How Obama Won the Presidency | Elliott Wave International

Home > Cultural Trends
How Obama Won the Presidency
A look at social mood’s role in Barack Obama’s presidential victory – and how it will continue to influence his presidency.

By Gary Grimes
Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:15:00 ET

Get investable insights sent to your inbox at least once a week – for free. Challenge the way you think about investing with The EWI Independent.

Privacy

Please note that this article does not take a political stance, rather its intention is to examine Barack Obama’s path to the White House through an objective socionomic lens.

One thing that was especially fascinating about Barack Obama’s historic rise to the presidency was his massive, even international, appeal. Although Republicans reserved hopes for retaining the executive branch, it seemed apparent to everyone else that Obama was a lock. Talent, intellect, determination and fund-raising aside, you must dig beneath the crust of stump-speech rhetoric to uncover the larger force driving Barack Obama to victory.

To examine Obama’s widespread support from a socionomic perspective, let’s take his two major platforms for example: unity and change – both broadly admirable in a time of economic strife. Each of these two powerful promises tugged at the heartstrings of Americans – now, perhaps, more than ever.

In addition to his more traditional Democratic viewpoints, including income redistribution and universal health care, Obama campaigned as a tax cutter and a politician who would be tough on wasteful government spending – neither of which are historically popular stances for Democrats. But perhaps just as important was the absence of some of the traditionally popular Democratic platforms: namely, separation of church and state and abortion (more on abortion later). Obama’s campaign spent very little time on these issues. Perhaps, as some media pundits have pointed out, it was a conscious effort to move toward the middle to unify undecided voters. Perhaps it was unnecessary as the failing economy bolstered the already fervent cry for change. Perhaps Obama was just a different kind of candidate.

Our research of presidential races viewed through the scope of socionomics as well as our study that reveals Fibonacci Regulates the Occurrence of Landmark Political-Equality Events have proven to be quite accurate at predicting the results of political races, especially those with incumbents involved. Simply put, the negative social mood that drives a bear market also brings the social desire for political change. Races without incumbents are harder to predict, because each candidate is technically a “change” from the lame duck. Therefore, it’s not always clear who the real change candidate is. In the 2008 election, both Obama and McCain claimed to be change candidates. But the perceived landslide Nov. 4 tally reveals that the public regarded only one as the man of “change.”

That brings us back to Obama’s political platforms: change and unity.

Unity

In times of uncertainty and fear, people count on friends, family and neighbors to help them through. A sense of “we’re all in this together” is never stronger. During these times, people search for meaning, a higher authority. People seek the safety and shared resources of organized groups. An increase in religious and spiritual activity is one of the best examples of a move toward unity.

Steven Waldman, president and editor-in-chief of Beliefnet.com, a website promoting “inspiration,” “spirituality” and “faith,” explains in a November op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal, “How Obama Lured Millions of Religious Voters.”

“Sen. Obama helped ease [spiritual voters] to his side through a canny set of tactics and strategies unlike anything we’ve seen from Democrats in years,” Waldman wrote. “He emphasized his personal faith. No Democrat since Jimmy Carter has spoken as openly, and as often, about his personal faith.”

The wisdom of this decision, we believe, is of consequence as it relates to his campaign and the prevailing social mood.

In his groundbreaking book Pioneering Studies of Socionomics, part of his two-book socionomic set, Robert Prechter explains why:

“There is also some evidence that religion becomes more important to people as bear markets progress and less important as bull markets progress. … In extended periods of social depression, such as the Dark Ages, religion is generally a central aspect of people’s lives. In long periods of social ebullience, religion plays a secondary role.”

Whether Obama knew it or not, he was playing right into the social mood of many Americans by standing up for his religion. In America, where according to some statistics only 15% of adults have no religious affiliation, the belief in a higher power is perhaps the greatest unifier.

Another example is Obama’s campaign stance on abortion – an especially polarizing topic between the conservative right and liberal left, even more polarizing among groups of varying spirituality. While abortion was not a hot topic throughout the 2008 campaign, when it was discussed, Obama again was able to appeal to the masses. With his unquestionably pro-choice record, he was careful to promote an “‘abortion reduction’ agenda – helping reduce unintended pregnancies through education and birth control,” Waldman writes. Again, this helped unite moderate and right-leaning voters disenfranchised with the Grand Old Party (more specifically, its leader of the past eight years) to Obama’s cause.

Change

As social mood shifted decisively more negative in late 2007 and throughout 2008 – in sync with the topping of global stocks and commodities – public outrage started to sizzle. Real estate had topped two years earlier and now stocks were heading lower, too. The public was pointing fingers, and the person who got the finger more than anyone else – literally in some cases – was President Bush. It was obvious that the presidential candidates would have to distance themselves from the new public enemy.

Perhaps Senator Obama’s wisest move was to harness the power of negative social mood and craft a slogan that not only distanced himself from Bush but also promised a better future while uniting voters to a singular cause: “Change We Can Believe In.” It’s a simple yet powerful – and most importantly – timely message.

When mass social mood shifts to the negative, “change” is the ultimate goal for voters. The candidate that represents “change” the best wins, period.

After the flames of economic crisis crossed from Wall Street to Main and foreclosures fed a wildfire of American recession, months of job losses ignited a full-blown public outrage. It was the spark Obama needed for his fiery campaign speeches. To say the least, the flames spread across America.

For many households today, change is not only a desire; it’s critical to put food on tables, roofs over heads. Families are making household changes to survive; they look for the same from a leader. So when voters stepped into the voting booth to punch their ballots, they chose the man they think will bring the most change and the most unity.

The Power of Social Mood

In his November 2008 Elliott Wave Theorist, Robert Prechter presented a powerful lesson in socionomics. It displayed just how powerful social mood is in deciding elections across the globe. You can take this short fill-in-the-blank social mood lesson here.

What If

Finally, it’s also of interest to consider a couple of “what ifs” that pertain to social mood and the 2008 presidential election. What if John McCain had voted against the $700 billion bailout? Could he have tapped into the mass social mood at the time? And what if the October meltdown happened just a few months earlier, when Constitutionalist Ron Paul, a staunch bailout opponent, was still in the presidential race? Could he have beaten out McCain for the Republican nomination?

As we’ve pointed out before, social mood can spin the needle on political approval ratings from high to low, and fast – just ask President Bush. But our forecast suggests the next four years won’t be any easier for President Obama.

We’ll continue to watch the stock market, the best barometer of social mood, to give you readings on what may shape American politics in the future and whether Obama can do what Jimmy Carter couldn’t in a bear market: get re-elected.

For the latest developments and fascinating socionomic research, visit our friends at www.socionomics.net and pick up Robert Prechter’s groundbreaking two-book set, Socionomics: The Science of History and Social Prediction.

Tags: Barack Obama

Put Yourself a Step Ahead of "Unpredicted" Social Change

The Socionomist puts you ahead of tomorrow's news, zeroing in on the important social trends that will shape your world in the foreseeable future.

Each issue warns you about dangerous pitfalls and alerts you to exciting opportunities emerging from trends in society.

Preview the Latest Socionomist now>>

Get the Latest Free Socionomics Reports

Our friends at the Socionomics Institute regularly release new free socionomics reports, multimedia and more. You can sign up to be instantly notified when they release a resource.

Sign Up for Free>>

Cultural Trends