[Politics] Why is the world's opinion different than America's?

[Deleted]

How closely do you think the majority of respondents to these polls follow american politics? Of course they probably know Obama is the president of the united states and probably heard about how he was the first african american elected to that office. How many do you think are aware who the governor of Massachusetts was from 2003 to 2007? (Hint: it's Romney). If you asked a bunch of people who they think should be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and gave them the choices of David Cameron or someone they never heard of, who do you think they'd pick?

Really think the EU cares about Obamas ethnicity?

[Unalorian]

Norway would still do better if the USA had a more posetive financial situation, look at the trade balance.
Sweden exports quite a lot to the USA but we don't import much at all from them, so our trade surplus is significant, the more the USA can import the better. I suspect Norways situation is similiar.

We only had one bad year btw, 2009, which 2010 made up for(great year) but overall we've done well, so h5 :P

Indeed. The Oil Fund is nothing more than a virtual number that can make you sleep peacefully at night. But you can bet your ass that if shit hit the fan in the US, shit will hit the fan (at smaller degrees, possibly) in Norway as well.

Anyone that has gone through the housing market pre- and after-2008 here know that already. In 2008, before the end of the year crysis, you need 0% equity in Norway to get a loan to buy an apartment. Now you need 15%. Not that hard to find news in the local newspapers saying how the next generation will struggle to pay their equity to get a loan if they only save money through the BSU plan.

[Tierbook]

Really think the EU cares about Obamas ethnicity?

ive seen plenty of people on the forums complaining about Romneys religion

[Rooneyguy]

Really think the EU cares about Obamas ethnicity?

Most likely not directly. It was pretty major news at the time he was elected, however. If I was a citizen of another country being asked to decided between two american politicians I really didn't give a damn about, one of which i had never heard of and the other i vaguely remember some news about 4 years ago him becoming the first minority president of a country with a shaky history with regards to such issues, i'd probably go with the later.

[Panoramixe]

Really think the EU cares about Obamas ethnicity?

In Belgium we have a gay prime minister who's the son of two Italian immigrants and still doesn't speak the major language well. I'd say someone's skin color is indeed not a tripping point, we're quite open-minded :-). To scare you even further he's a socialist, that he does get accounted for since our social system definitely doesn't need to get stronger.

By the way if you were to educate yourself on the Belgian political system, you'd see how simplified and limited the American two party system seems to us.

ive seen plenty of people on the forums complaining about Romneys religion

If someone believes have an impact on his politics, then yes his religion is important.
I don't see how being black would impact someone's decisions other than perhaps even less tolerance for racism?

[Endus]

Libertarianism is very much a busted philosophy.

Big-L Libertarianism, yes. Which is basically a slightly more fiscally responsible Republicanism.

Small-l libertarian, not so much. Small-l libertarians believe in personal freedom over all, accepting the consequences of such freedom. So a small-l libertarian, for instance, would be pro-life, because people should be free to make that choice. They'd be pro-gay-marriage, because there's no sense having extra laws making it legal for some and not for others; just make one system and reduce the bureaucracy. They'd be anti-military when it comes to anything but national defense.

I'm not saying Ron Paul's "wrong" to call himself "libertarian", just that there's a lot of shades of grey to that philosophy. For instance, I'm a leftist social libertarian, in principle, and I disagree with Ron Paul about almost every single stance he's taken.

I'm also realistic. I don't like spending money on nationalized universal health care, but it's the best system for providing such care (fiscally speaking), so until we can get health care out of the market (so it's not profit-driven, but health-driven) some other way, it's the best way to go. I don't like income tax, but until we can remove enough government to fund it without income tax, it needs to stick around.

This kind of social libertarianism really hasn't ever been tried. And the world's not ready for it right now. But it could be, which is what guides my voting.

[Deleted]

ive seen plenty of people on the forums complaining about Romneys religion

Religion has a much larger impact on the views of a person than their ethnicity. As Romney's been quite fond of proving.

