The Rest of the World Wants Kerry 458
Pentagram writes "A poll by GlobeScan Inc and the University of Maryland of 34,330 people from 35 countries found almost all of them gave a strong backing to Kerry; less than one in five backed Bush.
Only people from the Phillipines, Poland and Nigeria clearly backed Bush, whereas Norway gave Kerry the strongest backing with 74% to Bush's 7%. The UK, the US's most vocal ally during the Bush-led Iraq invasion, overwhelmingly preferred Kerry at 47% to 16%."
Two presidents (Score:5, Insightful)
One for the people of the US and the other for the world
Everyone'd be happy
We Got 2 Already (Score:2)
John Dean argues [salon.com] we already have a Head of State (George W. Bush) and a Head of Government (Dick Cheney) and that they serve as co-presidents.
It's certainly enough for me!
Re:We Got 2 Already (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Two presidents (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, that brings up an interesting idea- govern people according to how they voted. With computers it could almost be done, though there are areas it wouldn't work. E.g., if you voted for Bush, your taxes drop 0.5%, but your kids get stuck going to a shit school- unless you send them to a private one; you don't get any national health care; and maybe they'll put your name on a missle. Vote for Kerry or Nader and have your taxes go up 3%, but actually get services for your contribution. When some poor schmuck who voted for Bush shows up at the hospital, they ask for his ID, and check the database. If he voted republican, send him the full bill; if he voted Green, send him home healthy and with a co-pay or reasonable deductable.
Things like roads would obviously not work- but most politicians would agree on the need for a public transportation infrastructure. But the national vacuum train system would only be used for those who voted for the candidate which supported it...
They don't 'want Kerry' (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They don't 'want Kerry' (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:They don't 'want Kerry' (Score:3, Funny)
There was a great Onion headline a while back that said 'Kerry Unveils One Point Plan for a Better America' and it showed a picter of Bush with a circle and slash over it. Priceless.
Re:Britain:14% Bush; 47% Kerry, 39% Mop w/Bucket H (Score:5, Insightful)
His implementation of foreign policy was far from perfect but he clearly meant well (for a US president anyway) and the general approach was fairly multilateral by today's standards. eg its conceivable that Clinton might have signed the US up to the "Kyoto Protocol" on carbon emissions.
The business with Monica Lewinsky didn't hurt him a bit. Actually I think many people saw the humour in the situation, or sympathised with this minor and clearly human failing of succumbing to a bit of illicit nookie. The roasting he got afterwards didn't play well over here (Kenneth Starr as a jumped-up, joyless pinprick). There was the further barracking via impeachment proceedings etc. and it all didnt reflect well on the republicans who were clearly just out to bring the man down by whatever dirty methods they could muster, no matter how hypocritical.
It didn't hurt that Clinton had an easygoing manner, played the sax in his off hours, and that he had treated the world to a Fleetwood Mac "Rumours" line-up reunion concert at his inaugural ball (utterly priceless - thanks Bill!)
Re:Britain:14% Bush; 47% Kerry, 39% Mop w/Bucket H (Score:2)
I say mod the parent up if not for anything but his illustrious use of the English language. Good show chap. Jolly good show.
Clinton, the Democrats, and Kyoto (Score:4, Insightful)
Why is it that when President Bush obtains the advice and consent of Congress to go to war he is criticized and ridiculed [slashdot.org], but when President Clinton signed the Kyoto protocol in defiance [heritage.org] of a unanimous Senate who tells him it will not consent to the treaty, he is praised?
Re:Clinton, the Democrats, and Kyoto (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm with Andrew- is that a serious question, or a joke? For it to be anywhere in the same league, Clinton would've not only signed the bill in defiance, but he would've had to go ahead and implement it (how?) and kill thousands upon thousands of innocent civillians and over a thousand of our Service men and women in the process. If he could manage fucking up that hugely (taking lessons from Bush?) then he better get criticized and ridiculed.
