START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Why the World Wants Obama to Win


US Politics & Gov't  (tags: presidential race, obama, politics, elections, candidates, usa )

Cal
- 676 days ago - theweek.com
People surveyed in 21 countries overwhelmingly favor President Obama over Mitt Romney. What's behind that landslide?



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Jason S. (57)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 7:12 pm
538 give a 68.1% chance of winning on Nov 6.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 7:13 pm
I don't think Obama's foreign policy really works all that well: His idea appears to be to maintain a peaceful image through speeches and diplomacy while, on the ground, continuing with whatever aggressive pursuit of American interests he feels is necessary. This seems to be beautiful finesse, until one considers the dynamics of the U.S.'s most powerful tools of foreign influence, deterrence and coercion by threat of violence.

These both depend upon an opponent's belief that the U.S. would use its armed forces if some action which it demands is not taken, or some actions which it forbids is. Looking at Obama's and the U.S.'s track-record, it seems as though opponents should have no trouble believing that force will be used, but his diplomatic strategy centres around keeping attention on his speeches rather than the track-record. the U.S. cannot have its cake (image of peace) and eat it (maintain the credibility of threats) too. The trouble is that his image as "the man of peace" is a big part of what got him elected and what plays to his base, so he cannot regain the use of the U.S.'s two greatest tools without losing much of his influence at home. To do that, he would have to overcome the image that he established in 2008 while retaining the support of those who backed that image.
 

Maria A. (12)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 7:22 pm
Interesting!
 

Kit B. (276)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 7:28 pm

As usual Stephen is wrong. The majority of people (with the exception of Pakistan) around the world overwhelmingly support, the strong, steadfast hand of a reliable and reasonable leader at the helm of US foreign policy. The numbers of well reasoned comments from people around the world is stunning. They are much better informed than many of the people that will be voting in the US.
 

Rose NoFWDSPLZ (273)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 8:04 pm
I hope he wins
 

JL A. (275)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 8:34 pm
You cannot currently send a star to Kit because you have done so within the last week.
 

Susanne R. (249)
Wednesday October 24, 2012, 9:49 pm
Kit is absolutely right! The way President Obama is perceived by the rest of the world speaks volumes about the way he's handling our foreign policy. Mitt visited three foreign countries during his campaign and managed to create controversy in each of them with his arrogant insults and condescending attitude. It's a tinderbox out there, and we desperately need strong and loyal allies. Mitt proved that he doesn't have the knowledge or experience to handle foreign affairs during the final debate. Any popular policies he described as his own are already in place --which is basically an endorsement of President Obama. Let's keep a steady hand at the helm by choosing the better candidate --again!

Obama-Biden 2012
 

Past Member (0)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 12:32 am
See who they polled and then answer that question.
 

Rana Sinha (50)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 3:21 am
Interesting, noted.
 

Anneke Hut (39)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 6:41 am
NO woman over here would ever vote for Romney!!
 

Roger M. (0)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 6:55 am
It's easy. It's because the Republicans - I remember Nixon, Reagan, the Bushes - scare the hell out of us.
 

Arielle S. (317)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 7:02 am
You can't make friends with a closed fist although many of the Republicans seem to think that is the only way to rule the world. Threatening, being arrogant, being condescending all just make us look like the big bullies we often are. President Obama has the grace, intelligence, and temperament to deal with others. "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding."
--Albert Einstein

 

Ben Oscarsito (335)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 9:57 am
I saw a Swedish poll with the result: Obama 90%, and Romney 10%...how about that...?
 

Gene Jacobson (251)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 11:11 am
Well, Ben, that is encouraging. I wish they could vote. The world certainly has a large stake in who the American President is given our rather large footprint in the world. Being of 100% Swedish ancestry gives our President a sort of combined Swedish/American vote, lol. The world is right to fear a Romney presidency, he hasn't shown a single thing in this entire campaign that would be of benefit to anyone other than his 1%er base. I wouldn't trust him with the keys to my outhouse, let alone the White House. And I truly believe a majority of the American people feel the same way and that will be demonstrated on 11/6. God help us all if it isn't.
 

greenplanet e. (157)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 8:27 pm
Better than Romeny, but we could do with another more progressive choice.
Romney is way too scary.
 

Virginia Esquer (8)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 10:01 pm
i am voting for obama
 

Susanne R. (249)
Thursday October 25, 2012, 10:36 pm
Re: "See who they polled?" I don't know the names of the individuals who were polled, Heidi --and If you do, please share, but I do know that the poll was conducted by the BBC/GlobeScan/PIPA. A few charts are worth a thousand words, so I'm including a link.

HEADLINE: BBC poll: Rest of world favours Obama

"A BBC World Service opinion poll has found sharply higher overseas approval ratings for US President Barack Obama than Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

An average of 50% favoured Mr Obama, with 9% for Mr Romney, in the survey of 21,797 people in 21 countries.

Only Pakistan's respondents said they would prefer to see Mr Romney win November's election.

France was the most strongly pro-Obama (72%).

The survey was conducted by GlobeScan/PIPA between 3 July and 3 September.

BBC poll: Rest of world favours Obama

I don't imagine this information was provided by Fox News. I find it very offensive that they employ so-called "journalists" like Ann Coulter who have the audacity to refer to the President of the United States using politically incorrect terms that are hurtful to developmentally disabled individuals and their families. Fox News has proven time and time again that it has no more credibility than the gossip tabloids it owns that have reaped countless millions for Rupert Murdoch's empire at the expense of anyone with any notoriety and, more importantly, the truth.
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:48 am
Team Romney just pulled in $111.8 million in 17 days.

Fox News is the highest viewing cable news outlet and has been for many years. The majority of Americans watch Fox News because they can hear the truth about Obama. The left wing biased media stopped reporting the truth five years ago.

Romney is up in the polls. So, no matter how the liberals want to spin the actual truth the polls show with accuracy just how the majority of Americans will vote.

By the way, yesterday Obama voted for himself in Chicago. He was asked to show a photo ID....imagine that!
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 3:00 am
LOL, Kit. Obama has been the worst president on foreign affairs. He postures weak and uncaring about the rest of the world. If these countries are supporting him it is directly related to Obama's non involvement in what they do. For example: Benghazi Obama was running around keeping dates with talk show hosts while Americans were killed. No wonder they like him. They also know that when Mitt Romney is elected he'll come down hard on them because he is a true leader. Obama is lazy and doesn't care what's going on.

Remember Fort Hood which was not called an act of terrorism. Obama can't say the word "terrorism" because he is in lockstep with the Muslims abroad. Why does Obama snub Israel? Because he doesn't care what happens to them.

It's time to get Mr. Incompetence packed and on the road back to Chicago. Obama wasn't raised to love America. Read his book "Dreams From My Father." He tells us who he is and what he really believes in and I can tell you now.....he doesn't believe in the United States of America. He showed us when soon after being inaugurated he went around the world apologizing for our country. He may not have said "we are sorry" but he didn't have to. Everyone knew exactly what he was doing.
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 3:06 am
Do you know why France is pro Obama? They are on the brink of raising taxes on those earning $1 million and over to 75%! Know what that will be do France? Their corporations will leave France taking the jobs with them taking their companies to a country where they can realize a profit. Businesses taxed at 75% kill jobs. Obama is all about raising taxes on the rich. France is shooting themselves in the foot. They believe in socialism and so does Obama. Of course they will come out saying they support Barack Obama.
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Friday October 26, 2012, 4:06 am
Oh oh, a PinkMindy-ite! A Christian fundamentalist too? Diane, is Obama the anti-Christ? Not really a Christian but really a muslim? Go for it!
 

John Gregoire (255)
Friday October 26, 2012, 5:55 am
Too funny Ken! Obama is merely incompetent. Whatever became of Pink Mindy? Did she take you folks seriously and crash?
 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Friday October 26, 2012, 6:28 am
Well, we live in Europe and Obama has been a huge disappointment. Don't confuse 'supporting the least worst candidate' with real support. Here in Spain the US is largely viewed as a world bully who has caused more misery and war than it has stopped, and the majority of people want the US military base off Spanish soil (how many of you US Americans would put up with another country having military bases on US soil?)

You in the US have such delusions of your status in the world, thinking the whole world just dreams of moving there and spends every waking minute waiting for the latest pronouncement from the US. Nothing could be further from the truth. What the advanced world wants to see is for the US to quit invading other countries and stirring up hate and violence, to quit interfering in everyone else's lives and affairs, and to clean up the terrible mess in your own country.

Europeans are appalled at the third world lack of health care and other social programs in the US they think an enlightened nation should have. They dislike the US's militarism, high infant mortality, huge gap between rich and poor (worse than Cameroon!) and its arrogance. The silly, unsubstantiated notion that the US supports the whole world is laughable - the US gives the least in foreign development aid per capita of any developed nation (Norway is best).