[Deleted]

If you asked a bunch of people who they think should be the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and gave them the choices of David Cameron or someone they never heard of, who do you think they'd pick?

I'd choose "someone I never heard of", even Farange, unless is is the BNP candidate over Cameron. And during Bush's reelection he was extremely unpopular here, after his insults following the Iraq war discussion, so mosts Germans would pick the someone they never heard of as well. It also tainted Merkel's reputation that she wanted to follow Bush, but that was quickly forgotten.

[smelltheglove]

That's because Ron Paul is morally superior and more honest than Romney. He understands the constitution more and actually cares about people, that's why he will never win. It isn because a couple of his ideas are impractical.

it's easy to be sincere when one doesnt bother to hide crazy. sorry, but at this point paul is a detriment to his movement tbh. gary johnson makes a lot more sense on a lot of things that paul is glaringly weak on. that said, even though i kind of like johnson, i dont want to see him as president

[Catta]

ive seen plenty of people on the forums complaining about Romneys religion

Thats because Romney has been a high ranking member of a religion while it was still openly racist and the religion has a prophetic leadership akin to Catholicism which Kennedy was under fire because of which.

[RüneRS]

By the way if you were to educate yourself on the Belgian political system, you'd see how simplified and limited the American two party system seems to us.

Altough its not as bad as in America, you do have to admit that during elections there's quite a lot of mud-slinging between the parties, Anyway I'm happy NVA won, but didn't completly destroy the socialists ^^ the more parties you have, the more chance that theres at least a few smart politicians

[Rooneyguy]

I'd choose "someone I never heard of",

You make a good point. Bush was very unpopular both at home and abroad because of the wars America was engaged in. That's a pretty important difference. I think Bush made mistakes both domestically and abroad that made him unpopular. I think his domestic failings were perhaps overshadowed by foreign policy issues (that and the fact the economic woes of 2007-whenever didn't really effect him cuz he wasn't up for re-election anyway.) This is certainly up for debate, but I think the biggest issues of this election are economic ones. If that's true, the ramifications of these issues affect Americans more than anyone else. Do persons in Germany care about domestic issues in the US? Do they follow them or keep up with US tax rates and stuff like that? I wouldn't think they would, not so much anyway. Differences between candidates on these issues therefore are probably less noticeable to person's being polled in other countries. To them Obama is "that guy who won the Nobel Prize in 2009" and Romney is "that other guy."

[Jackmoves]

Most likely not directly. It was pretty major news at the time he was elected, however. If I was a citizen of another country being asked to decided between two american politicians I really didn't give a damn about, one of which i had never heard of and the other i vaguely remember some news about 4 years ago him becoming the first minority president of a country with a shaky history with regards to such issues, i'd probably go with the later.

I think you severely underestimate how well covered the US presidential election is in a lot of countries. You get articles about it all newspapers on a daily basis, news on telly covers it, lots of documentaries and specials on telly etc. Got one special running on SVT2(public service tv) right now as we speak as a matter of fact. I'm not saying everyone cares about it, but for those who do, the information is readily available and not only through american media.

The Road to the White House
American documentary 2012 part 2 of 2.

... we go beyond the heated political rhetorics and get a clearer picture of the events and relationships that has shaped the lives and values of Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

Also aired on Kunskapskanalen 6/11, SVT1 6/11 and 9/11 Kunskapskanalen

Part 1 was quite interesting tbh, covered their childhood and upbringing and early adult lifes.

ps. no one gives a fuck about the skin colour of Obama.

[Tierbook]

My place of birth is no indication of what I think or do, but my religion is.

Those things are really different.
I'd still be the same guy if I was born in Germany, I would be different if I had another religion.

well i doubt thats true place of birth has a large impact on your thoughts im from South Carolina and im Republican i can almost guarntee you that if i was from another nation i would be Democrat simply because thats the norm

[Wayne25uk]

I dont see point in America having a president,for one they dont do feck all,and 2 they spend most of their term arguing about why they should be re-elected,i vote for who ever gets voted in to be there till the day they die like a king or queen,fighting all the time solves nothing and gets nothing done at the same time. Absolutely pathetic.

