In a Danish newspaper it was resently claimed, that if the American presidential election was held in Denmark, Barack Obama would most likely be voted the next president, and that – among other things – as a result of the Danish media´s favouring exposure of Obama.I generally see Obama portrayed as an innovative and visionary candidate, while McCain is poetrayed the opposite way as a conservative and rooted candidate.

In Denmark our political system is founded on several different political parties divided into two main wings. But parties belonging to the same wing can easily have different political point of views and characteristic issues. The wings in Danish politics are therefore not synonymous with one person in the same way, as it is the case with the American presidential election.

In The United States, an important part of the electioneering campaign seems to be digging up dirt and smudging the canidates´ moral characters. Of course I find it important, that the people know the personal values and integrity of their candidates, and thereby can sort out hypocrits and double standards. The candidate whose moral character can go through this unhurt, has passed the ultimate test.

But winning a person´s vote is often a strange complex. I have met Danish people, who based their choice of which political party to support on their supposition of, who might be most likely to win the election. As well as I have met people who based their choice on their perception of an engaging and strong leader. But what about the political point of views, that the canidates stand for? Do we tend to overlook them in favour of concentrating on evaluating the candidate´s moral character?