Opinion On a knife edge

In the end,although tempted,he did not dare and voted early for Obama. His quandary illustrates a fundamental dynamic of the excruciatingly close Ohio vote,which in turn could decide the election. Many men who voted for Obama in 2008 are now leaning toward Romney because they are frustrated by the president’s handling of the economy and convinced that he cannot spur a decisive recovery.

Many women,more focused on social issues,the problems they face in the work force and particularly the right to abortion,just think these men have lost it.

My Ohio survey was unscientific — conversations over a few days — but national polling reveals a sharp split along gender lines. The latest poll by The New York Times and CBS News found that Obama is supported by 52 per cent of women and 44 per cent of men,while Romney is preferred by 51 per cent of men and 44 per cent of women.

The race is poised on a knife-edge: the knives at the American breakfast tables where many husbands and wives are arguing.

If Obama loses,he will have to blame not only his disastrous first debate performance,his futile attempt to define Romney as a monstrous unfeeling capitalist,and his touch of alienating coolness. He will have to blame his inability to convince the leaders of corporate America that he is not “anti-business”. The anti-Obama feeling I encountered among business leaders in both Cleveland and Chicago was of startling vehemence. It included his failure to place business leaders in his inner circle,his reluctance to listen to them at White House gatherings and his lack of business experience.

The painstaking,if uncertain,recovery from the abyss of 2008,the salvaging of the auto industry,the lenience to Wall Street earned not a mention. Obama is battling this sticky “anti-business” label in the land of business. That is an uphill road — especially in an age of unlimited campaign contributions.

If Romney loses,he will have to blame remaining hostage too long to the right wing of the Republican Party,adopting a social agenda to please the Tea Party,delaying his move to the moderate centre for too long and failing to perceive that the level of economic discontent was such that he could win as a centrist pro-business Republican rather than as a “pro-life” ideologue echoing antediluvian male views on the rights,anatomies and inclinations of women.

Both candidates have made big mistakes. We will know next week whose was most fatal. Obama allowed Romney back in the race. After the conventions Romney was toast. After the first debate he became plausible. The Democratic ad blitz to define him as the beast of Bain imploded. Obama,through his lofty disdain,had suggested he did not care much about keeping his job. How then could he deliver on creating others?

I ran into Thomas Kish,a black ex-Marine working in security. He has voted Democratic all his life. Now,worried by “our downhill trend,” he is unsure. “I watched all those commercials that put Romney down and then I saw him in the debates and liked his aggressiveness,” he said. “He seemed like he could make some changes. Obama is a good talker,but not much of a backer-upper.”

Kish is a big reason Obama should be worried.

But then there was Pamela Stevenson,aged 49,with a job in marketing,who had already voted for Obama when I met her — and brought along her two sons,aged 20 and 19,to make sure they voted for Obama,too.

It has come down to women against men,turnout against momentum. How many women,blacks,Latinos,workers will vote for Obama? How many Romney voters are keeping quiet about their choice? There is no romance left. Obama will have to grind this out — and hope feminine good sense prevails.