That headline makes about as much sense as the claim in the London Times, in Republicans defect to the Obama camp, that Barack Obama is the black Ronald Reagan.

Apparently there is a massive trend of former Bush supporters (most notably, Robert Kagan) switching to support of Obama. Dozens of GOP voters nationwide may have may this switch, or at least considered making it. And it's not hard to see the reasons why, as the Times points out.

Kagan is an informal foreign policy adviser to the Republican senator John McCain, who remains the favoured neoconservative choice for the White House because of his backing for the troops in Iraq.

Well, for every supporter of McCain I've seen on the "neocon" side, there appear to have been ten Romney supporters and twenty Rudy ones, but stuck here in the States as I am, I'm doubtless missing something that is apparent in London.

Kagan wrote approvingly that a keynote speech by Obama at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs was “pure John Kennedy”, a neocon hero of the cold war.

JFK, LBJ, FDR, Henry Wallace. Neoncon / conservative heroes all. As for JFK's actual Cold War legacy, he gets high marks for the Cuban Missile Crisis and low ones for the Bay of Pigs, so it's usually considered to be mixed at best.

For his optimism about the future, Obama has been dubbed the “black Ronald Reagan”.

I for one seldom hear him referred to in any other way - although that may start clashing with his being the black John Kennedy at some point.

Anytime I hear Americans fretting that we may be making the wrong electoral choices (as judged by our European masters), I think of articles like this one. What's realy scary isn't how clueless the most well-respected newspaper in the world is about the most basic facts concerning the most powerful nation in the world, but the fact that they're probably far less clueless than their counterparts in Paris, Berlin, Rome, etc.