1
   

Views of the US election from non-US folk

 
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 04:47 am
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,1658,392525,00.jpg
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 05:15 am
Kerry's man tells (Oz) PM: mind your manners
By Peter Hartcher in Washington
November 1, 2004

An adviser to the Democratic presidential challenger John Kerry has criticised John Howard for publicly wishing for victory for George Bush in this week's election.

The Prime Minister last week said of the US President: "I hope he wins."


A senior defence official in the Clinton administration and prospective senior official in a Kerry administration, Kurt Campbell, said this was "a little inappropriate". Dr Campbell told the Herald: "I remember when Australians thought there was too much playing of politics here, when the Bush Administration was talking about Australian politics.

"I would remind Australians that the same applies at home. Such comments about our politics are a little inappropriate."


In June, Mr Bush criticised the Labor leader, Mark Latham, for promising to withdraw Australian troops from Iraq by Christmas.

Dr Campbell's comments herald the likelihood that a Kerry administration, while still well-disposed toward Australia, would not be as intimate with the Howard Government.


"Obviously, a Kerry Administration wouldn't be as warm and cuddly with the Howard people as a matter of personal relationships," said a Democrat and political analyst at the Brookings Institution, Tom Mann. "But Kerry will bend over backwards to be conciliatory to coalition partners."

Dr Campbell added, however, that there was likely to be some initial anxiety, regardless of which man won: "If it's another Bush term. Australia's best friends in the Administration, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and his deputy, Rich Armitage, are unlikely to remain in place," said Dr Campbell, the head of security studies at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. "So you are likely to have new players who will need educating or re-initiation into the high priesthood of the alliance."
Further, the Australian Ambassador to the US for the past five years, Michael Thawley, has advised the Government that he will resign to look for a job in the private sector in the first quarter of next year.

So the topmost officials in the daily conduct of the US alliance in Washington are set to change, on both sides of the relationship, regardless of who wins the election.

The two biggest joint ventures of the alliance, however, are expected to continue with only minor change.

First, the Free Trade Agreement, whose implementation has been delayed by US concerns, is likely to take effect from January 1 as planned, informed officials said.

Second, the next administration, whether under Mr Bush or Mr Kerry, is expected to ask US allies for fresh contributions to the occupation of Iraq.

Before the FTA can enter into force, its terms require the two governments to exchange letters attesting that enabling legislation has been faithfully enacted.

This exchange is supposed to occur at least 60 days before the agreement takes effect, a deadline which expired at the weekend. But Richard Mills, a spokesman for the US Trade Representative, said that this 60-day requirement could be varied with mutual consent: "In previous cases like Chile and Singapore, exchange occurred less than 60 days before entry into force, and we are continuing to discuss with Australia implementation measures."

Officials said Australia would need to amend the enabling legislation on technical points on the treatment of intellectual property before the US would agree to implement the FTA.

Also, talks were continuing on details of the pharmaceutical benefits scheme.

On the question of the contribution to Iraq, Australia's response, according to well-placed officials, would be to offer some flexibility in the components of the Australian deployment, but without substantially increasing the total number of troops, which is around 900.


http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/31/1099219993094.html?from=storylhs
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 07:12 am
Why do I get so nervous when I read stuff like this? I should feel please, but, something about jinxes worries me:

Pendulum swings to Kerry landslide
Malcolm Mackerras
(Malcolm Mackerras teaches US politics at the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.)
November 01, 2004/the Australian

MY key prediction in an article published in February this year was this: "On Monday, December 20, 2004, the Electoral College will meet and 327 votes will be cast for John Kerry and 211 for George W. Bush."

The article went on to predict that the 327 votes for Kerry would be made up as follows:

"First, he will win 260 votes by carrying every state carried by Al Gore in 2000. Second, he will win 27 votes in Florida, four in New Hampshire, 11 in Missouri, 20 in Ohio and five in Nevada."

