Australia speaks - it's Obama v McCain

In the Democrat primary this meant that voters were weighing up experience versus change, man versus woman, black versus white. Direct policies, such as the Iraq War, or climate change, were barely mentioned. 2.9 per cent mentioned Iraq, while a similar number mentioned either climate or warming. Experience was mentioned by 10 per cent and change by 9 per cent, showing where the real battle for hearts and minds is occurring, although both these concepts imply an underlying concern for issues like the Iraq War and climate change.

This quote from an older Australian male living in Sydney is a good example of the symbolism surrounding the Obama "nomination":

"I think Barack Obama represents the best hope for a world entering a dangerous state of confrontation between Islam and Christianity. Obama is a Christian but he had Muslim parents and grew up in the world's most populous Islamic nation, Indonesia …"

He's cosmopolitan, he offers a fresh framework for conceptualising global issues, and he is a defence against fundamentalist Christianity in the US.

And it's fundamentalist Christianity in the US which worries most respondents about the Republican nominees. While McCain won, it was as the "best of a bad bunch".

Assessments of Republican candidates were mostly defensive - the least, worst alternative - and very few concepts stood out. The most frequently mentioned at 6.2 per cent was "religious", followed by "war" with 5 per cent. The lack of concepts scoring over 10 per cent suggests that the Republican candidates have failed to grip the Australian imagination. The two concepts most frequently mentioned concepts are perceptions left-over from the Bush presidency that the US is full of warmongering Armageddon-bound religious hicks.

This means that "war" works generally in McCain's favour. He gets marks for being a "war hero", against torture, and while a proponent of the war in some respects a critic of the conduct of it. But it is safe to say that most of our respondents aren't in favour of the war, so this is a way of differentiating him from the other Republican candidates, not a reason to vote for him.

However, unlike the two Democrat contenders he manages to combine change and experience with respectability.

"John McCain is a very fine person, who opposes torture, and is not bound by party politics - he sticks to his own point of view. Also he is not overtly religious. The others are all members of whacko religions or unsuitable in some other way." Female, 55-64, Sydney.

While recent surveys have suggested that the USA is unpopular around the world, our survey showed a great deal of affection for, and reliance upon, the US, underscoring the popular support for Australia's bi-partisan position on the US alliance. When we asked respondents which candidate would be best for Australia and why, they chose Obama, with the most common reason being a concern that if the US could re-establish itself as a respected world power, then Australia was safer than now. Very little attention was paid to the candidate's economic positions, even though these are arguably more directly significant to Australian well-being, as the sub-prime crisis demonstrates.

McCain was also seen as someone who could re-establish respect for the US in the world, while support for Clinton was, as often as not, based on the fact that she had visited Australia while First Lady.

Today is Super Tuesday, the day when the largest group of delegates to the US primaries is up for grabs in ballots across the US. Except, that it won't be Tuesday in the US until tomorrow. So Australia gets ahead of the US once again. Will they follow our lead and endorse Obama and McCain? And if they do, will they also follow our lead in the election and go with the young professor with all the rhetoric rather than the old guy conviction politician?