Then again, there's the other question: why is it OK if Bush was a lush and a cokehead for year upon year, but Clinton smokes (part of) a joint and suddenly he is Satan incarnate. Cocaine is more wholesome perhaps?
Re:Clinton, the Democrats, and Kyoto (Score:3, Insightful)
Now this is priceless. Everyone except Bush Jr's diehard supporters knows that he doesn't need any help at all to sabotage his own presidency, he, and Dick "Haliburton" Cheney and John "Patriot" Ashcroft are doing a bangup job all on their own.
"The Rest of the World Wants Kerry" (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say:
"The Rest of the World Wants Anyone but Bush"
Re:"The Rest of the World Wants Kerry" (Score:3, Insightful)
If you were a US citizin who would you vote for?
[] George w. Bush.
[] Efdgnaq J. Kwosqla.
Let's all pick the not Bush one.
Re:"The Rest of the World Wants Kerry" (Score:2, Funny)
Practice abstinence! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Practice abstinence! (Score:2)
UK is not Bush's ally (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:UK is not Bush's ally (Score:2)
Re:UK is not Bush's ally (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:UK is not Bush's ally (Score:3, Funny)
touche'
Re:UK is not Bush's ally (Score:2)
I'm serious -- trips to England & Ireland can be somewhat depressing when people treat you like you're Bush himself just because you're an American.
Error a president can make ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Error a president can make ? (Score:2, Funny)
What a disgusting image.
Re:Error a president can make ? (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Why isn't this a troll or flamebait...... (Score:2)
Flush the Johns in '04.
Re:Error a president can make ? (Score:4, Funny)
Even sex wouldn't stop Bush. After all, he already fucked the economy, he fucked Iraq, he fucked our international relations, he fucked our intelligence services, he fucked our civil liberties, and he fucked our electoral system. Kinda puts a blowjob from an intern into perspective, doesn't it?
Re:Error a president can make ? (Score:3, Interesting)
But, since i'm a sucker for naive people...
After all, he already fucked the economy
Hmm, actually, he inherited an economy that was already in decline, and then, despite of what happened on 9/11 and a subsequent war, turned the economy around which has reduced the unemployment rate to a low 5.4%. Not to shabby.
The economy is about more than jobs. His tax cuts to the rich made it so that our children will have to pay something like $1,500 apiece when it comes time to
It's true. (Score:4, Insightful)
This will probably be spun negatively (Score:5, Interesting)
Alternative spins include "the world wants a nuanced leader who understands the issues", or "the world wants less war", or "the world wants to attack us so they need a senator in charge", or "the world likes red ties more than blue".
Hmm... it'll be interesting, but I think this is mostly a non-fact. World opinion doesn't count much within the US.
If the US takes an isolationist stance, that's not a bad thing. If we'd rather have more UN engagements (i.e. less US soldiers, easier for us to pull out and leave our allies holding the stick, et cetera), though, it might be worth paying attention.
"World wants to send soliders in to fight our battles, but only if we change leaders!" Now that's an odd spin we could try.
Too bad for them (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Too bad for them (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Too bad for them (Score:2)
We should definitely elect Bush then... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We should definitely elect Bush then... (Score:4, Funny)
Sure the rest of the world has US interest in mind. I'm sure the first thing that went through the poll respondants mind when polled was "Well, who would best represent the interests of the US people... because that's who I want." Then they go to the store and think to themselves, "What products can I buy to best support US companies?". They go home, flip on the TV and think, "Which show can I watch to best support Hollywood and the US media?". Then they get on their computers and think to themselves, "Which website can I go to to best support the US tech industry."
They think all these things because they really, really have our best interests in mind. That's why they want Kerry.
Re:We should definitely elect Bush then... (Score:2)
People are buying U.S.American products, are listening to American music and watching American films. They aren't forced to, they chose so. And when the US has a bad economy, other nations are feeling the downsides, too.
So, usually foreigners would not knowingly make the worse choice for the US.
