AUSTRALIANS overwhelmingly want Barack Obama to win next week's US election.

A Lowy Institute poll this year found a whopping 80 per cent of Australians want to see Obama returned to the White House for a second four year term.

A paltry nine per cent would prefer to see Republican challenger Mitt Romney take power.

What accounts for this chasm? Particularly given that the race is so tight in the US?

Well, the poll was taken in April, before we really got to know Romney - indeed, before we were even sure he'd win the Republican nomination.

But a BBC World Service poll taken just a few weeks ago suggests those numbers have barely shifted in the last six months. Australian support for Obama still hovers around 70 per cent; Romney still can't even crack double digits.

For many Australians, Romney is just too conservative, particularly the version of Romney we saw during the Republican primaries, when he was chasing the Tea Party vote.

There's also the fact that for many of us, the word Republican still reminds us too much of George W Bush's shambolic presidency, which dragged us into two costly, long-running wars. And sullied too by the Tea Party's "cranks and crazies", as Treasurer Wayne Swan so memorably dubbed them.

Griffith University political scientist Wes Widmaier offers another compelling explanation.

"Obama is just so much cooler," the senior research fellow laughs. "He's a much more attractive figure."

Indeed, whatever you think of Obama's first-term record, it's hard to deny he's still got serious star power. Romney just can't compete on cool.

Whatever the case though, does it really matter for Australia who wins on November 6?

Would Australia's relationship with the US be any stronger or weaker under a Romney administration?

Lowy's executive director, Michael Fullilove, reckons the alliance will be on strong ground whatever happens. Indeed, he believes that when it comes to foreign policy, there's really very little difference between the two men.

"President Obama is not as left-wing and dovish as many believe and Governor Romney is not as right-wing and hawkish as he would have us believe," Fullilove wrote in an analysis paper last month.

Similarly, he doesn't think it matters whether Julia Gillard stays in The Lodge, or Tony Abbott moves in next year. Both would work well with an Obama or Romney administration.

"Whichever combination of the Rubik's Cube of political leadership clicks into place, the alliance will be secure," Fullilove says. The alliance is deep and "grinds on" regardless of the personalities of the leaders at the summit.

True, nothing that happens in the US or Australian elections is likely to dramatically alter the relationship.

But the Australian National University's Andrew Carr says personalities can affect the energy, enthusiasm and emphasis of the relationship.

"It does make a little bit of difference," he says.

"Certainly the relationship is stronger in the periods where there is some ideological overlap between Canberra and Washington."

John Howard failed to foster warm relations with Bill Clinton, for example, but got on famously with Bush.

Gillard gets on well with Obama. Abbott probably would too, but would no doubt privately prefer to deal with Romney.

A more pressing question for Australia is this: what would a Romney presidency mean for overall US engagement with the Asia-Pacific, particularly its relationship with China?

The Obama administration has "pivoted" towards Asia, meaning it has made the region a top foreign policy priority.

Romney has so far appeared pre-occupied with the Middle East, particularly Iran. When he does turn his attention to Asia, it's usually to bag China.

"We'd like to lock in that pivot," Carr says.

"And a Romney administration focused on the Middle East may suggest another few years at least of drift in terms of the US role the region."

Widmaier says it all comes back to one of the key questions of the campaign: "Who is Mitt Romney, really?"

Is he a Bush-style neo-conservative, as some of his posturing on Iran would suggest?

Or is he a pragmatic technocrat, as his record as Massachusetts governor would suggest?

The former would be bad for Australia.

But Widmaier and Fullilove think Romney's inner technocrat will prevail.

"His character and experiences lead me to conclude that he would more likely be a careful, analytical foreign policy-maker who based his decisions on expert advice and facts rather than intuition," Fullilove writes.

He concludes that while Americans do face an important choice on November 6 - and their decision will be felt in Australia - the world is not at a crossroads.

Foreign Minister Bob Carr says the Gillard government is ready to work with Romney if he wins.

"He's fine," the minister says.

"Were he to be elected, we would be well prepared. The work we've done through our embassy in Washington means that we're prepared for either eventuality."

Of course, one suspects Senator Carr is really no great fan of Romney.

He labelled the Republican "bloodless" on his Thoughtlines blog just a couple of weeks before he was drafted into the government this year.

Indeed, many in the government will probably be quietly hoping for an Obama victory. On this, at least, they're in step with Australian public opinion.

Originally published as Obama or Romney: does it matter for Oz?