They blame your corrupt, greedy and incompetent banks and corporations for the misery so many are suffering right now, yet Obama has had the gall to actually try to tell EU countries how they should govern themselves! Countries in the EU have much to teach the US about progressive ideals.

It is no coincidence that the 'Socialist' countries like Sweden, Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands have not been affected by the US caused economic meltdown. Why? Because these states with higher standards of living have never deregulated their banks, and instead of spending their tax monies on war and invasions to enrich their military-industrial complex, they have generous social programs and a much smaller gap between rich and poor. You'll never see poverty over here like is so visible in the US. No, no one considers the US an example to follow and Obama has not changed that much at all.

The only reason anyone here cares a whit what goes on in the US is because the US is the world's self-appointed ruler and what it does affects the wellbeing of us all, and rarely for the better.
 

Vlasta M. (7)
Friday October 26, 2012, 7:40 am
This is a good argument for Barak Hussein Obama to leave US, since he caters to those who want to destroy America and Western Civlziation, his Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and his Saudi King. Europeans conviniently had forgotten that US saved their ass during and after WWII with the US Marschall Plan and all those African and Asian countries had gotten lots of aide from US.

There is going to be a landslide agaisnt Obama on November 6 and then Barak Hussein Obama who is an excellent story tettler (which made him a very rich man) can look for a job outside US. Good riddance ;-)!
 

Gene Jacobson (251)
Friday October 26, 2012, 8:13 am
Sorry, Diane, while Fox does lead in cable viewership, in no way can you state a majority of Americans watch Fox news as the table below shows. A majority of Americans would be something over 155,000,000 people. Those numbers don't add up to anything approaching a majority, they add up to 2, 979, 000 people which divided by our population yields 0.009517571884984. Not quite a majority. Though it does have more viewers than any other cable network, the percentage is still very small. Just so we are accurate on this.

Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for Wednesday, October 24, 2012
P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
Total Day
FNC 1,767 409 803
CNN 375 123 181
MSNBC 726 242 363
CNBC 167 49 84
FBN 76 18 34
HLN 223 82 107
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Friday October 26, 2012, 8:42 am
Rob and Jay, so many huge generalities in your post. You live in one country in Europe---Spain to be specific---which you think entitles you to use 'They' 'They' 'They' as generalities repeatedly by you as if you are speaking for 'all of Europe' and 'Europeans' Must be nice to be their spokesperson lol. 'They' 'They' They'. 'Europe' 'Europeans'. Of course you long since discovered generalities can't easily be argued against, since hey, they're GENERALITIES.
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Friday October 26, 2012, 8:57 am
Breakdown Rob and Jay: "You in the U.S: have such delusions of your status in the world..." GENERALITY. Now I know you don't know everyone in the U.S. or what they think. So that' s LIE.

"What the advanced world wants to see..." Speaking for the entire world now? And the 'advanced' world? GENERALITY.

"Europeans are appalled" and "They dislike...." "They blame..." THREE GENERALITIES..

"The silly, unsubstantiated notion that the US supports the whole world is laughable" GENERALITY.

"no one considers the US an example to follow" GENERALITY and thus a lie since you don't what 'all Europeans' think.

"The only reason anyone here cares a whit what goes on in the US" GENERALITY because you don't speak for 'all Europeans'.

" the US is the world's self-appointed ruler" GENERALITY.






 

Susanne R. (249)
Friday October 26, 2012, 10:34 am
Diane: WHY do you continue to use --over and over and over-- the same talking points that have earned "pants on fire" ratings by award-winning fact-checking sites? Everything you say earns that distinction! You say that the majority of Americans watch Fox News because they want to learn the truth about Obama. If that was true, the last thing they'd watch is Fox News. They watch it because they hate him --and Fox has found a way to make money by feeding that fire. ANY journalist (and I'm using that term loosely in this particular case) who used a politically incorrect term like "retard" --and who used it to describe a sitting president-- would have been fired or suspended by any credible news outlet. But not Fox News! Why? First, they're NOT credible. Second, they promote such hate speech! They promote controversy. They promote anything that increases their viewership and rakes in the bucks. They embrace anything that demeans our President. Ann Coulter is a joke, and so is Fox News.

I thought you had mentioned in another thread that you're a mother and a grandmother. If you, or one of your children, or anyone within your extended family had given birth to a developmentally-disabled child, you'd be singing a different tune about Ann Coulter and about Fox News' failure to deal with her increasingly offensive and disturbing behavior.