Sure, foreigners are less qualified to judge the internal policies. B
Re:We should definitely elect Bush then... (Score:2)
I agree with you. They are not likely to intentionally choose who is the worst choice for America. It's not an either/or situation. When they choose to watch American TV programs it's because they like them - not because it is good for America. When they buy American products it's because they like them - not because it is good for America.
They are likely to choose who they think is best for them (being a non-American), based
Re:We should definitely elect Bush then... (Score:2)
I don't think you understand the significance of this poll. Nearly all of our allies are democracies. The leaders of these democracies cannot afford to be seen supporting
Foreign Interference (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Foreign Interference (Score:2)
Interestingly enough, other nations say otherwise (Score:4, Informative)
No, they don't, at least not educated people. (Score:2, Interesting)
Quote from the article [hindustantimes.com] : "But why does the foreign policy establishment want Bush -- a man regarded by most educated Indians with a mixture of hostility and a derision that borders on contempt -- back in the White House?"
Outside of the U.S., Bush and Cheney are the most disliked U.S. president and vice-president in history. A Canadian government leader called Bush an "idiot".
Bush and Cheney are also the most arrested U.S. president and vice-president in history. George W. Bush was arrested once for
The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:2, Flamebait)
I suppose they liked Carter, too?
Re:The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:2)
Re:The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree that what is good for the rest of the world may not be good for the United States but the United States needs to realize that what is good for the Unites States may not be good for the rest of the world.
Specifically, Republicans who think that the rest of the world wants the United States to bring the world "freedom" and "democracy" aren't exactly basing their world view on reality.
We're Not Alone (Score:4, Insightful)
There's good reason why only Americans can vote in American elections. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't consider all of the facts, including the fact that the rest of the world is getting increasingly wary about the United States.
-Waldo Jaquith
Re:We're Not Alone (Score:2)
Re:We're Not Alone (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:3, Insightful)
Because like it or not, the USA is part of a world community. If you take that attitude, and don't give a shit about how your government treats others, then don't be suprised when you are spit upon when travelling abroad, or even denied entry to some contries.
Also, you should not be surprised when people from the rest of the world consider your country to be 'criminal'. Do you know why the US will not abide
Re:The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:2)
What it does indicate is that the majority of the World feels that Kerry will be better for the World in general than Bush will be. This is not neccesarily the same thing as being better for the USA, though.
However, as a member of the Rest Of The World, it is fustrating that I am not in any way represented in the voting in of a person who will have a huge effect on my personal safety. For inst
Re:The rest of the world can go screw. (Score:2, Insightful)
Carter
Carter's presidency, while marked with practical difficulties (like his micromanagement of White House tennis court schedules), will be remembered 100 years from now as more moral and principled, especially after the Watergate scandal ridden presidencies of Nixon and, to a lesser extent, Ford.
Carter's stand on human rights violations by tinhorn dictators in the 3rd world was particularly admirable. And, yes, foreigners I met overseas in the late 1970's were impressed with Carter.
Every president
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
You can spin this data any way you want to (assuming it is valid data - I would tend to assume that the voting population in the study was hardly randomized among all the various determinant factors). I'll provide an opposed spin (it's stupid, but no more so than any of the others) that makes the data pro-Bush:
In the current geopolitical scene, one country's financial loss is another's gain. Therefore smart people in the world would try to push for a candidate in the US who would cause the US to lose in the larger global fiscal game (not in a big de-stabilizing way that would backfire, just enough that the other countries can take advantage). Therefore the fact that people outside the US overwhelmingly favor Kerry means that they are predicting (in the market sense) that Bush would lead to a stronger US fiscal victory over the rest of the world.
Nigeria, eh? (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure us geeks have an opinion [aa419.org] on support from Nigeria.
And as an American (Score:2)
Re:And as an American (Score:2)
Sad that the "World" doesn't get to vote, eh? (Score:2, Funny)
Hey, those guys know what a strong leader really is:
Philippines: There's nothing like electing a President who committed human rights violations under the Marcos regime.
