All change as the superpowers vote? Maybe not
Three of the global superpowers vote for new presidents in 2012. Will they chose to elect the president they know rather than risk change? If so, the Putin, Sarkozy and Obama will be winners.
Russian, France and the United States all go to the polls and it is possible they will all prefer to vote for the president whose faults they know rather than the unknown quantities whose deficiencies they don’t.
Neither Putin, Sarkozy nor Obama are universally popular but they all have the advantage of being known to their electorate and in a time of uncertainty, the certainty of a tainted candidate can outweigh the risk of the new.
In the US, the Republican party is still fighting bitterly among itself to choose a candidate. The fight could continue into the summer. Yet by November the party must put on a united front against incumbent Barrack Obama, who has had four years on the world stage and in the
domestic arena and who goes into the election unopposed. That gives the current president a head start over a divided opposition, despite the mixed opinion of his track record so far.
In Russia, Vladimir Putin is aiming to return to the presidency he held from 2000 to 2008 when he had to step down after two consecutive terms. He handed over to Dmitry Medvedev and sat out four years as prime minister but is now ready to resume his Russian leadership. He will not be opposed by Medvedev, and while a vocal contingent of countrymen question the polls’
integrity, for most voters, the chance to vote for the man they know – only the second president of the post-Soviet nation and the man who modernised it - will give him a clear electoral advantage.
In France, Nicolas Sarkozy started 2012 behind Francois Hollande in the opinion polls but the president was late to declare his candidacy and has the chance to close the gap quickly. French elections usually have two rounds before a winner is declared. The public often votes with its heart
in the first round for the man they dream of ruling them - then votes with its head a week later for the man best able to do the job, When push comes to crunch, Sarkozy can well move ahead to spend a further five years in the Elysee.
It is possible or an incumbent to be considered so bad they are ousted for a newcomer but it helps if the upstart has had a long track record in opposition. To take UK examples, Thatcher had had four years as opposition leader when she beat Callaghan, Blair four years before he beat major and Cameron as long before ousting Brown. The candidates in this year’s superpower elections have served no high-profile apprenticeships to find their feet and make their faces well known.
If Putin, Sarkozy and Obama are returned to their presidencies, the world will have stability but the problems will still be there. If this trio had big ideas, it would already have implemented them.
Incumbents can pull the levers to boost their economies before polling day, giving them another electoral advantage. But if they lose, their countries face greater disruption as the winners undo those policies.
Business will almost certainly prefer the return of devils they know rather than face the upheaval and uncertainty caused by newcomers.
As for Ed Miliband, he is having the chance of nearly five years to make himself known to and loved by the UK electorate. But Cameron will have had twice as long as leader: that gives the Tory a considerable advantage when Britain votes in 2015.
