Obama + Environment = White House

With gas prices seeing their first break in months, it would appear on the surface to be a positive thing for McCain.  If this were November, it would be.  The US Presidential Election is still months away, and gas prices will rise again.  Count on it.

As voters make life-changing decisions based upon gas prices, it will become more of a focus point in the weeks leading up to the election.  Moreover, as attention is brought to environmental concerns, more people are increasing their awareness and starting to consider climate change as something important.

It isn't just the environmentalists anymore.  The environment has gone mainstream. Al Gore has taken his fight to the bloggers and beyond.  Even traditionally political sites like the Huffington Post have gone eco with their recently launched Green News and Opinion section

These events by themselves will not sway the vote.  In the end, it will come down to a stalemate between national security and the economy.  As both candidates split dramatically in those areas, environmental and gas price issues may end up being the tie-breaker for many voters.

This doesn't compute to many.  Traditionally, American voters are concerned about two things: "keep me safe" and "keep me financially secure".  Why then would the environment play a role in the election?

The answer, if Barack Obama and his campaign staff choose to utilize it, is that the issues of fuel prices and climate change are intertwined and together fall under the category of "keep me safe and financially secure."

It isn't an easy card to play, but you will most likely be seeing the combined message in the weeks to come.  Basically, by pushing for an intricate yet easily understood plan that could kill both birds with a single stone, Obama can position himself as the man with the plan that can save the dollars now and the world in the long run.

By themselves, neither of these issues can overcome the national security and economy issues.  Even together, they are still secondary.  Still, combining the issues and showing how we can save the planet and save a few bucks at the tank can be the nudge that pushes swing voters off the fence and into one camp or the other.

In this article, ohmygov.com states very clearly an idealistic view of the environment and its effects on the election:

• "Green" is hip in 2008, even in the presidential campaign.  No longer
  do candidates and their supporters debate whether or not global warming
  is a real problem, but rather what needs to be done to reverse it.  A
  candidate who prioritizes the environment is not slandered as a
  "tree-hugger" or "crunchy," instead the candidates clamor to be
  perceived as the greenest of the green.

While this envisions the green movement more powerfully in the minds of voters than what is actually the case, it still makes excellent points about how the next president may be the eco-president.

A recent Rasmussen poll shows that in New Hampshire, 52% of voters say that reducing the price of gas and oil is more important than protecting the environment. Thirty-seven percent (37%) disagree and say protecting the environment is more important.

In these numbers lies the key to the Presidency.  If Obama (likely) or McCain (unlikely) can present their plans in a way that can both reduce gas and oil prices while also helping the environment, they will swing their way into the White House.

* * *

Read more from this Environmental Politics Blog.