Poland: Well, you wouldn't think they'd go for invaders, but...
Nigeria: Come for the stonings, stay for the floggings, amputations, and beheadings under Sharia law.
In any event, what does it matter who the "world" would vote for? The only ones that count are the
Re:Sad that the "World" doesn't get to vote, eh? (Score:2)
Why the rest of the world cares (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny because both are 100% percent correct, and each will be used to support arguments that disagree with each other. In particular, while I agree that the rest of the world gets no say, and wouldn't for a second suggest changing that, to gruffly deny that we don't all have a stake is laughable. The world is a small place, and getting - relatively - smaller. More people, more interconnected economies, better communication, more, faster and easier travel, shared environmental and social problems etc. What happens in the US affects the rest of us, just as what happens to the rest of us affects the US. Even if we don't live in the "Axis of Evil". The rest of the world sees the outsider looking in perspective of Bush and we don't like what we see. Also, the much of the rest of the world still has laws about media fairness and impartiality and so we don't get relentless repetition of the GOP's weekly talking points passing as news. Bias check, I'm left wing by the standards of a country that has been called Soviet Canuckistan by you Americans. So by American standards that places me three steps to the left of Psycho-pinko-commie-freaks. By Canadian standards I'm part of the third largest political party in the country.
I digress. We want to see Bush out because I, and most of the rest of the world, perceive Bush and the types of things that have happened under him as negative, destructive and dangerous. I frankly don't know much about Kerry, and thanks to the American media's relentless refusal to actually discuss issues and focus on election platforms, neither do most Americans. Ask yourself next time you see the media focusing on medals, ribbons, type setting etc - Do you really know anything about either candidate's platforms? Really really? Do you know Kerry's? Bush's? If not, why not? Shouldn't that bother you? This is an election isn't it? And as much as the spin machine wants to talk about easily misconstrued things like character and "flip-flopping", platform and issues matter. And shouting "Terrorist" over and over isn't an issue, it isn't a platform, and if you elect the candidate that insists on doing it...well, the rest of the world will have to wait four for years to get what we want and you'll get four more years of Bush. Enjoy them and try not to bomb anything.
Re:Why the rest of the world cares (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that there really aren't "platforms" outside of the emotionally charged rhetoric. The reality is that both major parties are centrist when it comes to actual government.
So if you have nothing to argue about, then you must attack the other man's character. You must also find non-issues to talk about - things that don't belong in federal government anyway, such as legislating morality (how many wives you can have, or whether or not gays can marry, or if stem cells are people too).
People aren't thinking of issues. It's too hard to think about what is best for the country - too much complexity. We want to know who is More Evil and who is Less Evil. Who best fits our ideal of moral goodness? Who is a Real Hero? Issues be damned.
Re:Why the rest of the world cares (Score:3, Interesting)
You are neglecting the qualifier in my original statement: actual government
But you have a point: Bush has a dangerous streak, in spite of the moderate tone.
bless the internet : www.johnkerry.com (Score:2)
so head over to: www.johnkerry.com [johnkerry.com]
if you'd like to know more about Kerry.
Bad memories, maybe? (Score:4, Insightful)
That's on a subconsious level.
On an intellectual level, there's the impression that the U.S. broke away from the U.N. The world would have wished for a unanimous Security Council resolution in the style of Operations Desert Shield&Storm, instead the U.S. is basing the legailty of the invation on cease fire violations by Saddam Hussein's regime. The U.S. is such a ferocious military power, that seeing it operate outside its old patterns scares other nations. And what kind of precedent does it establish? If you feel that a country presents a danger, you're allowed to attack it first. Pre-emption. What if China or Russia does that to a country that we like. (Ignoring all the WMD resolutions.)
Plus, we have heard allmost nothing about the econimic interests France and Russia had in Iraq. And the food-for-oil corruption is a non-story.
