The latest data on US nonfarm unemployment is likely to be the subject of a bitter interpretation battle.
If it is true that the unemployment rate has risen by 0,1%, dangerously close to that "threshold of no return" (8%), beyond which no President has ever been re-elected, the data on new jobs does not leave escape: 171.000 new payrolls recorded in October, about fifty thousand more than expected, indicate a certain tendency of the labor market to recover confidence.
The increase in unemployment to 7,9% it was however expected by analysts, therefore compared to the technical forecasts the numbers released today represent a positive balance. In any case, in Washington, presidential advisers and sherpas have collected the new data with a certain caution, precisely because they know they cannot rely too much on it from a political point of view.
So how will the communication strategy of the two presidents move after today's publication? It's too early to tell, but looking at Romney's statements starting in September, it's almost certain that the Republican challenger will try to use the numbers as an instrument.
In particular, the increase in the unemployment rate, equal to 0,1%, is determined by the return to the workforce of a part of the "dishearten“, or that mass of unemployed people who, from a statistical point of view, were no longer counted in the employment statistics as they were “not interested” in looking for a job.
But in September, the drastic drop in unemployment to 7,8% (according to Romney due to the contraction of the workforce) had - perhaps recklessly - pushed Obama to make overly optimistic statements about the recovery. Statements made necessary above all by the imminence of the autumn elections.
Romney therefore has an easy shot up his sleeve: to denounce Obama's inadequacy in the economic field, in the light of the incorrect interpretation of the September data, demonstrated by the bulletin published today. Nonetheless, the President returned to the lead in average polls. It was from October 21 that "Mitt the moderate" appeared ahead of the tenant of the White House, maintaining an average margin of 0,6-0,9 points over his rival.
But Sandy has changed the cards in order, and the utterances of the mayor of New York Michael must have played a significant role Bloomberg (now independent, but with a Republican and Democratic past), but above all of the conservative Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, who both openly praised the President's promptness and leadership during stormy hours. Externalities not appreciated by the Republican establishment and welcomed with open arms by the democratic apparatus, still mindful of not exactly flattering comments received in the past both from Bloomberg, who described Obama as "the most arrogant man ever met", and from Christie himself .
The result? In the polling average released daily by Real Clear Politics, Obama appears today leading by 0,3 points (47,5 vs. 47,2). An advantage still completely insufficient to reassure the Democrats, but significant because it represents a rather unexpected trend reversal.
And from a political point of view, the "perfect storm" has happened in the right place and at the right time, since the states of the east coast (North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, and – in the interior – also Ohio), have about seventy constituencies at stake. Coincidentally, in the polls Obama lacks just 270 votes to win a second term (XNUMX are needed to enter the White House).
And right in Ohio, after the Sandy-emergency, the latest "blitz" is taking place which will lead to the polls next Tuesday. According to party strategists, Romney must win at least one state between Ohio, Nevada and Wisconsin. But the Republican Sherpas bet above all on the former, for political and numerical reasons: the latter matter more, given that the state brings more votes from electors (18), than Nevada and Wisconsin combined (16) . But the conservative candidate cannot help but try to strike a coup with that working class which certainly does not smile at the economic vulgate of the "Grand Old Party", since the beginning of the mandate against the Chrysler bailout and the consequent bailout of the automotive sector, with its indispensable induced activities, which employs one in eight people in Ohio, with nearly one million employees.
