Out out, damn shrub.
September 8, 2004 7:46 PM   Subscribe

World wants Bush out. "Only one in five want to see Bush re-elected," "Senator Kerry was particularly favoured in traditionally strong US allies." Should America take into consideration the international support of their presidential hopefuls, or can they really go it alone in today's global community?
posted by krisjohn (32 comments total)
 
Going it alone: mistake. Identifying as a favorite of furriners: election fatality in half of the 50 states.
posted by namespan at 7:58 PM on September 8, 2004


"Global community"? What the fuck you talking about? When it benefits America to pretend there's one--when they want to exploit some part of the world for profit--they'll do so. But in the country's heart of hearts there is America and the rest of the planet.
posted by dobbs at 7:59 PM on September 8, 2004


A world with less bush is a sad world indeed.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 8:01 PM on September 8, 2004


WAX BUSH
posted by quonsar at 8:46 PM on September 8, 2004


Should America take into consideration the international support of their presidential hopefuls...?

Hahahaha! Hahaha! Aha! Ha! ... No.

What? You hippies want the UN to vote for our president? Give me a break.
posted by MrAnonymous at 8:46 PM on September 8, 2004


but he liberated iraq
posted by tsarfan at 8:48 PM on September 8, 2004


Hahahaha! Hahaha! Aha! Ha! ... No.
What? You hippies want the UN to vote for our president? Give me a break.


Since when is this a "hippy" thing?
posted by Quartermass at 8:58 PM on September 8, 2004


A concerted policing effort by the global community is the only answer to stateless terrorism. It is entirely reasonable, then, to desire an administration that can credibly call for and carry out an organized, global response.

It's a legitimate issue; hardly a "hippy" matter.
posted by SPrintF at 9:10 PM on September 8, 2004


Are we tired of this yet?
posted by ParisParamus at 9:13 PM on September 8, 2004


I think the blue needs more anti-Bush posts. I haven't seen quite enough. And frankly, it's disheartening.
posted by cinematique at 9:32 PM on September 8, 2004


I don't remember the rest of the world asking me who they should vote for.
posted by David Dark at 9:44 PM on September 8, 2004


I wish more people, especially journalists, realized polls are downright dangerous to use for news stories, regardless of how well they think they're conducted.
posted by cinematique at 9:49 PM on September 8, 2004


This is a great story, I think every pro-Kerry person should be sure to use this story as a talking point. Mention it on your blog, to your friends, call in to talk radio and bring this up, demand your local paper cover this poll, and link it in your .sig.
posted by Mick at 9:54 PM on September 8, 2004


Well, it's your vote indeed. However it's also true that by reelecting a warmongering unilateralist it's quite likely that the US will gradually lose its standing and power of moral suasion in much of the world. One needs only look at Bush's "Coalition of the Willing" to realize that America under Bush fils simply can't get a coalition happening like it could under Bush père.
posted by clevershark at 10:00 PM on September 8, 2004


NO MORE BUSH POSTS I DONT CARE AND I READ DRUDGE REPORT ANYWAY
posted by cell divide at 10:13 PM on September 8, 2004


I found this Canadian newspaper poll amusing:

Who would you most like to see win the U.S. presidential election in November?
George W. Bush - 3913 votes (11 %)
John Kerry - 11293 votes (31 %)
Ralph Nader - 21644 votes (59 %)
posted by bobo123 at 10:35 PM on September 8, 2004


I don't remember the rest of the world asking me who they should vote for.

They don't have to ask - we just tell them.

Iraq, Venezuela, Chile, Iran, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Panama, Haiti, Cuba, Phillipines - any of these places ring a bell?
posted by bashos_frog at 11:08 PM on September 8, 2004


I'm not interested in hearing how my next door neighbors think I should vote, (beyond an academic sense,) why should I care more about what someone in Melbourne or Rio thinks?
posted by Snyder at 11:32 PM on September 8, 2004


I guess it's not so fun hearing large masses of people calling for a change of regime in the country you live in - even if they're not threatening you with a heavy bombardment of cruise missiles just yet.
posted by bashos_frog at 11:37 PM on September 8, 2004


bashos_frog wins the thread.
posted by krisjohn at 11:53 PM on September 8, 2004


can they [the USA] really go it alone in today's global community?"

Speaking on behalf of everyone else in the world, I think when Bush wins you'll find out the answer to that one.
posted by fullerine at 1:53 AM on September 9, 2004


> A concerted policing effort by the global community is the only answer to
> stateless terrorism.

Policing by a (stateless!) wooly abstraction? Kewl! Run up the Jolly Roger.
posted by jfuller at 4:22 AM on September 9, 2004


This is probably very bad news for President Bush. Oh, wait, only U.S. citizens get to vote for President of the United States.
posted by gyc at 1:13 PM on September 9, 2004


The world doesn't have to care one way or the other. All the world has to do is reprice oil in Euro's.
posted by rough ashlar at 1:45 PM on September 9, 2004


You do realize that the perception that the President is disliked globally is, actually, a way to rally domestic support for Bush?
posted by ParisParamus at 1:50 PM on September 9, 2004


Good thing no one registered to vote in America came from other parts of the world.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 4:08 PM on September 9, 2004


I don't recall the UK asking me who it should have for its prime minister. And they've got nuclear weapons and helped invade Iraq.
posted by haqspan at 4:15 PM on September 9, 2004


You do realize that the perception that the President is disliked globally is, actually, a way to rally domestic support for Bush?

In the same way that the perception that there was no reason to invade Iraq buttresses support for that little misadventure?

Certainly, amongst the same blockhead-demographic. But they're slowly being weeded out of the genepool through accidentally shooting themselves and stuff, so no problem there.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:31 PM on September 9, 2004



Well, most of the 'world' is ruled by socialists, communists, theocracts, cronies, or outright despots. They obviously want someone who will overlook their cronyism and sepotism... someone like Kerry.

Point is, the 'world' sucks and we shouldn't put much weight as to what they want.
posted by Witold at 5:25 PM on September 9, 2004


Witold, you forgot your sarcasm tags. I hope.
posted by krisjohn at 5:45 PM on September 9, 2004


Witold, well put. You didn't intend to have sarcasm tags. I hope.
posted by MrAnonymous at 9:34 PM on September 9, 2004


I don't remember the rest of the world asking me who they should vote for.

Having an opinion on the subject isn't the same thing as telling you who to vote for.
Even Canadian-American relations have somewhat broken down, and Canada is hardly "ruled by socialists, communists, theocracts, cronies, or outright despots."

It's not like it doesn't affect us. You guys have all the money and the nukes and the opinions about how the world should be run.
posted by SoftRain at 3:46 PM on September 10, 2004


« Older Who care what happened 25 years ago   |   Sorry for the NewsFilter Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments