<p>Also, Obama is just more of an “international” figure. He has an African father, lived in Indonesia, and is multiracial. He would present a very different face of American than Bush does, or McCain would. I recognize that all this is superficial, but the point is that people in other countries probably respond to somewhat different superficial characteristics than Americans do.</p>
<p>Most people prefer “internationalist” heads of state in all <em>other</em> countries, but when it comes to their own country, these same people tend to prefer the “nationalists”. </p>
<p>The McCain/Obama contest offers a clear contrast between a nationalist and an internationalist. Will American voters favor the internationalist this time?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. *****</p>
<p>I’m not so sure about that. They might. I certainly hope so.</p>
<p>If they do it won’t be because he is an internationalist but in spite of that.</p>
<p>Good point.</p>
<p>Actually, I think that international (and multiethnic) quality is part of his appeal to younger voters. For others, other factors will be more important.</p>
<p>I’m not nearly as concerned about who people in OTHER countries want to see elected in the US as I am about what the person we elect will DO for OUR country.</p>
<p>You can go ahead and say that by electing someone who the rest of the world favors, we’ll be gaining favor w/ the rest of the world, but I don’t believe they will change their view of us that much or for that long. They’ll just be smug about how much our election can be influenced by others. As long as we are unilaterally the most powerful nation in the world, we will always be the “bad guy”, no matter what we do.</p>
<p>Don’t vote for Obama because you think it will gain favor for the US abroad - it won’t matter that much & you will have thrown away your chance to vote for the stronger candidate for a false hope.</p>
<p>We have to do what is right for America regardless of what the rest of the world wants. In fact, I’d be leery of anyone who is widely favored by foreigners - not because I don’t care what they think, but because I don’t think they really have America’s best interests at heart (& many would LOVE to see the US weakened).</p>
<p>“Sure, go ahead - let your teenager drive your Ferrari! He looks like a great driver! So what if he’s never really driven a car - he’s never had an accident either… What’s that? Oh, he wrecked your car? Well, you didn’t need a Ferrari anyway; no one should have that nice of a car - now you have to drive a crummy one like me!”. </p>
<p>Surely everyone on CC is astute enough to understand the analogy here. How about this one: “If I do XXX, then will you go out with me and love me forever??”</p>
<p>Is this fella at the New York Times the same idiot who sold us the never-ending war in Iraq, one Friedman Unit at a time?</p>
<p>And, why should we pay any attention to him? Shouldn’t he be rotting in a jail cell with Judith Miller?</p>
<p>Poetsheart, why so skeptical?
source: [Nat’l</a> Poll: Obama +6 - Real Clear Politics - Elections 2008 - TIME](<a href=“TIME | Current & Breaking News | National & World Updates”>TIME | Current & Breaking News | National & World Updates)</p>
<p>What is really significant about the latter figure (54/30) is that it shows that a lot of undecided and/or McCain supporters feel Obama has the edge. It’s not just blind faith from the Obama fans.</p>
<p>I’d also note that McCain has an enthusiasm problem within his own party:
McCain has some huge problems within his own party:
[TheHill.com</a> - New Gang of 14 won’t back McCain](<a href=“http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/new-gang-of-14-wont-back-mccain-2008-06-11.html]TheHill.com”>http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/new-gang-of-14-wont-back-mccain-2008-06-11.html)</p>
<p>I don’t deny the reality of racism as an influence in voting decisions, but I think that the dynamics of this particular race and these particular candidates is going to mean that the people who are somewhat uncomfortable about voting for an African-American are likely to sit out the election – McCain’s position on immigration reform pretty didn’t ingratiate him to the closet racists.</p>
<p>“Don’t vote for Obama because you think it will gain favor for the US abroad - it won’t matter that much & you will have thrown away your chance to vote for the stronger candidate for a false hope.”</p>
<p>I don’t think this is enough of a reason to vote for Obama, but I consider it a bonus.</p>
<p>^^^ Well, Hunt, you just go ahead and hang onto those false hopes. If you think that electing Obama will make the rest of the world “like us” then you just aren’t facing reality.</p>
<p>Don’t you realize that the rest of the world would LOVE to see us elect a weak, ineffective, novice of a leader??</p>
<p>But we did it already, and they didn’t love it.</p>
<p>^^^^ Touche</p>
<p>^^ Yeah, LOL!!!</p>
<p>I’ve said from the beginning that McCain should’ve been elected in 2000.</p>
<p>If your assertion is that electing Bush (ineffective, weak novice) didn’t inspire the rest of the world to “like us” as a result, then why would you want to do it again w/ Obama?</p>
<p>Bravo, Hunt!</p>
<p>“If your assertion is that electing Bush (ineffective, weak novice) didn’t inspire the rest of the world to “like us” as a result, then why would you want to do it again w/ Obama?”</p>
<p>Well, obviously, I disagree with your assertion that Obama will be ineffective and weak, and I also think he’s (somewhat) less of a novice than Bush was. But what will make the world like Obama better than Bush will be a whole series of factors, including his intelligence, his policies, and has background. Again, I think international approval is a bonus factor, and it’s not the main reason I perfer Obama to McCain. In fairness, McCain would also boost our international image above its current nadir.</p>
<p>bz2010–I agree with you on McCain. He’d have been an infinitely better Republican choice than Bush back in 2000. In fact, if he’d had been elected then, I seriously doubt we’d be entrenched in Iraq today. … But he wasn’t his party’s nominee that year because of the lying slime campaign the Bush folks unleashed on him. I oppose McCain today, in part, because he now feels compelled to carry on in Iraq until we can declare “victory,” whatever that means. Like our “victory” in 'Nam all those years ago, which cost more than 50,000 young American lives?</p>