That big blowhard clown, Donald Trump, offered $5 million to President Obama's favorite charity if he'd release his college transcripts. If his intentions were anything other than self-serving, and if he was truly making this offer in support of charity, he would have also offered Mitt $5 million to release 12-years' worth of tax returns --just as Mitt's father had proposed every politician should do!

Diane, your hatred of the Obamas goes beyond your hatred of having to pay higher taxes. It's obvious in everything you write. And it appears that Grover Norquist has his work cut out for him. The following article is going to break your heart:

CEOs to Congress: OMG, fix the deficit!

"Today’s Wall Street Journal ran a front page story focusing on a group of American CEOs and business leaders who are calling on our politicians to fix the nation’s deficit problem. They implore lawmakers to look to a model like the Simpson-Bowles plan, which would include both spending cuts and… (gasp!) revenue from higher taxes! From the Journal:

The CEOs who signed the manifesto deem tax increases inevitable no matter which party succeeds at the polls in November. “There is no possible way; you can do the arithmetic a million different ways” to avoid raising taxes, said Mark Bertolini, CEO of Aetna. “You can’t tax your way to fix this problem, and you can’t cut entitlements enough to fix this problem.”

The CEOs all put their names to a letter as part of an effort by the Fix the Debt campaign. It’s not surprising that the campaign’s recommendations take a deficit reduction path similar to the Simpson-Bowles commission’s recommendations, because the co-founders of the Fix the Debt campaign are none other than former Senator Alan Simpson and former Small Business Administration director for President Clinton, Erskine Bowles.

In tonight’s Rewrite, MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell took a look at this effort by CEOs of some of America’s biggest corporations.

“The CEOs believe that the Simpson-Bowles framework of three dollars in spending cuts for every one dollar in tax increases is quote, ‘an effective framework’ for a deficit reduction plan,” said he said. “When AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson was asked about the seemingly unbridgeable gap between his position on deficit reduction and Mitt Romney’s anti-tax position on deficit reduction, Mr. Stephenson simply told the Wall Street Journal, ‘This is bigger than any one political candidate.’”

As for the Obama campaign, spokesman Ben LaBolt told the Journal, “There’s a strong and growing consensus that the only way to reduce the deficit while also growing the economy is through a balanced approach that includes both tough spending cuts and increased revenue.”

For more, check out the full segment above."
.........................
Again, please note, this article first appeared in the Wall Street Journal. These CEOs not only agree with President Obama's policy on debt reduction, they agree that more emphasis needs to be placed on education, especially in the areas of math and science. That they would come out with this announcement in support of President Obama's policies two weeks before the election is telling indeed. Perhaps they're starting to fear the multiple-personalities of Mitt Romney. Sybil had nothing on this man...
 

Kit B. (276)
Friday October 26, 2012, 10:45 am

Come on guys, one can not have a frank, honest, open, factual discussion with a bag of rocks.
 

Kit B. (276)
Friday October 26, 2012, 10:46 am

Huh oh....Breaking News...

The economy grew at an annual rate of 2 percent during the third quarter of 2012, federal researchers said Friday, handing President Barack Obama better than expected economic news in the final Gross Domestic Product report to come out before the election.

 

Ge M. (217)
Friday October 26, 2012, 11:28 am
Kit says, "The majority of people (with the exception of Pakistan) around the world overwhelmingly support, the strong, steadfast hand of a reliable and reasonable leader at the helm of US foreign policy." Yes, we'd all like that but, sadly, you don't have it.

First of all it is clear to me that the American people are not getting any media stories when Obama does something wrong, and for those of you who will jump down my throat I am hearing this from many people all over the US. Out of the US we are seeing what you should see and don't.

An example is the grovelling from Obama and Clinton over the murder of Ambassador Stevens and 3 other members of embassy staff. Apologizing for a video that had nothing to do with it, both Obama and Clinton were totally aware of what was about to happen, they were warned yet the "great statesman" chose to ignore it and. by doing so allowed the murder of 4 American citizens. I'm surprised that he didn't apologize for the murderers having to rape the ambassador's body (I do hope that he was dead at the time).

Michele Obama showed an appalling lack of respect to the Queen of England by hugging her. Absolutely unacceptable whatever the press said, one only had to look at her body language.

When a candidate Obama stated clearly that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and would stay so. Now he is refusing to comment.

Obama has Wahabi Muslim advisers, the same as Bin Laden. Dr Jasser was to have joined them but as he is a moderate, the extremists did not want him and he was told that he was no longer wanted. Obama supports CAIR, a known front for terrorists.

Obama has refused to give Iran a red line. Apart from the threatened destruction of Israel (after all, none of you care) America is also a known target.

