The Michael effect.

[Vern]

How will Michael effect the mid-terms in FL, GA, SC and NC?

[Person Man]

Suppress turnout where it makes the biggest impact?

[KingSweden]

Regulars on this forum and thousands of others are in the path of this beast. Have some respect FFS and don’t broach this until the storm is over

[Vern]

Regulars on this forum and thousands of others are in the path of this beast. Have some respect FFS and don’t broach this until the storm is over

Give me a break. Asking how a storm will effect the midterms is not showing disrespect. And if you didn't know, I went through Flo and now I will have to deal with about 8 inch of rain from Michael. This is a political forum and this question is about the effect of an event.

[KingSweden]

Regulars on this forum and thousands of others are in the path of this beast. Have some respect FFS and don’t broach this until the storm is over

Give me a break. Asking how a storm will effect the midterms is not showing disrespect. And if you didn't know, I went through Flo and now I will have to deal with about 8 inch of rain from Michael. This is a political forum and this question is about the effect of an event.

At least save it for tomorrow when the worst looks like it’ll be over.

[Vern]

Regulars on this forum and thousands of others are in the path of this beast. Have some respect FFS and don’t broach this until the storm is over

Give me a break. Asking how a storm will effect the midterms is not showing disrespect. And if you didn't know, I went through Flo and now I will have to deal with about 8 inch of rain from Michael. This is a political forum and this question is about the effect of an event.

At least save it for tomorrow when the worst looks like it’ll be over.

Thats fair enough.

[Vega]

Scott got a fairly considerable Hurricane Irma, so I imagine if he handles this one well it could only benefit him.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

It will probably help Scott a bit, so Nelson should counterpunch with an ad like this.

Nelson should do this as a 15 second ad.

Hola soy Skippy Scott y me encanta visitar a mis amigos en Carolina, manténgase a salvo a todo el mundo y hasta pronto!

[NewYorkExpress]

It helps Scott, but given Gillum is the mayor of Tallahasse, it probably helps him more than it helps DeSantis.

[ctherainbow]

I was gonna ask this.  I imagine if Scott handles this well, it could help him, plus poor voters in the panhandle+rural Georgia might not have voting foremost on their minds if they’re trying to recover from serious storm damage?

[Progressive]

First of all, for all those who worry about this being "disrespectful," my family, friends, life, and community were absolutely wrecked by Sandy and I still talked politics in the 2012 election.

Second, I could weirdly see this help Gillum and Scott in their respective races.

[Person Man]

I was gonna ask this.  I imagine if Scott handles this well, it could help him, plus poor voters in the panhandle+rural Georgia might not have voting foremost on their minds if they’re trying to recover from serious storm damage?

Heavily R area. I think for Scott it's a wash.

[Tintrlvr]

I've said this elsewhere but I'll say it here, too. The areas affected are very small in relative population to the rest of Florida, and the coastal regions that are hardest hit are also already very Republican. Moreover, there is little reason to think anyone outside of the immediate areas of highest impact will still be thinking about this storm a month from now, on Election Day. Any impacts are hard to ascertain (maybe a few people won't vote because their homes were destroyed and they are relocated elsewhere; maybe a few people heavily affected will decide climate change is a major issue and vote for Democrats; maybe a few people will decide Scott or Gillum did a good or poor job in his management and vote for or against him) but either way can't make a difference of more than a few hundred to a few thousand votes given how few overall people are heavily impacted, and it's hard to figure out who it would favor. So the overall effects will be minimal if any at all, and certainly not enough to be detectable.

[2016]

I've said this elsewhere but I'll say it here, too. The areas affected are very small in relative population to the rest of Florida, and the coastal regions that are hardest hit are also already very Republican. Moreover, there is little reason to think anyone outside of the immediate areas of highest impact will still be thinking about this storm a month from now, on Election Day. Any impacts are hard to ascertain (maybe a few people won't vote because their homes were destroyed and they are relocated elsewhere; maybe a few people heavily affected will decide climate change is a major issue and vote for Democrats; maybe a few people will decide Scott or Gillum did a good or poor job in his management and vote for or against him) but either way can't make a difference of more than a few hundred to a few thousand votes given how few overall people are heavily impacted, and it's hard to figure out who it would favor. So the overall effects will be minimal if any at all, and certainly not enough to be detectable.

I disagree. It's more Perception.

[DataGuy]

As long as a leader responds in a reasonably competent way, natural disasters predictably boost their poll numbers. Michael might be a smaller-scale repeat of Hurricane Sandy's impact on the 2012 election. An "October surprise," if you will.

[Florida Man for Crime]

As long as a leader responds in a reasonably competent way, natural disasters predictably boost their poll numbers. Michael might be a smaller-scale repeat of Hurricane Sandy's impact on the 2012 election. An "October surprise," if you will.

The thing to keep in mind is that in the case of Sandy (and other historical examples of a major hurricane shortly before an election), turnout has been lower in the areas hardest and most immediately effected, especially if there was large scale damage. In this case, there does seem to be large scale damage, and if that reduces turnout it should hurt Republicans in this case. Regarding the example of Sandy, the reason why Obama won Staten Island in 2012 is because turnout on the southern part of Staten Island was low due to the Hurricane.

Anyway, so it is possible that one candidate or another might get a temporary bump in the polls for their response to the hurricane in the various races, but we also need to take into account the direct impact on turnout.

[Tintrlvr]

I've said this elsewhere but I'll say it here, too. The areas affected are very small in relative population to the rest of Florida, and the coastal regions that are hardest hit are also already very Republican. Moreover, there is little reason to think anyone outside of the immediate areas of highest impact will still be thinking about this storm a month from now, on Election Day. Any impacts are hard to ascertain (maybe a few people won't vote because their homes were destroyed and they are relocated elsewhere; maybe a few people heavily affected will decide climate change is a major issue and vote for Democrats; maybe a few people will decide Scott or Gillum did a good or poor job in his management and vote for or against him) but either way can't make a difference of more than a few hundred to a few thousand votes given how few overall people are heavily impacted, and it's hard to figure out who it would favor. So the overall effects will be minimal if any at all, and certainly not enough to be detectable.

I disagree. It's more Perception.

Perception only matters in very, very immediate terms. For example, Hurricane Sandy struck less than a week before Election Day in 2012 and affected a lot more people (by an order of magnitude at least) with severe effects than Michael will, and, as a result, generated a great deal of media attention that was sustained even through to Election Day, yet it had only minimal if any political impact outside of the areas that were directly and severely impacted (though it certainly did boost Obama's fortunes in areas of severe impact like NYC and the Jersey Shore). Michael's impacts simply aren't widespread enough to generate media attention for more than a day or two after landfall, which is far less than what would be needed to cause a boost in anyone's fortunes for perceptions of competence outside of the immediate zone of impact, and, even in the circumstance where Michael impacted a lot more people severely, any boost outside of the impact area would probably fade in a couple of weeks at most, being very generous.