Subject to a quite minor revision, that remains my forecast. ....


(see entire article)
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,11247939%5E2703,00.html
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 07:17 am
I'm terribly superstitious right now. I do that when there is something happening that I have no control over but a great deal of stake in. So I have the same reaction...
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 07:47 am
soz

Believe it or not, Malcolm Mackerras is legit., not a crank ...... But let's not tempt fate ...

GOOD LUCK!
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 07:52 am
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/11/02/wbcartoon_gallery__550x379.jpg
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 08:01 am
Laughing Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 08:10 am
The previous image says all about the issue.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 08:19 am
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/10/31/monwilcoxtoon_gallery__550x336.jpg

Very Happy George gets advice from his good friend, John Howard, Oz PM, on how to influence the vote. (It worked for him! Sad )
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 12:52 pm
Some headlines at the news stand today, all splashed big across the front page:

Algemeen Dagblad (Netherlands): "US fears chaos at voting booth"
Rheinische Post (Germany): "Tomorrow, the US elects the most important man in the world"
La Repubblica (Italy): "Il ultimo duello"
(err, thats from memory, I dont speak Italian)

La Corriere della Sera had a cartoon on the front page, headlined "Il ultimo sondaggio" (sondaggio meaning opinion poll): it showed an excited-looking reporter, holding out a mike to a somewhat bewildered looking Osama bin Laden, and asking: "Bush or Kerry?"
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 02:19 pm
What I am finding hard right now is otherwise reasonable folk saying bin Laden has "endorsed" or is "batting for" Kerry..

Man that is dirty.

If A2k is reflecting the US as a whole, he must be laughing and slapping his knees about successfully sowing that sort of especially insidious drama - or is the interpretation just a symptom of the hysterical depths to which the divisions have sunk?

Ozzians - did it get that bad here before the election?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 02:21 pm
msolga wrote:
Kerry's man tells (Oz) PM: mind your manners
By Peter Hartcher in Washington
November 1, 2004

An adviser to the Democratic presidential challenger John Kerry has criticised John Howard for publicly wishing for victory for George Bush in this week's election.

The Prime Minister last week said of the US President: "I hope he wins."


A senior defence official in the Clinton administration and prospective senior official in a Kerry administration, Kurt Campbell, said this was "a little inappropriate". Dr Campbell told the Herald: "I remember when Australians thought there was too much playing of politics here, when the Bush Administration was talking about Australian politics.

"I would remind Australians that the same applies at home. Such comments about our politics are a little inappropriate."


In June, Mr Bush criticised the Labor leader, Mark Latham, for promising to withdraw Australian troops from Iraq by Christmas.

Dr Campbell's comments herald the likelihood that a Kerry administration, while still well-disposed toward Australia, would not be as intimate with the Howard Government.


"Obviously, a Kerry Administration wouldn't be as warm and cuddly with the Howard people as a matter of personal relationships," said a Democrat and political analyst at the Brookings Institution, Tom Mann. "But Kerry will bend over backwards to be conciliatory to coalition partners."

Dr Campbell added, however, that there was likely to be some initial anxiety, regardless of which man won: "If it's another Bush term. Australia's best friends in the Administration, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and his deputy, Rich Armitage, are unlikely to remain in place," said Dr Campbell, the head of security studies at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. "So you are likely to have new players who will need educating or re-initiation into the high priesthood of the alliance."
Further, the Australian Ambassador to the US for the past five years, Michael Thawley, has advised the Government that he will resign to look for a job in the private sector in the first quarter of next year.

So the topmost officials in the daily conduct of the US alliance in Washington are set to change, on both sides of the relationship, regardless of who wins the election.

The two biggest joint ventures of the alliance, however, are expected to continue with only minor change.

First, the Free Trade Agreement, whose implementation has been delayed by US concerns, is likely to take effect from January 1 as planned, informed officials said.

Second, the next administration, whether under Mr Bush or Mr Kerry, is expected to ask US allies for fresh contributions to the occupation of Iraq.