There are terrorists based in America (& other Western countries) who are being tracked by the FBI. However, thanks to Obama and CAIR, the terrorists know how they will be tracked and how they can hide from them.

During his term in office you have a 48% unemployment rate and debts so large that, even if no more occurred during the next 20 years, you will not have paid it off.

You have a great president, one who is in the process of destroying US. I, and so many others in the UK can see it clearly. We can see how it is being done, how your right to free speech is being eroded. How Sharia law is making its way into US courts. Yet so few of you can see it or want to see it. There is none so blind as those that point blank refuse to see.
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Friday October 26, 2012, 12:34 pm
Well, THERE'S a reason not to vote for Obama---his wife hugged the Queen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh....my....God!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hey if it bugs Gillian (yet possibly didn't even bother the Queen herself that much) , it must mean something...something important....something really significant....somehow....hmmm....Nope.


.
 

Dave C. (214)
Friday October 26, 2012, 12:36 pm
shows how much smarter the rest of the world maybe than us.....

perhaps......because if Mr. Obama wins we have greater chance for peace, he sees the world as a community and doesn't have a "do it ourselves" attitude, maybe we'll have a chance to stop global warming, etc????????
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 12:43 pm
Susanne R, I don't answer to you. I will use my freedom of speech in any way I deem productive politically and you can do the same.

 

Susanne R. (249)
Friday October 26, 2012, 1:18 pm
Gillian: The importance and relevance of your comments with regard to why President Obama doesn't deserve another term are getting more and more desperate. It seems that you've reached the bottom of the barrel, and if you dig any deeper, you risk falling into it.

If you had looked at the international polls, and a link to the site that posted them was provided in one of my comments in this thread, you'd have seen that the poll was conducted by the BBC (sound familiar?), GlobeScan/PIPA between 3 July and 3 September. According to that poll, In the United Kingdom President Obama was the preferred candidate for President of the U.S. by about 64% of the respondents, while Mitt was favored by about 7% of the respondents. It seems that the vast majority of your countrymen are in solid disagreement with you.

Every point you've brought up is either of little importance (hugging the queen?), or a "pants-on-fire" lie, as proven by the most reliable fact-checking sites. I share your concern over the deaths that occurred in Benghazi, but I also believe that it was best to determine what was actually going on before responding in a way that might have necessitated further military involvement in that region. People in other Islamic countries WERE protesting an American-made film that insulted Islam at the same time the attack in Libya occurred, so there was reason to wonder if the attack in Benghazi was related. A good leader doesn't make decisions without having all the information in front of him and the advice of the best people available. Bush depended on advisers that led our country into Iraq and Afghanistan --and Mitt is surrounding himself with those same advisers. The family of Ambassador Stevens and mother of Navy Seal Glen Doherty, along with his best friend, have asked the Romney campaign to stop using the tragic deaths of these two heroes to further his campaign. As a parent, THAT was more telling than any "theories" presented by conservative sources which, in my opinion, always need to taken with a grain of salt or fact-checked.
 

Susanne R. (249)
Friday October 26, 2012, 1:21 pm
Freedom of speech is a wonderful freedom. Unfortunately, there are those who believe it protects their freedom to lie.
 

jan b. (3)
Friday October 26, 2012, 1:23 pm
Romney's debut on the foreign policy stage opened to horrible reviews. U.K. media tears apart Mitt Romney for multiple gaffes on the first day of his visit to London in July. ..The Polish Solidarity union issued a statement attacking Romney as an enemy of working people. The world is aware that Romney is the same party as Bush republicans who started two wars and the world has had enough of war even though Oil speculators and defense contractors are some of the groups looking to make a killing on another war and would love to get Romney elected.


He seems to insult people wherever he travels.

 

Ge M. (217)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:12 pm
Kenneth, you really show your ignorance every time you "open your mouth and put both feet in", don't you? You do not walk up to someone you don't know and hug them. Royal protocol would have been explained and just plain common sense would be that you just don't walk up to the Queen and hug her. It is also an invasion of her personal space and unacceptable in any sense and an insult. Her body language would have made it clear that it should not have been done. In other words the Obamas insulted an ally.

I also note that you pick on something that you obviously regard as irrelevant but are unable to contest anything else.

