We asked a group of prominent Canadians what would be better for Canada: an Obama win or a Romney win.
But we can't let the pundits and politicians have all the fun. We posed the same question to our readers and collected the answers.
There wasn't much Republican love in the results, but it's no secret that Canadians are enamored with Obama. In fact, we prefer him seven-to-one over Romney, according to an Angus Reid survey.
See a round-up of our readers' comments below and keep sharing your opinions.
Which candidate do you think would be better for Canada? Tell us what you think in the comments or by tweeting us @HuffPostCanada.
Olivia Chow: Obama
"I think a U.S. president focused on creating high-quality jobs for all would be good for Canada. But as our leader said this weekend, we would of course work constructively with whomever Americans elect as their next president. Of course it’s no secret that many New Democrats are rooting for Obama, we have a lot of values in common with him and his administration. This vision includes an understanding of climate change and environmental responsibility, access to public healthcare, access to education, and basic social justice and equity — human rights, women's rights and same sex rights." <br><br> — Olivia Chow, NDP MP for Trinity-Spadina
David Frum: Romney
"Mitt Romney is the better choice for Canada for 4 crucial reasons: <br><br> 1) Romney will approve the Keystone pipeline; President Obama cannot be relied upon to do so. <br><br> 2) President Obama favors heavier corporate taxes on US corporations that invest outside the United States. As the leading recipient of US investment, Canada is directly threatened by Obama's preferred policy. <br><br> 3) Romney has made clear he favors tighter US monetary policy and a higher US dollar, implying a cheaper Canadian dollar, which will boost Canadian sales to the US market. <br><br> 4) By repealing Obamacare and preserving gun rights, Mitt Romney will preserve the popular joke that a Canadian is an unarmed American with healthcare." <br><br> — David Frum, Canadian-American journalist, former speech writer for George W. Bush
Heather Jarvis: Obama
"Obama would be better for Canada because U.S. politics and governance strongly influence Canada and much of the world. Obama has recognized that rape is rape and there aren't times when rape is justifiable or legitimized. Obama more strongly supports reproductive justice, the right for people who become pregnant to make the choice that's best for them and not be forced into invasive ultrasounds, intimidated into birthing a child, or forced into a decision because others feel entitled to make it. <br><br> Obama has recognized that LGBTQ people have humanity and that they deserve recognition, rights and safety as much as anyone else. Neither Presidential candidate is going to be everything the U.S. needs and both have criticisms that are important to understand, but if the U.S. is going to continue to influence Canada, I want a U.S. President that is going to support more people, among their wonderful differences." <br><br> — Heather Jarvis, SlutWalk Co-Founder/Organizer
Matthew Good: Neither
"If we're to be honest, neither is a good option, which is why the United States desperately needs a significant third party option. Unfortunately, that will never happen given the significance of the historically engrained financial superiority of the two party system." <br><br> — Matthew Good, musician
David Suzuki: Obama
"During the debates, Mitt Romney's only comment about the environment was to make a joke about President Obama's concern with rising sea levels and pollution. Obama is a disappointment in his timid response to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and his support for increasing domestic pursuit of oil and gas rather than embarking on a major program to move the U.S. away from its dependence on fossil fuels to renewable energy. But Obama's high-level appointments, from energy to NOAA, have been fantastic, and at least he acknowledges that human-caused climate change is real. No question, there is a world of difference between Romney and Obama." <br><br> — David Suzuki, scientist, broadcaster, author, and co-founder of the David Suzuki Foundation
Conrad Black: Romney
"Romney would be better for Canada because he would take the U.S. deficit seriously and, starting with Simpson-Bowles and the Ryan Plan as a joint basis, would propose and enact measures that would enable the world to see the beginning of the end of this hemorrhaging deficit, which, since most of the resulting bonded debt is bought by the Treasury’s subsidiary, the Federal Reserve with spurious, newly issued notes, has the quality of immense money supply increases. Also, Romney is clearly prepared to use force if there is no other way to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. He knows Canada better than Obama does, having summered here, and would be reasonably attentive to the interests of this country, including in completing the Keystone Pipeline." <br><br> — Conrad Black, author, former media mogul
Elizabeth May: Neither
"If asked how I would vote in the US election, the question is always Obama or Romney? There is a Green Party presidential candidate. Her name is Jill Stein and she is a serious and admirable candidate. She is against continuing to bail out Wall Street, noting that while George W. put $700 billion into Wall Street bail-outs, Obama has put in $4.5 trillion. Stein identifies the climate crisis as the cause of 60% of America being in drought, raising food prices, and that's only the beginning." <br><br> — Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada
Dan Mangan: Obama
"Which president would be better specifically for Canada? <br><br> Well, Canada <em>does</em> exist within the commonly respected confines of human social reality, so Obama is better for Canada. <br><br> That being said, most of that decision was influenced by Romney's whole dog-on-top-of-van shenanigan. That was a real game changer for me. <br><br> Oh, no, wait, it wasn't the dog thing. It was logical and rational respect for knowledge, compassion and societal relevance. <br><br> Gobama." <br><br> — Dan Mangan, musician