate success or failure – the political game changer.

Political campaigns at the highest level involve very sophisticated plans and cost a tremendous amount of money, a sizeable portion of which is dedicated to paying high priced consultants and candidate handlers. In the case of America’s recent election, both front running parties employed thousands of people to map out and execute their opposing campaign strategies. Yet, despite the most well thought out plans, campaigns can be thrown off track and subsequently won or lost when an unexpected event occurs that changes the public’s perception about a candidate’s position or character.

In the days leading up to Hurricane Sandy’s landfall, many pundits were suggesting that momentum was on Mitt Romney’s side. He had scored well in the debates, and his campaign was successfully touting his business acumen as a much needed characteristic to repair the country’s dire financial condition. Furthermore, the Republican campaign was increasingly portraying President Obama as an ineffective leader who had been unsuccessful in getting much done since first being elected.

When the first storm clouds began to batter New York City, both campaigns agreed to suspend their activities for a period of time while rescue crews dealt with the disaster. President Obama’s advisors, having learnt from the mistakes made by George W. Bush in 2005 when dealing with Hurricane Katrina, seized the opportunity for him to demonstrate leadership and compassion for the hurricane victims of New York. The President responded quickly and appropriately, committing assistance and offering assurance that the federal government was there to help. So successful was Obama’s timing and sincerity that even staunch Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey was heaping praise on his actions.  While the President was benefitting from positive widespread media coverage, his opponent, with only a week before Election Day, had to remain silent on the sidelines until the campaign formally resumed. Though no one can know for sure how much President Obama’s response to Hurricane Sandy impacted his eventual win, whether intentional or not, he undoubtedly made the most of an opportunity to appear presidential; eliminating much of the momentum that had been generated by his rival’s campaign.

Campaigns try to orchestrate game changers all the time, in efforts to throw off their opponents and make their candidates look more favourable in the public eye. Increasingly, most of these tactics are viewed negatively by the electorate who are tiring of what they view as “dirty politics”.
While media types and political observers yearn to witness a game changer during political debates, nowadays they rarely happen. Enormous amounts of time go into debate preparations with campaign teams preparing their candidates for the political equivalent of a championship heavyweight boxing match. While the temptation always exists to see their candidate win by knock out, smart campaign teams prefer to manage the contest in the hopes that their opponent says or does something that garners negative media attention.  Mitt Romney’s much maligned presidential debate references to ‘Big Bird’, and ‘binders full of women’ were great examples of such mistakes.

Game changers don’t always have to happen during campaigns. Here in Ontario, we witnessed a significant swing in public support over the past 3 months, leading to the Premier’s resignation and subsequent Liberal leadership race.

Despite winning an unexpected third term last fall, albeit a minority, Premier McGuinty was dogged by a series of scandals that accumulated to the point where public opinion turned against him very quickly. While the opposition parties hammered the government on a series of issues including E-health and Ornge, these controversies on their own failed to dent Liberal support, or increase public support to either opposition party. However, like the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back, a private member’s bill calling a motion of contempt against Energy Minister Chris Bentley around the cancelled Mississauga gas plant lead to the Premier’s prorogation of parliament and subsequent resignation. The game changer in this case was political in nature, but it still lead to unexpected and significant consequences. Now with a leadership race underway to elect the next Premier, it will be interesting to see what if any game changers occur to boost an underdog or threaten a front runner before the Liberal convention ballots are counted.

The moral of this story is to beware the unexpected. Regardless of how certain electoral victory may be, things can and do happen that change the route to the finish line. While stakeholder groups can’t initiate massive hurricanes they can strategically foster political storms of debate on issues that are important to them. Those who have run campaigns understand that one can’t rest or take anything for granted until the polling stations close on Election Day. While it’s doubtful a tropical storm will impact the results of the next election here in Ontario, other unforeseen game changers undoubtedly will.