Civilised world votes for Kerry

[taranaki]

Global survey shows 30 of 35 countries want Kerry in White House

Wed Sep 8,12:49 PM ET



WASHINGTON (AFP) - A majority of people in 30 of 35 countries want Democratic party flagbearer John Kerry (news - web sites) in the White House, according to a survey released showing US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) rebuffed by all of America's traditional allies.

On average, Senator Kerry was favored by more than a two-to-one margin -- 46 percent to 20 percent, the survey by GlobeScan Inc, a global research firm, and the local University of Maryland, showed.


"Only one in five want to see Bush reelected," said Steven Kull, the university's program on international policy attitudes. "Though he is not as well known, Kerry would win handily if the people of the world were to elect the US president."


The only countries where Bush was preferred in the poll covering a total of 34,330 people and conducted in July and August were the Philippines, Nigeria and Poland.


India and Thailand were divided.


The margin of error in the survey covering all regions of the world ranged from plus or minus 2.3 to five percent.


Kerry was strongly preferred among all of America's traditional allies, including Norway (74 percent compared with Bush's seven percent), Germany (74 percent to 10 percent), France (64 percent to five percent), the Netherlands (63 percent to six percent), Italy (58 percent to 14 percent) and Spain (45 percent to seven percent).


Even in Britain, where Prime Minister Tony Blair (news - web sites) is Bush's closest ally in the war on terror, Kerry trounced the incumbent 47 percent to 16 percent.


Kerry was also greatly favored among Canadians by 61 percent to Bush's 16 percent and among the Japanese by 43 percent to 23 percent.


Even among countries that have contributed troops to Iraq (news - web sites), most favored Kerry, and said that their view of US foreign policy has gotten worse under Bush.


They included Britain, the Czech Republic, Italy, the Netherlands, the Dominican Republic, Thailand, Kazakhstan, Japan, Norway and Spain.


Asked how President Bush (news - web sites)'s foreign policy had affected their feelings towards the United States, a majority of those polled in 31 countries said it made them feel "worse" about America, while those in only three countries said it had made them feel "better."


"Perhaps most sobering for Americans is the strength of the view that US foreign policy is on the wrong track, even in countries contributing troops in Iraq," said GlobeScan President Doug Miller.


In Europe, the exception for Bush was a new ally, Polland, where he was preferred by a narrow majority of 31 percent against Kerry's 26 percent.


Another new European ally, the Czech Republic, however went for Kerry (42 percent to Bush's 18 percent) as did Sweden (58 percent to 10 percent).


Asia was the most mixed region, though Kerry still did better. Aside from enjoying a large margin in Japan, he was preferred by clear majorities in China (52 percent to Bush's 12 percent) and Indonesia (57 percent to 34 percent).


But those polled were divided in India (Kerry 34 percent, Bush 33 percent) and Thailand (Kerry 30 percent, Bush 33 percent).





Latin Americans went for Kerry in all nine countries polled. In only two cases did Kerry win by a large majority -- Brazil (57 percent to 14 percent) and the Dominican Republic (51 percent to 38 percent) -- but in most cases the spread was quite wide.

Bush was preferred in Nigeria with 33 percent as compared to Kerry's 27 percent but the Democratic candidate was favored in five other African states polled -- Kenya (58 percent to 25 percent), Ghana (48 percent to 24 percent), Tanzania (44 percent to 30 percent), South Africa (43 percent to 29 percent) and Zimbabwe (28 percent to six percent).

Strongest negative views on US foreign policy were held in Germany, with 83 percent of those polled saying "worse" followed by France (81 percent), Mexico (78 percent), China (72 percent), Canada (71 percent), Netherlands ( 71 percent), Spain (67 percent), Brazil (66 percent), Italy (66 percent), Argentina (65 percent) and Britain (64 percent).

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...y_040908164913

[Tehvisseeus]

Hmmm I guess I can thank the lord that the "civiliezed world's" votes don't matter

[indyram]

mmmmm let me think, oh yeah

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Hmmm I guess I can thank the lord that the "civiliezed world's" votes don't matter

Proof that rednecks can't spell for shit.

[crapmaster4000]

I think we all know who God is gonna toast! And we will be with them soon.

[Ssom]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Hmmm I guess I can thank the lord that the "civiliezed world's" votes don't matter

I hope you aren't one of those dickheads who goes "Why does the world hate us waaahh waahhh". Because that's the exact kind of attitude that got most of the world disliking America in the first place.....

