Schadenfreude: a feeling of glee at someone else's misfortune. That sums up a considerable portion of international sentiment as the world watches the tortured proceedings of the U.S. election. Nearly two weeks after the vote to select the president of the United States -- the most powerful man in the world -- the result is still unknown. And the entire wrenching procedure, complete with recriminations and recounts, is being played out in full view of the public. Some laugh, others grimace. We applaud.

The pundits and pros said this election would be close, but they never dreamed it would come down to a handful of ballots scattered across the country. The margin of victory in New Mexico seems to be several hundred votes; in Iowa, it was several thousand; in Florida, the world watches as the count continues and the legal skirmishes intensify. The two campaigns are increasingly focused on the courtroom, but the real fight is in the court of public opinion. Winning is important, but so is legitimacy. Neither man can afford to be seen as taking office after a tainted victory.

The near-perfect division of the U.S. electorate has aroused considerable concern. Governing is going to be difficult, even if the Republicans win the presidency along with control of both houses of Congress. But the U.S. has survived division in the past. It is hard to imagine deeper divisions than those that resulted in the government shutdown in 1995, when President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, squared off against the Republican Congress. Indeed, it seems that the American people prefer a divided government as a way to limit its power. That is one reason why it has been rare for the same party to control both the executive and legislative branches.