[Rooneyguy]

I think you severely underestimate how well covered the US presidential election is in a lot of countries.

ps. no one gives a fuck about the skin colour of Obama.

You are right, I probably do underestimate how well covered US politics are. I think my point still stands, however, about Obama being a much more well known figure internationally than Romney. In politics, name recognition matters. Again, my statements might be biased by American cultural considerations, but the fact that he's the first african american president in a long line of old white guys going back 200+ years is pretty significant. It might have absolutely no bearing what so every on his ability to govern, but it certainly impacts the respect he's given, and for good reason. IMO it takes alot to be elected president even if you have everything working in your favor (see Bush II) If you're a minority in american, it makes getting elected that much harder.

[Deleted]

I like that poll, Romania would vote 100% for Obama... but seriously now, yes, it's because of socialism, the big bad wolf many americans fear that europeans do not. Also, with all the smearing of Obama that he's muslim, that he's black etc, he loses more votes in the americans. In Europe the conflict against muslims is not so prevalent... they're right next to us and we accept them easily, however, for many americans the ideas that muslims are terrorists, that Obama is a muslim and socialist have been imprinted in their brains. And sometimes in voting, people don't vote for the best, but the smallest evil, and these many people see Romney as smallest evil.

[Someudontno]

I dont see point in America having a president,for one they dont do feck all,and 2 they spend most of their term arguing about why they should be re-elected,i vote for who ever gets voted in to be there till the day they die like a king or queen,fighting all the time solves nothing and gets nothing done at the same time. Absolutely pathetic.

I respect your opinion, but dictatorships in the past have failed; a person who doesn't have the citizens' interests at heart should not be involved in government.

[GennGreymane]

Now my personal theory on this is that most of the difference is based on history. Europe and most other countries were ruled by kings, which meant a powerful government, which the democratic view supports more than republicans (Economy wise at least).

So most of europe, having powerful government throughout history, maintains some of that today. As to why America is so different is because they wanted to get away from that, hence the revolution. North america (US area) never had any history of kings or other mass government as it was never really settled on a large scale. But when it finally was,it broke away in order to get away from that big government, hence the large support for republicans, who favor less government control on economy.

and yet in many respects europe and other parts of the world do not control economics as much as you think, many can argue that even china is more free economically then we are.

not just that, but a lot of it comes from the social view points, not the economic ones. as well as foreign policy, which is why ron paul is popular.... u mean a guy advocating NOT going to war as a campaign slogan!

---------- Post added 2012-11-04 at 09:49 PM ----------

powerful governmental control over economies was not the main reason for many of histories revolutions, rather it was how the people were treated by the government and how oppressed they felt.

---------- Post added 2012-11-04 at 10:58 PM ----------

As an American, assume the United States was not a world power, and China was the lone superpower. In China's elections, I would strongly support whoever it is that I felt made them weaker as a nation from an economic and military point of view.

That is how I assume the world views America. The world support democrats because they believe they are most incompetent of the two political parties in the US. They believe the democrats are most likely to bungle away America's status as a world power.

that is implying they are only at war or distrusting of each other and dont have intertwined economies

---------- Post added 2012-11-04 at 11:44 PM ----------

They aren't biased - they may be misguided, but most people outside the US don't like republicans.

The US is perceived to be responsible for the biggest economic collapse in the last 80 years - under republican leadership.
The US is perceived to be responsible for a number of wars - under republican (W1 and W2)

Again, this could just be bad press, but I don't think so.

wait what... that.... that is not even right in the slightest on many many levels.

[Lumocolor]

I'm not an american and i don't wish to be mean or anything but can an american explain to me why all you hear from US citizens is how they don't want the government to meddle in their lives, they don't want socialized medicine, they don't want regulations on banks or corporations, they want a free for all society, but when something like katrina or sandy happens all of a sudden the government isn't doing enough to help them or doing it fast enough. You can't have it both ways, get a shovel and dig yourselves out.