[kman10587]

Duh, pretty much the only people who support Bush are the brain-washed, terrified American public. Anyone with the intelligence to step back, put aside all bias, and look at both candidates objectively will see that Kerry is the better choice.

[Tehvisseeus]

Hmmm well lets see

1. Ive lived in California so that rules out the Redneck idea.

2. I'm sorry that I spelled civilized wrong. Sometimes I push a key that I don't mean to, but hey if that makes me a redneck I guess myself and everyone who has ever mistyped is a redneck.

3. I really don't care about why people hate the US. I mainly think that its jealousy over being the only superpower left. Also might have to do with the fact that we don't like countries who support terrorism.

4. I actually don't like either candidate, however if I have to pick between Kerry and Bush I'd pick Bush. Kerry is weak on defense and thats enough for me. If I have to worry about dying because I have a weak candidate in office, no amount of tax hikes to the upper class will make me feel better

5. Terrified? Hmm most of the people who I know that support Bush support him because they aren't terrified. Why would they elect a president who has kept them terrified?

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

1. Ive lived in California so that rules out the Redneck idea.


3. I really don't care about why people hate the US. I mainly think that its jealousy over being the only superpower left. Also might have to do with the fact that we don't like countries who support terrorism.

4. I actually don't like either candidate, however if I have to pick between Kerry and Bush I'd pick Bush. Kerry is weak on defense and thats enough for me. If I have to worry about dying because I have a weak candidate in office, no amount of tax hikes to the upper class will make me feel better

You and Jeff Foxworthy prove that Rednecks can be found anywhere, not just the south.

Your ignorance is astounding (and I mean this to be constructive.)

On the one hand, you don't care about the opinions and feelings of people who don't like the US.

Yet at the same time, you support Bush because he will be strong on defence. Lets see, Kerry is now against the Iraq war, and invading other countries, so he must be weak on defence, right?

That makes sense - Why don't you just say 'I don't want to know about them, but lets just attack/invade/kill them if they get too uppity.'

Trust me on this, the rest of the civilised world does not hate the US. We are just free of the blinders that American patriotism/propeganda has placed on so many of its citizens, so we can see what a truly disturbing nightmare the Bush administration really is.

[Tehvisseeus]

Originally Posted by MagicRat

You and Jeff Foxworthy prove that Rednecks can be found anywhere, not just the south.

Your ignorance is astounding (and I mean this to be constructive.)

On the one hand, you don't care about the opinions and feelings of people who don't like the US.

Yet at the same time, you support Bush because he will be strong on defence. Lets see, Kerry is now against the Iraq war, and invading other countries, so he must be weak on defence, right?

That makes sense - Why don't you just say 'I don't want to know about them, but lets just attack/invade/kill them if they get too uppity.'

Trust me on this, the rest of the civilised world does not hate the US. We are just free of the blinders that American patriotism/propeganda has placed on so many of its citizens, so we can see what a truly disturbing nightmare the Bush administration really is.

Yippy I'm a redneck.

Wow ok so I'm uninformed. So thats why you're replying to me by calling me a redneck huh. Normally isn't it the uninformed that have to resort to name calling?

I do care about the opinions of others outside of the US even if they don't like us. I don't care about the opinions of people who hate us because we fight for what we believe is right, or because their government tells them we're evil. When did I ever mention their feelings?

Actually its Kerry's reluctance to vote for any of our modern weapons systems that makes him weak on defense. Keep in mind he has supported the war in Iraq 2 times (or was it 3?).

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Hmmm well lets see

1. Ive lived in California so that rules out the Redneck idea.

2. I'm sorry that I spelled civilized wrong. Sometimes I push a key that I don't mean to, but hey if that makes me a redneck I guess myself and everyone who has ever mistyped is a redneck.

3. I really don't care about why people hate the US. I mainly think that its jealousy over being the only superpower left. Also might have to do with the fact that we don't like countries who support terrorism.

Statement 3,part 1, is pure redneck attitude.rules out statement 1.
Statement 3 part 2, means that you don't support George Bush.

Statement two is twisted logic.My argument was that all rednecks can't spell,not that all who can't spell are rednecks.reinforces my argument that you are under-educated.Still,you won't be needing logic if you are still prepared to vote for bush.........

[MagicRat]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Yippy I'm a redneck.