Before the FTA can enter into force, its terms require the two governments to exchange letters attesting that enabling legislation has been faithfully enacted.

This exchange is supposed to occur at least 60 days before the agreement takes effect, a deadline which expired at the weekend. But Richard Mills, a spokesman for the US Trade Representative, said that this 60-day requirement could be varied with mutual consent: "In previous cases like Chile and Singapore, exchange occurred less than 60 days before entry into force, and we are continuing to discuss with Australia implementation measures."

Officials said Australia would need to amend the enabling legislation on technical points on the treatment of intellectual property before the US would agree to implement the FTA.

Also, talks were continuing on details of the pharmaceutical benefits scheme.

On the question of the contribution to Iraq, Australia's response, according to well-placed officials, would be to offer some flexibility in the components of the Australian deployment, but without substantially increasing the total number of troops, which is around 900.


http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/31/1099219993094.html?from=storylhs


Dear goddess! Thus has civilised practice between nations sunk under these people!!!!

Bush does it here - to immediate outcry even from many conservatives - so Howard does it!! The fact that almost no American will know he did it is of no relevance to the fact that did.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 02:53 pm
Well, I tried going to the debate down here in the cinema about the American elections, but it was totally full .. it wasnt free or anything, but it was still so totally full they wouldnt let anyone in anymore, regardless!
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Nov, 2004 03:33 pm
God I love Cath Wilcox's cartoons....

I think the mere fact that this presidential election is holding centre court across the world tells you a hell of a lot about how this presidency is rated.

Normally we just don't care - we've always expected someone reasonable to
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 06:11 am
OK you Americans getting ready to vote.

This is your big chance to get back at us smarmy Australians who always look down on you and call you irony challenged.

Get out there and vote against Bush - then your government will less reactionary than ours and we will be forever mortified and will defer to whatever opinions you espouse because you will be on the moral high ground.

Also I'm encouraging every US busker to get out there and entertain the queues of voters so that they don't get sick of waiting in line and go home before they vote.

This is a very important election and regardless of the result I really need you guys to care about it as much as I do and actually cast a vote.

Remember Jefferson 'The price of liberty is eternal vigilance' so bloody well exercise your democratic right or I'll hold my breath until I turn blue.

Goodnight America....
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 06:20 am
What he said! <nodding head in agreement>
0 Replies
 
fbaezer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 10:12 am
Yesterday's phone poll here in mx:


"Who do you think would be a better US president in his relationship with Mexico?

Kerry 70%
Bush 21%
Nader 9%

"If you could vote in the US elections, who'd you choose?"

Kerry 82%
Bush 12%
Nader 6%
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 10:17 am
Wow!

Do you think that would translate at all to the Latino vote? That's supposed to be a big one, thought it was more for Bush.
0 Replies
 
fbaezer
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 10:34 am
The poll was on Mexican nationals living in Mexico.

Latino vote in the US was, according to the last poll of The Miami Herald: 61-39, for Kerry.

Of course, this is divided differently, according to origin. Mexicans and Puerto Ricans vote overwhelmingly Democrat, while Cubans vote overwhelmingly Republican.

The Miami Herald has Cuban voters 76-24 for Bush (down from 82-17, Bush-Gore in 2000). They say that if Kerry catches 30% of the Cuban vote, Florida is his.

I don't think the Mexican-American vote will be over 70% for Kerry. Bush has done some good campaigning among that constituency, ya know? Some Mexican-Americans I know are doing tax-talk. Some tax return for having children... Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Nov, 2004 10:37 am
Right, that's what I meant about translate in case it wasn't clear -- I knew that was a Mexicans-in-Mexico poll, but a lot of the Mexican-Americans I know keep close ties to Mexico, so it seems like what Mexicans as a whole think often has a correlation to what Mexican-Americans think.

Thanks for the Miami Herald poll, didn't know that.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 11:57:51