Although the situation on the ground in Iraq would be just as bad with a U.N. force, the situation in the rest of the world would be better if there was a clear Security Council mandate for the action.
And shouting "Terrorist" over and over isnt an issue, it isnt a platform
No, but protecting your country from terrorism is a serious issue.
Re:Why the rest of the world cares (Score:2)
No platform (Score:4, Informative)
And ... ?? (Score:2)
The US is our country. We will vote for who we please, not who may or may not please pe
Re:And ... ?? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Is ignorance really bliss?
Re:And ... ?? (Score:2)
Re:And ... ?? (Score:2)
Re:And ... ?? (Score:5, Informative)
The takeaway from the Madrid bombings is not how it swayed Spanish politics, rather how smart and media-savvy the terrorists are for making themselves appear to the rest of the world as having swayed the elections, and in the process embarrasing Bush.
Re:And ... ?? (Score:2)
Well (Score:3, Informative)
That definetly would have cost him my vote. Not that I would have voted for him anyway.
The other issue is that voter turnout was huge. People who normaly wouldn't give a fuck about politics suddenly said "WTF have we got ourselves into!?"
Why it matters (Score:2, Insightful)
Put simply, the USA is in a unique position of power. With that power comes responsibility. Come November, that responsibility is in your hands.
Let me get this straight......... (Score:2, Insightful)
Can the collective European electorates really have anything to offer the citizens of a successful 228 year old constitionally based republic? The history of France's civic history over the last 100 yrs alone will leave one'
Re:Let me get this straight......... (Score:3, Funny)
That's a nice straw man you have there. Shame if anything were to happen to it...
chl
Re:Let me get this straight......... (Score:2)
Re:Let me get this straight......... (Score:2)
For 500 Francs, what is the "The Sykes-Picot Agreement [bbc.co.uk]"
Re:posting from hell (Score:2)
Re:When you start invading other coutries, (Score:2)
1.) it goes both ways
2.) when the US "gets into others business" diplomatically, it's always demonized. Why is "European" intervention so morally superior and ethical, legally defensible as opposed to our intervention.
And when "Big Daddy United States" sits out a situation, it receives 10 fold the criticism as it's so called "European Counterparts".
Re:When you start invading other coutries, (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably because European countries have for some time lacked the military prowess the US has, and therefore require the cooperation of other nations to back up their diplomacy with force.
You see, there is a sort of checks and balances system that arises when you lack power; you are forced to make alliances with others who similarly lack power in order to pass muster. This means that anot
You don't get a Vote (Score:4, Interesting)
weaker (Score:3, Informative)
Why is this IMO stupid article being posted on Slashdot anyway?
Globscan press release and poll results summary (Score:2)
PDF - 8 pages
http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/GlobeScan- P IPA_Release.pdf [globescan.com]
Kerry vs. Bush (Score:2)
My two cents as a Canadian:
In general I don't think much of the "Bush-bashing" is warranted or useful. I don't think Bush is a particularly bad President, but from a philosophical standpoint I would rather see a Democrat than a Republican in the position of President.
So, it seems that I'm in agreement with the rest of the non-US world. There's a catch, though: Although I prefer Kerry as a candidate, I realize that he's going to lose. Badly. The best synthesis I've ever heard of all the information in the
An outsiders point of view (Score:2)
Literally anybody but Bush in the next election would be great. The guy is a moron.
