Kenny Farquharson: Barack to the future or McCain mutiny?

I HAVEN'T yet met an American who believes Barack Obama can win the presidency of the United States. Even those who adore him, who are moved to tears by his eloquence, who admire his grace and his good looks and his style, who catch in his politics a glimpse of an America invisible to the world over the past eight years, even they find it hard to believe that November 4 will see a black man elected to the White House.

A couple of weeks ago at the Wigtown Book Festival I was speaking to Alvin Hall, the American personal finance guru and broadcaster. An African-American himself, he argued that race wouldn't be the issue that sealed Obama's fate – it would be the economy. As financial catastrophe loomed, said Hall, Obama's chances of winning receded. At a time of national peril, Americans would not be minded to be brave. They would "go home to mama". Hall's view was that Republican candidate John McCain was best placed to take advantage of this craving for comfort.

Two weeks on, with trillions wiped off share prices and the very fabric of capitalism starting to tear, does this theory hold up? The battle is taking place on a new field, with very different terrain. Words are taking on new intonations. During the primaries all the presidential hopefuls clamoured to claim 'Change' as the leitmotif of their campaigns. After two terms of George W Bush, who could blame them. Obama made it his own, offering "change we can believe in". But with economic storm clouds gathering, the idea of change becomes twin-edged. What voters want is a place of safety. They ask whether change is the route to that safe harbour, or whether it is an unnecessarily risky adventure into unknown waters.

So the stakes were even higher than usual before last week's presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, the second of three. Both candidates were judged on the usual behavioural criteria for these events – who was the most relaxed, the most likeable, who smiled the most, and so on. More than usual, these seemed beside the point. Here and now, in Britain as well as America, politics is no longer dominated by image and ephemera. People are looking to governments to protect their livelihoods. They want real policies that will improve real lives during a real crisis.

An instant CNN poll at the end of the debate had 54% of voters saying Obama had won, with McCain at 30%. CBS had a narrower result, but still had Obama ahead at 39 points to 27. The reason for this seems pretty clear. Up until this point the election was seen as a choice between two fascinating men of character, each with a story to tell and with contrasting strengths and weaknesses. Now it is about economic strategy, and, for McCain, there is no way of avoiding scrutiny of a traditional Republican platform that favours cuts in corporation tax and – crucially – a light regulatory framework for big business.

In contrast, at a time when many Americans are in fear of losing their jobs (and their health insurance), Obama's ambitious plan for universal health care is exactly what a nervous nation wants to hear.

I used to think Obama's chances of winning rested on him persuading America that this election was akin to a Hollywood blockbuster. In this movie, the narrative was compelling and irresistible. It had its own logic, its own momentum. It took the son of an immigrant from Kenya, gave him an unlikely name and placed in his heart an unlikely hope. Obama's story is a challenge to Americans. It asks them: is the American Dream, that anyone born a US citizen can one day become president, just baloney? Or is it true? And if it's true, would you be willing to use your vote to help give this movie it's obvious ending?

McCain, of course, has his own narrative to offer – the Navy pilot bidding to lead the country for which he suffered torture at the hands of the North Vietnamese. But Obama's is bigger box office.

The battle of the movies will still be a factor on November 4, but this election will be won on the economy. If, as now seems likely, McCain loses, he will come to rue two moments. The first was his failure of judgment when, as the $700bn US banking bail-out was being put together in Congress, he called for cancellation of the first presidential debate.

This was not what the voters wanted to hear. It was of utmost importance to them and to the future of the country – and indeed, to the bail-out itself – that he and Obama made clear their views on what lay ahead. The second was an unguarded comment during an interview: "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should." Sometimes a politician can be too honest.

There is, of course, a British parallel to this debate – our very own shift of emphasis from the politics of image to the politics of substance. But that is one for another day. (Memo to self: get down to the bookies on Monday and put the kids' pocket money on a spring general election.)

For now, and for the next 23 days, the election that matters is across the pond. It'll be an extraordinary day – the moment America elects its first black leader; or the moment it decides it is not yet ready, 138 years after the passing of the 15th amendment that ruled: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged… on account of race, colour, or previous condition of servitude." The question being asked of white Americans is this: when you're drowning in the creek, do you really mind if the hand offered to haul you out is white or brown?