Obama spending U.S. tax dollars to refurbish mosques worldwide
http://www.yourjewishnews.com/Pages/22851.aspx

http://www.shoebat.com/2012/10/10/the-obamas-kenyan-branch-revealed-in-shocking-video-obama-family-member-spills-the-beans-about-baracks-wahhabi-connection/

Was Obama gun-walking arms to jihadists?
http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/22/the-real-reason-behind-benghazigate/

 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:27 pm
Susanne, that would be your personal feeling and nothing more. You shouldn't believe everything you read. The Brits aren't behind Obama, far from it. Israel isn't behind Obama, far from it. The only reason any country would be supporting a second term for Obama is directly related to his lackluster handling of foreign affairs. After all, Obama did go around the world apologizing for our country.

So, personally, I wouldn't put emphasis on this thread topic. It proves nothing and is meaningless. Once Romney wins he'll restore our country's dignity and heighten our national security. He will strengthen our military. Perhaps that is why other countries support Obama. They want the weenie American President who has no back bone.
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:28 pm
Romney hasn't insulted anyone. However, talk about insulting an ally of ours turn your eyes towards Israel. Romney had nothing to do with that.
 

Ge M. (217)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:37 pm
Try reading the article relating to this http://www.care2.com/news/member/605579978/3474875
 

Diane O. (149)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:46 pm
Obama clearly showed his love and respect for the Queen. He handed over the Winston Churchill statue because if you folks had read "Dreams From My Father" Obama told you in his own words that his biological, alcoholic deadbeat Dad hated Winston Churchill. So, that statue was one of the first things to go back to England.

Obama also showed his love by giving the Queen an ipod of all things downloaded with all of his speeches. Rich! Bet the Queen put that away somewhere in a drawer.

Gillian, Obama never ever goes toe to toe with the Muslims. It's breathtaking that we are rebuilding their mosques. But, it's what we Americans do. When we blow up a mosque we promise to rebuild them. Perhaps that is something that needs to change. 3,000 innocent Americans were murdered on 9/11 and many liberals believed GWB ordered it and sat back smiling while 3,000 Americans were killed. This is how they think.
 

Kit B. (276)
Friday October 26, 2012, 2:49 pm

Excuse me, but I think I might just go with the BBC on this one. One or two people do not a make consensus nor a majority.

If you are talking about the Treaty of Versailles from WWI then all of the allies are involved most particularly the UK, if you mean WWII, then again look homeward. The US did (with some assistance and cooperation from the allies) rebuild Germany after both wars. Some of our best known business men were fully supportive of Hitler, that is until FDR told them that had to leave Germany or lose their right to operate within the US.

Are you suggesting the United States or any country has a right to destroy nearly one third of the population of the planet? No one, likes what happens within these countries, most directly what is happening to women. but pointing fingers is most certainly not helping any one.

You don't like Obama, well, Gillian you also don't have a vote.
 

Susanne R. (249)
Friday October 26, 2012, 4:52 pm
Gillian: Sometimes a good dose of reality is sobering --or embarrassing-- depending on whether you're misinformed or simply being dishonest to advance an agenda.

This is what I said, " People in other Islamic countries WERE protesting an American-made film that insulted Islam at the same time the attack in Libya occurred, so there was reason to wonder if the attack in Benghazi was related. A good leader doesn't make decisions without having all the information in front of him and the advice of the best people available."

You said: "Susanne, you have just stated that it is acceptable for millions of people to riot, kill, destroy property etc just because they didn't like a film. How pathetic and stupid is that."

Twisting someone's words and adding sarcastic insults is an act of desperation. It's done when a person doesn't have a real response. Was the film in question NOT made in California? Did it not insult Islam's Prophet Muhammad? Am I doing something wrong in admitting that, or should I lie and deny those facts as though they don't exist?

You said: "If you were as savvy as you claim to be you will be totally aware that this was orchestrated to co-incide with 9/11. Did you hear about that? That was where a terrorist group, run by Muslims, flew planes into American buildings and people died. A day of mourning every year but Muslims don't like the idea and wanted to hijack it.:"

When did I claim to be savvy? I've read and re-read my post, and I can't find such a statement. And yes, I've heard about 9/11/2001. I've also learned that the Bush administration had been warned well in advance that Osama Bin Laden had been planning an attack on the U.S. mainland. The U.K's own publication, "The Guardian," covered this story:

HEADLINE: Bush told of hijack warning weeks before 9/11
Rice says briefing contained no fresh information

"President Bush was given an intelligence briefing, entitled Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States just weeks before the September 11 attacks, it emerged yesterday.

Julian Borger in Washington
The Guardian, Friday 9 April 2004 05.51 EDT

Details of the August 6 briefing in 2001, which warned of terrorist preparations being made for hijackings on American soil, surfaced in testimony given by the US national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to a commission of inquiry studying the September 11 attacks.

