WITH evangelical zeal the United States has spent the past half century preaching the virtues of its brand of democracy across the globe.

The 2000 Presidential Election has been a dreadful advertisement for its system of government.

For a year we have witnessed an overbearing campaign dominated by presentation and style rather than policy.

And in that time we have seen millions and millions of dollars invested in campaigns with the intention of buying a four-year term in the White House. The money spent on the campaign equates to 20 dollars for each voter.

Then yesterday we saw the excesses of the opinion poll culture. States were declared while people in that state had still to cast their vote. TV networks declared one candidate the winner, then declared the other the victor, then decided it was too close to call.

One candidate conceded defeat on the strength of TV exit polls, and then withdrew his concession.

And after all that we still don't know for sure who will be the next President of the United States.

We trust the American people reflect on the excesses of the past year's campaign, and in particular the excesses of the past 24 hours.

In the modern age we can't expect the media to play a crucial role in elections. But surely there are lessons for us all about the over-use of opinion polls and the over-reliance on them particularly on polling day before official results are declared.

But for all that, it is somewhat gratifying that the final decision on who will become the most powerful person in the world will be down to a handful of ordinary men and women scattered across the south-east corner of the most powerful nation in the world.

There is a place for democracy after all.

IN politics listening to the people is perceived as an attribute; caving in to public opinion is perceived as a weakness. In reality, they are one and the same.

Hence, the Chancellor's autumn statement will be judged in the positive light by his supporters, and in the negative light by his detractors.

In the longer-term, however, Gordon Brown's concessions on fuel and pensions will be judged on their impact on the economy, and their impact on Labour's fortunes at the General Election.

These measures appear prudent enough to keep the economy on track. Generous enough to keep protestors at bay. And popular enough to stand the Government in good stead at the polls.