With the financial crisis and resultant bailout, it became inevitable that Obama had won- a fortuitous coincidence for him, since the awareness of serious crisis struck (slightly less then)a month and a half prior to the election, causing McCain to suspend his campaign on September 24 and sealing his fate.
So how would the election have turned out if the crisis had held off for just two months*? Presumably Obama would still win, though with a smaller mandate and congressional gains- Franken and Begich, at minimum, would have lost(and possibly Merkley and Landrieu as well). Or could McCain have even pulled off a victory?
Of course, with the crisis striking subsequent to the election and with Obama set to take the presidency, the Republican's would probably be more reluctant to compromise their principles and bailout the banks- fear of inaction's consequences on the imminent election was probably their primary motive, and they will hardly be inclined to lighten Obama's economic burden.
And of course with smaller Democratic representation in the senate, Obama's legislative agenda will be seriously curtailed- we can assume a smaller stimulus and no healthcare reform. On the other hand a more moderate agenda might lessen the backlash Obama.
The longshot alternative of McCain narrowly winning and being dumped with the crisis is probably the most interesting scenario. How would he handle the troubles? In retrospect this is probably the best thing that could have happened for the Dems- not only McCain getting the lionshare of shit for economic problems, but passing energy and immigration legislation
that Obama failed to pass.
*How is the crisis delayed? Economics is unpredictable, that's my explanation. If anybody with a deeper understanding of the subject then me want's to pipe up, you're most welcome
