Mother Nature timed one of her catastrophic onslaughts perfectly during the build up towards the election of the new leader of the world’s largest economy. It almost seemed as though hurricane Sandy intended to steal the US election campaign’s “thunder” while at the same time remained the US (and the rest of the world) who ultimately rules the earth. Immediately after Sandy struck and clean-up operations began, only a few days prior to the Election Day, some mentioned whether super-storm Sandy would influence the outcome of the election surfaced.
Articles about weather events changing the course of history came to light1 and there are many theories concerning voting psychology as the US election campaigns reached their critical stages2. This leads to the concept of how the daily weather conditions influence human judgment and decision making.
Apart from the simple daily choices the weather imposes upon society as a result of how the current weather will affect one in their daily routine, such as taking a rain jacket to work because of a possibility it will rain, a deeper connection also exists in which more intricate and important decisions, even as far as influencing one’s intention to commit violent crime3 include what psychologists try to decipher.
Together with the theories surrounding the psychology of voting and why or how one makes their ultimate decision, hurricane Sandy could well then have had a strong link with the latest outcome of the US election. This association will, however, vary among each individual on a more personal capacity.
The more obvious examples of this would firstly place the spotlight on the president at the time Barack Obama and his ability to have dealt with the crisis. The votes of the population or communities that were touched by and experienced well organized relief efforts may have been enough to putting a cross next to Obama on the voting ballot while on the other hand a situation like this often presents a large amount of people that feel otherwise.
Secondly, it is impossible for climate change to go unmentioned in times like this4. Although it is generally known among climate scientists that it is difficult to initially attribute a single extreme weather event to climate change, this concept is often adopted by the media and the public. As a result, Sandy could well have influenced the votes of the population that were severely affected by the storm in that final week leading up to the election based on the two parties stance on climate change5.
But, could this single incident have been enough to sway ones vote after having 4 years to base a more profound decision on? This most likely would have applied only to that percentage of the population known as swing voters6 who have the intent on voting and remained undecided up until the Election Day. Having said this, it is believed that swing voters make up on average 15% of the population, which ultimately tips the scale in favour of the final candidate in close election outcomes7 such as the one we have recently witnessed in the US.
The timing of Super-storm Sandy could have been the crucial factor ultimately regarding Sandy as one of those extreme weather phenomenon that changed the course of history as the world’s largest economy progresses into a new term of leadership.
References:
1. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/30/winds_of_change
2. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-money-and-your-heart/201210/which-emotions-have-the-most-impact-voters
3. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199804/hot-and-bothered
4. http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/science/environment/sandy-climate-change-or-crap-shoot-1.1417186#.UJtQKIZJ2Sq
5. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/us/politics/climate-change-nearly-absent-in-the-campaign.html?pagewanted=all
6. http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/video/how-voters-really-decide.html#.UJtT9IZJ2So
7. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/06/voter-psychology