None of the above. (Score:5, Informative)
Country: Kerry, Bush, neither
Kerry
Germany: 74%, 10%, 16%
Norway: 74%, 7%, 19%
France: 64%, 5%, 31%
Canada: 61%, 16%, 23%
Italy: 58%, 14%, 28%
Brazil: 57%, 14%, 29%
Indonesia: 57%, 34%, 9%
China: 52%, 12%, 36%
Kerry, no mandate
UK: 47%, 16%, 37%
Japan: 43%, 32%, 25%
Too close to call, no mandate
India: 34%, 33%, 33%
Bush
Philippines: 32%, 57%, 11%
Neither, no mandate
Spain: 45%, 7%, 48%
Mexico: 38%, 18%, 44%
Nigeria: 33%, 27%, 40%
Thailand: 30%, 33%, 37%
Poland: 26%, 31%, 43%
2000: Gore, Bush, other, none of the candidates
None of the candidates
USA: 22.0%**, 21.8%**, 1.7%, 54.5%*
* Eligible voters [seacoastonline.com]
** Gore, Bush, and other's percentage support of eligible (I hope) [fec.gov]
My comment had too few characters per line, my comment had too few characters per line, my comment had too few characters per line, my comment had too few characters per line, my comment had too few characters per line, my comment had too few characters per line.
Dupe, Troll, and Non-Story to boot (Score:3, Insightful)
Non-Americans don't like American candidates. In related news, Americans don't like non-American candidates. Not to mention that pesky legality issue...
It's a non-story because everybody knows that the world's socialists, communists, and terror enablers are against American values. I would like to see a poll that included the millions of dissidents and people of the "wrong" religion or party that dictators have locked away from the outside world and see if they would support Bush and his liberation schemes.
It's a troll since it's a desperate attempt to show support for Kerry who is falling behind in the polls of legal voters.
It's a dupe [slashdot.org], and both stories were posted by CmdrTaco!! Can you smell an agenda? Hello, Dan Rather.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Slashdot (Score:2)
People who work with computers think carefully. (Score:3, Insightful)
"Slashdot's increasingly left-leaning story postings..."
People who work with computers have to think carefully and logically, or they won't be successful. There is nothing illogical about being Republican, but George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are the most secretive and corrupt administration in U.S. history, or at least in the last 100 years. They are Re-money-cans, not Republicans. Someone observant enough and able to think clearly enough to do computer work is usually able to see that.
Republicans,
Re:People who work with computers think carefully. (Score:4, Insightful)
There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Bush (or against Kerry, as the case may be). There are plenty of extremely intelligent people I know who are voting for Kerry (or against Bush, as the case may be).
Only very insecure people and fanatics [claytoncramer.com] convince themselves that people who disagree with them else must be stupid.
Re:In other news (Score:5, Insightful)
Al Queda and Bush (Score:2)
I suspect thats true. Certainly Bush's response to 9/11 could hardly have pleased Al Qaeda more - we're an ineffectual occupier of Afghanistan (much of the country is controlled by the Taliban, by all accounts), we're stirring up Muslims all over the world by our actions in Iraq and with things like the Cat Stevens deportation. And more - civil liberties are under very real threats in the US, our stature in the rest of the world is dismal, we've put on more dept in three years than
Al Qaeda DID endorse Bush (Score:5, Interesting)
Read the news! Al Qaeda endorsed Bush. Here's the reporting from Fox News, of all places:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,114489,00.html [foxnews.com]
The statement tells American voters that Abu Hafs al-Masri supports the re-election campaign of President Bush: "We are very keen that Bush does not lose the upcoming elections."
The statement said Abu Hafs al-Masri needs what it called Bush's "idiocy and religious fanaticism" because they would "wake up" the Islamic world.
Re:Al Queda and Bush (Score:2)
Re:In other news (Score:2)
Re:Who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)
We don't dictate who should become President of [...]
Yes, [wikipedia.org] you [gwu.edu] do [wikipedia.org]MOD PARENT UP!!! Exactly right. (Score:3)
MOD PARENT UP!!!
Most people in the U.S. know little of the activities of their government. The U.S. government has bombed 24 countries [hevanet.com] since World War 2. The system of violence works by creating fear in U.S. citizens so rich [hevanet.com] people [hevanet.com] can profit. The problem happens largely because the U.S. government has a break-the-law department called the CIA. Secret government cannot be not democratic. How can you know what you are voting for, if you are not allowed to know what the government did?
The problem is
Re:Denmark (Score:3, Insightful)
This to me sort of explains why there'