Posted on 01/06/2008 3:56:33 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The rest of the world gets uneasy every four years as Americans start to pick their next president. We don't have a vote. But we do have to live with the results. As the tenure of George W. Bush illustrates – this is not always pleasant.
With the so-called Iowa caucuses out of the way, the murky U.S. political scene has become marginally clearer. Most Canadians would be hard-pressed to name all of the presidential candidates. We now know, thanks to an arcane and not particularly fair voting system in one of America's smallest states, which names we will never have to know. Iowa leaves just two serious candidates – Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton – duelling for the Democratic nomination.
The Republican results are harder to figure out. But Iowa has raised the truly scary possibility that Mike Huckabee, the Republican victor in that state and a Know-nothing in the best American tradition, may succeed Bush. (The Know-nothings were a 19th century U.S. political party devoted to keeping immigrants out and promoting American values. Their influence persists.)
Sensible people outside America can content themselves with the knowledge that the victors in Iowa rarely win the country.
Sensible people outside America can also point to the fact that Arizona Senator John McCain, the most reasonable Republican candidate (he's the only one not in favour of torture), placed a respectable fourth.
Given that the Iowa results severely tarnished the reputation of former Massachusetts governor and one-time front runner Mitt Romney (he placed a sad second) and that Huckabee is a certifiable loon, McCain is now being accorded a chance. All he has to do is convince Republicans that he is less disagreeable than former New York mayor Rudy Guiliani and more serious than former senator Fred Thompson, which in a rational world shouldn't be hard.
Some Canadian analysts will talk about the various candidates' position on trade. They will point out that the Republicans (Huckabee excepted) are generally more open to free trade than Democrats and that the anti-NAFTA musings of Clinton and Obama could – if effected – hurt Canadian business.
All of this is true enough. But one shouldn't take the Democrats too seriously. Like Canada's Liberals, the Democrats tend to campaign from the left and govern from the right. As long as NAFTA profits U.S. business, it will be kept as is.
Conversely, if Congress turns solidly protectionist, there will be little that the most ardent free-trading president will be able to do.
Indeed, the real danger lies not in trade policy but in the U.S. president's near-untrammelled authority to wage war. On that score, history suggests that Democratic presidents are more dangerous, although the younger Bush does severely test that particular rule.
So which of the main candidates would be the least frightening? Common sense suggests that former soldiers are less likely to start frivolous wars because they know the price – another reason for the rest of the world to support former prisoner-of-war McCain. Presidents with something to prove are probably the most dangerous (think Lyndon Johnson and Vietnam). Is Clinton more likely to act tough just to prove that she's not a weak-kneed liberal? Would Obama, the son of a Muslim, feel obliged to ensure that no one thinks he is soft on Islam? Could Huckabee really win?
Huddle around your campfires and shudder. The Americans are choosing their president again. Pray that their decisions are guided by more than Fox News.
Has he actually seen Mc Cains temper?.......I'd say of all of them the one most likely to hit the button in anger is McCain.
Canada has had a long history of electing buffoons and fools as Prime Minister, broken only recently with the election of Stephen Harper.
Speaking of Harper, I suspect that the jerkwipe that wrote this birdcage lining is no friend of Harper’s either.
No doubt he is a World Government type. Maybe too many loonies up his patootie.
Maybe if the rest of the world didn’t “Dis” us so much we would take their feelings into account when we vote. It’s their own fault. They need to be asking themselves why don’t Americans respect their feelings, what have they been doing wrong blah blah blah. /s
He probably considers him "Chimpy McBushitler" writ small.
I don't recall such a debate taking place....
America to world: STFU and MYOB! IF your own countries were such garden spots, the Mexicans would be going THERE!
One of the other "results" that you don't seem to mind, along with Mexico, is that the only reason you've survived as Canada and enjoy your lifestyle is your proximity to America. Were you somewhere else in the world you'd probably be a footnote by now. Go DIAF!
Stupid european dipwad, all national elections have global affects...I think we
should be able to vote in their elections...oh, wait...they don’t have elections
anymore, Brussels is now their unrepresentative over lords. --Here was the take at Newsbusters
Alright. Let’s take this insane little thought to its ultimate, logically “democratic” extent. Should she get her way, it would be just good sense that we Americans should reciprocally be allowed to vote for our choice of candidates in Europe, too. After all, fair’s fair!
That being the case. We would have a chance to install the death penalty all across Europe. We would strengthen gun rights for every benighted, enslaved European in the EU. We would certainly get rid of all their permissive drug laws and we would also make sure their homosexual population lost all the absurd gains in civil unions and government recognition that they have won over the last 20 years. We would also make sure that every European has a giant SUV to drive down their ancient, crumbling streets.
And we could also ship over enough Mexicans so that their lawn care troubles would be over forever (I got that from one of Jay Leno’s striking writers.... and I didn’t pay scale, either).
I should also point out that we have far, far more voters in the U.S. than does Brussels or any other single European nation for the most part. So, WE would have the statistical edge to make Europe into a carbon copy of the great and wondrous U.S. of A.!
There. That all sounds pretty fair, eh?
On the other hand, let’s just tell them to pound sand. It’s easier and by far the more correct decision.
I knew we should have taken over that country in 1812. Although, I suppose we have enough self-loathing, socialist in our own country without importing anymore than we have to.
They just see his liberal positions and assume, correctly, that he’s one of them. One more reason not to like McInsane.
I don’t recall such a debate taking place....
It was a huge debate.
I know, a debate finally settled by the Japanese....but they still didn’t get to vote in our elections....
I once knew an illegal alien who claimed the same thing, that people all over the world should be able to vote in our elections. He didn’t feel that his homeland (Ireland) should offer a similar reciprocity though.
More garbage from up north.
I believe most of the people having a voice in Canadian media who attempt to critique the U.S. are severely insecure, incompetent, or drunk. The last choice being the most likely.
If they would spend more time in self-examination instead of comparison cataloging, they might realize how disorganized and ridiculous their own nation has become.
National nagging has become the standard of what passes for intellect.
Amazing I lost a friend of 6 years over that election, a beautiful canadian girl, must be something in water.
The nation was still bitterly divided. There were rallies for and against entering the war. Charles Lindbergh was bitterly opposed to America entering the war. The Brits, of course, were desperate and mounted a p.r. campaign to drum up support beyond the lend lease program.
Yep, you weak kneed dweebs point them out so that I can pick the Republican that is most frightening to you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.