The View From Here . . .

By Bob Morgan, Jr.

This is written on the morning after one of the more bizarre days in recent American economic history. The House of Representatives, on a 228-205 vote, rejected the proposed $700 billion emergency rescue (commonly known as a "bailout") package to shore up the financial markets. About 60 percent of House Democrats and a third of House Republicans voted for the measure, but that was not enough. Tellingly, given the measure's questionable popularity, most House incumbents in both parties facing a tough reelection fight voted against the measure.

The stock market reacted very negatively to the House vote, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average tanking on Monday by 777 points, or about 7 percent of its value. (It is rebounding some on Tuesday morning.) Although there were numerous partisan recriminations after the vote, House leaders promised to try again with a new measure.

Of course, the tumult on Wall Street and in the economy generally occurs just five weeks before the presidential election and its impact seems unmistakable on the race, at least so far - it favors Senator Barack Obama. In the course of about 10 days, Mr. Obama has gone from a tie or slight deficit in most polls to a lead of about 5 points.

And I think last Friday's debate had little to do with the improvement in Mr. Obama's fortunes. If I had to pick a winner in the overall debate, or at least its main foreign policy component, it would have been Senator John McCain. (I thought Senator Obama may have done better on the economic crisis and budget discussion early in the debate.) Mr. McCain had a clear command of foreign policy issues and much more in-depth knowledge, although Mr. Obama was at least a plausible commander-in-chief. A poll by the Rasmussen organization the day after the poll had it 36 percent to 33 percent for Mr. Obama, with 31 percent not sure, basically a draw.

The fundamental problem for Mr. McCain is that, as the nominee of the party in power, he is almost inevitably going to take more blame for the crisis than the candidate of the party not holding the White House.

Mr. McCain and his supporters offer a number of reasons why the Arizona senator should not take this political hit. They point to his long history as a maverick who has repeatedly opposed his party and his president. They characterize him as a strong and experienced leader, who, in contrast to Mr. Obama, is better suited to be in charge in time of crisis.

This line of defense has been reasonably effective, since Mr. McCain remains well within striking distance in the national race and remains tied or ahead in the polls in key electoral states like Ohio or Florida. Once the immediate shock of the Wall Street meltdown wears off, it is entirely possible that voters will decide that Mr. McCain is the type of leader they want in the White House. Still, however, Barack Obama's message of "change" is much more likely to be well received in tumultuous times than in calm ones.