SPQR I too like Obarma, will be sad if he fails to win.
Of more importance, to me at least, Republicans look dangerous to me, in the extreme.
And just what America would get, if electing them, looks grim.
I have to question one poster, he almost infers Labor is unelectable, ok but too, in post after post defames us who vote for them.
I remain forever, unhappy with the power brokers actions, and Gillards betrayal, of both Rudd and my party.
But hope against current odds she too will go as Rudd did, soon.
Still this country is not well served by the thought Labor voters are in any way inferior.

Belly,
When did I infer you are inferior ? I say you are inconsiderate to anyone who cares, you only care about Labor, you belittle every Coalition member but I never called you inferior.
And yes, I think President Obama is indeed a likeable character & rally should get another term.
Do not liken the Democrats & democratic system of the USA to those in Australia. Totally & utterly different in philosophy & competence.

Scribbler,
Time will tell if Obama is advantaged by the disaster. It could well be, however I notice that now some victims are now starting to complain, saying the richer areas are getting favourable help while the poorer suburbs are not getting any. Peoples perceptions can change quickly.

The thing that amazes me about US elections is why some people here and our media devote so much time to it. Over the years there has been a number of Presidents both Democrat and Republican and I have not noticed any difference in our relationship with the US. So in reality it has no effect on us one way or another. Maybe for US citizens there is a difference, but not for Australia or Australians.

Another thing that is of concern is that people here that want a Republic hold the US up as an example. They want us to have the same costly election circus that the yanks have and I have to ask why?

The circus in the US goes on for months and frankly I can see no good reason why such an election system should be inflicted on us. This circus happens every few years.

If anyone can point out any practical advantage I would like to hear it.

Scribbler,

I was talking of more recent times, where the proportion of incumbents losing is lower than winning. The primaries held by the republicans did a lot of damage and cost a lot of money that the democrats were not saddled with.

I understand your logic, but from the polls I am reading, I don't see much change since Sandy.

PS, you can also include Clinton as a 2nd term loser. He got almost nothing done, and his loosening of banking regulations which played a huge part in the GFC.

Sad thing about the effect of Sandy on democracy is that the American electors could be affected by a weather event. Seems democracy is dependent on whether it is a nice day or not.

It's also sad that some American electors may believe that Sandy is proof of the existence of god and others proof of the existence of the devil, depending upon whether their preferred candidate wins or loses, when it actually proves that warming oceans may be effecting weather patterns, something that the entire nation and their politicians seems to be in complete denial about.

Doesn't seem to matter who wins in that election, because nothing will change anyway. The only thing that will change is the pace of the status quo.