The existence of the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) had been publicly known for some time, but Ms Rice's confirmation of its title and some of its contents pushed it centre stage in the explosive political row over whether the al-Qaida attacks could have been prevented.

The emotive significance of the briefing - in the form of a memorandum sent to the president summarising potential threats to the US - is all the greater because at the time he received it, Mr Bush was on a month-long "working holiday" at his Texas ranch and spent much of the following days fishing and clearing undergrowth on his land. He did not cut short his vacation or apparently take dramatic steps in response to the briefing."

I do like the idea of rewarding virtue and the punishing vice.
 

patrica and edw jones (190)
Friday October 26, 2012, 10:10 pm
I imagine that most of those people surveyed would be from Islamic countries and the rest have been sucked in by Obama's charisma. It is not hard to fool people most of the time. Mitt Romney would not appeal to a lot of people because he does not ride the waves like Obama and because he is a clean cut family man - that alone would be enough to make him unappealing in this modern world. Family and morals are way down the scale today. Personally I think Obama is a great actor.......he thinks he can make people believe whatever he wants...and it is true.
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Friday October 26, 2012, 11:28 pm
Gillian, it takes a special kind of person to twist something so benign and innocent like the momentary lapse of protocol that Michelle Obama had in one instant of exuberant friendliness of a little hug to the Queen for you to make it into a BAD thing.

Your entire paragraph of a response at how BAD it was shows a perversion and exaggeration of a tiny little thing into something overblown and twisted by you.

Which reveals how if you can do that regarding such a benign little thing, you must certainly be nutso dipso facto about larger issues.

How does this story get from Obama vs. Romney in polls in 21 countriespolls to----MUSLIMS? I'll tell you--- -Rob and Jay, Gillian, Vlasta, pat and edw jones, and now the newest member of the Muslim-obsessed attack dog clique, Diane O.



.

 

Mm M. (450)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 12:16 am
Oh Why do we want Obama to win...Hum Head stuck so deep in sand you really don't care????
 

Mm M. (450)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 12:19 am
OK Ken Lay off Gillian this is a personal attack...GROW UP and be a Man and respect the Code of Conduct of Care 2...Or Just don't give a ????? Totally uncalled for!
 

Mm M. (450)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 12:25 am
BTW Cal Great Photo...While I know Obama has that Ummm smile on his face most of the time...Doesn't have those pecks (sp) probably wrong on the spelling, but have seen photos of him in a bathing suite...No body to show off! Non issue, but was kinda funny Cal! xx
 

Rob and Jay B. (122)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 1:30 am
Good points Gillian!

Kit said: "You don't like Obama, well, Gillian you also don't have a vote." Well, maybe it is time that non-USAmericans got to vote for US president since the US has single-handedly decided to rule the whole world, boss everyone around, tell other countries what to do, interfere and by that interference cause terrible 'blowback' years later, and, with its obscene militarism, make the world safe for its Military-Industrial complex to plunder at their leisure.

Gillian, don't even bother to respond to Kenneth. He's one of those who argue with no backing and knows nothing about anything he argues about. Ignore him.

What's Obama done that is progressive? Where's the 'change we can all believe in'? He's just another Wall St. corporate lackey, just like GW Bush, Reagan and Bill Slick Willy Clinton. There hasn't been a real Democrat in the White House for decades.
 

Carola May (20)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 4:58 am
Here is what he hasn't done, Rob and Jay:

“While the Clinton administration placed 65 species per year on the endangered list, Bush Sr. averaged 58 and Reagan 32, the Obama administration has so far averaged just 29 species listings per year for a total of 59 species. Of these, however, 48 are from Kauai, HI, and were protected in a single rule first developed by the Bush administration. When this rule is factored in, the Obama administration hasn’t made much improvement over the second Bush administration, which essentially shut down the endangered species protection program. Bush fils had the worst listing record in the history of the Endangered Species Act: 62 species listed from 2001 through 2008, or fewer than eight species per year.” Center for Biological Diversity (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/candidate_project/index.html)

His appointments for heads of the Dept. of Justice, Treasury and Environment would all be at home and warmly embraced in any neo-conservative administration. Obama is a fraud as a progressive. His DOJ actually defended Don't Ask Don't Tell in the courts until real progressives made such a stink. He didn't become a supporter of equal rights, including marriage equality, for LGBT people until the polls showed a majority in the US supporting them, then he suddenly became a supporter too. He has an agenda that is obvious to anyone who opens their eyes and does any research, but it ISN"T the welfare of the US and its people.
 