Wow ok so I'm uninformed. So thats why you're replying to me by calling me a redneck huh. Normally isn't it the uninformed that have to resort to name calling?

I do care about the opinions of others outside of the US even if they don't like us. I don't care about the opinions of people who hate us because we fight for what we believe is right, or because their government tells them we're evil. When did I ever mention their feelings?

Actually its Kerry's reluctance to vote for any of our modern weapons systems that makes him weak on defense. Keep in mind he has supported the war in Iraq 2 times (or was it 3?).

I was (trying) to make fun of your denial of redneck-ness just because you live in CA.

As for "care(ing) about the opinions of people who hate us because we fight for what we believe is right"; this is, with all due respect, perpetuating your ignorance.
You should care about these opinions because this would, logically, lead you to examine why others find these actions so objectionable.

You might suspect that some of the actions that the US has done recently are fundamentally evil, and contradict so much of what the US stands for.

For example, sure, Hussein regime was evil, but that does not excuse an unprovoked invasion of a soverign nation.
The ongoing imprisonment of enemy soldiers in Guantanamo Bay is evil. It is a war-crime. They are obviously not being held in the US becuase US territory is subject to rules of fundamental human rights. So why is is okay for the US to go against their own rules by way of a technicality.
It is not right. It is an evil act, and by its very nature, un-American.

My point is that so many Americans dont care or don't want to know about the actions and opinions of others; and this does a great dis-service to the US, its international influence, it's people and its allies.

[Tehvisseeus]

Originally Posted by taranaki

Statement 3,part 1, is pure redneck attitude.rules out statement 1.
Statement 3 part 2, means that you don't support George Bush.

Statement two is twisted logic.My argument was that all rednecks can't spell,not that all who can't spell are rednecks.reinforces my argument that you are under-educated.Still,you won't be needing logic if you are still prepared to vote for bush.........

1. You ever meet someone from the San Diego area who is a pure redneck let me know because that'll be a funny sight. Besides have you ever even met a redneck to know one when you see one?

2. Sorry it might be because I am under-educated but "huh?"

3. Got me there after reading it your right. I know you probably don't realize this since I'm a few timezones away from you but it was around 2:30AM when I wrote that so I'm just a little tired. Of course its more likely that I said that because I'm under-educated.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

2. Sorry it might be because I am under-educated but "huh?"

You must be if you support Bush's terrorist attack on Iraq as a way of reducing terrorism.If you really want to do more against terrorism, vote him out.Or shoot him.Ireally don't care which,but he is the biggest threat to world peace since Hitler.

[Tehvisseeus]

Originally Posted by MagicRat

I was (trying) to make fun of your denial of redneck-ness just because you live in CA.

As for "care(ing) about the opinions of people who hate us because we fight for what we believe is right"; this is, with all due respect, perpetuating your ignorance.
You should care about these opinions because this would, logically, lead you to examine why others find these actions so objectionable.

You might suspect that some of the actions that the US has done recently are fundamentally evil, and contradict so much of what the US stands for.

For example, sure, Hussein regime was evil, but that does not excuse an unprovoked invasion of a soverign nation.
The ongoing imprisonment of enemy soldiers in Guantanamo Bay is evil. It is a war-crime. They are obviously not being held in the US becuase US territory is subject to rules of fundamental human rights. So why is is okay for the US to go against their own rules by way of a technicality.
It is not right. It is an evil act, and by its very nature, un-American.

My point is that so many Americans dont care or don't want to know about the actions and opinions of others; and this does a great dis-service to the US, its international influence, it's people and its allies.

Well anyone who would want to be well informed listens to both sides of an arguement and then makes their own decisions. Just because I don't "care" what they say about the US doesn't mean that I don't try to understand why they're saying it. You are right that would be perpetuating ignorance.

Well considering that Saddam shot at our pilots on a daily basis and disreguarded many of the terms of the ceacefire reached in the gulf War, the war in Iraq was not unprovoked was it. I'm not saying that the reasons Bush gave for going into Iraq are right because frankly the claims that he made were sure to backfire. I do think that Saddam had WMDs I just think that they were sent out of the country during the month of warning that Bush gave him.

Guantanamo Bay is considered US soil until it's lease expires. The loophole that they are using is enemy combatants not foreign soil. I wouldn't worry too much about them. It looks like the Supreme Court will probably declare that they need to go to court soon. For now they are well fed, clothed, and aren't shooting at us