Carola May (20)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 5:07 am
Oh, BTW, I'm British and have spent my life passionately working for human rights and animal rights, and against all people and ideologies that oppose these issues. I will match my progressive credentials against anyone's any day, and I promise any one who is fair that Obama is not a progressive.

I don't know anyone her in the UK that likes him. They may dislike Romney more for his extreme right wing views, but Obama would be a Conservative in any western EU country. We have a Conservative Prime Minister and he's more progressive than Obama on just about everything.

If either Obama or Romney wins, the whole world loses. US militarism will not decrease under either of them and human rights will not be championed by either one of them. Civil rights and liberties in the US will continue to erode. Read this and weep:

http://www.policymic.com/articles/13539/get-ready-for-4-more-years-of-anti-gay-policies-and-patriot-acts-whether-obama-or-romney-wins-our-civil-liberties-will-be-crushed

It is shocking and disturbing that a nation of over 300 million people cannot come up with candidates far better than these too yobs. And as long as the US continues to bully and rule the whole world, everyone of us in the world should be able to vote for US president. And I can promise I'd write my own name in before I would vote for either one of these worthless, dishonest twits.
 

Kenneth L. (314)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 8:26 am
LOL Mm M. Gillian IS the Queen of the Attack Dog Clique and a special type of person who makes an innocent benign hug into a BAD thing. A certain twisted type of intention drives her to do that.

And I'm so glad, more of the attack dogs have come on this thread. Carola May, step right up.
.
Carola May 'doesn't know anyone in the UK who likes Obama.' ANOTHER GENERALITY. The attack dogs are full of endless generalities. No one in their right mind would make such a statement as if it meant anything. Unless Carola May has talked to every person living in the UK and knows what all of them think about Obama, her statement means zilch. Of course.

Rob and Jay LOL! I've deconstructed tons of your endless self-important arrogant blather you've engaged in time after time, and you have NO defense. So all you can do is 'ignore me' LOL. I've called you out as a liar and a coward many times and you have NO defense. Again, all you can do is ignore me.

AND ANOTHER GENERALITY BY ROB AND JAY, regarding me this time "He's one of those who argue with no backing and knows nothing about anything he argues about.".

This is not surprising coming from somebody who tells others which Supreme Being is the 'real' one and which one isn't. LOL! Boy, where do you get your stinking arrogance. Pronouncements by Rob and Jay! Wow. Gotta love it.
 

Phyllis Baxter (39)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 8:27 pm
Obama is seen as unreliable by most Australians over the age of 15. The left and the Greens are seen in a similar light. It is very disappointing and sad for people who invested so much hope in his presidency.
 

Mm M. (450)
Saturday October 27, 2012, 9:14 pm
Goodness~ just today at the Post Office someone was complaining about all of the political Junk and he was carring a baby...I did just say well at least you have more than just bills...his reply to me is I will Vote this year since I want Change and not what I was given...I have protect my child and this Administration is running everything to the ground...I never said anything was just listening to a person and when he left I did said I am happy that you Vote for what you believe it....That is what is important. Change???? Sadly, Never do know what you are going to get unless you have personally worked with and for that person and can gage their personality and Hopefully their intentions. I have sadly come to find out when it comes to Politics People always lie extremely eas, and lie often!. When I worked for some of the past Presidents I was honored to do so, sadly that doesn't mean that I did agree totally with what happened, but only that I thought that this Person would be the best Choice for the United States of America...Sorry Cal...Photo still has given me a smile on my face and did get off the topic (which I HATE TO DO) hopefully, someone will flag this and it will be gone like so many of my other comments are.

Important if you live in the USA Vote your Heart...but please do understand you are VOTING FOR YOUR FUTURE, Your Childrens Future and you are going to have to live with your choice for yet another 4 more years...You really want this past 4 years to continue with what has gone on lately??? That would be so sad for the future of the younger generation that needs a LIFE not Distruction of Environment/Animals! ~ Yes, I do know it will again be BLAMED on BUSH, but after 4 years kinda getting a wee bit old guys. If someone can not take care of things in four years ~ except to drive the USA INTO A DEBT WORSE THAN HISTORY then it is their end of days and it is time to GET OUT OF THAT WHITE HOUSE PERIOD! Just Common Sense...Not a lover of any choice, but know what I have had to live with and the horrific killing and death lately gravely disturbes me....it certainly should make you DIVE IN and take a peek at what is truly going on. NO BLIND FAITH...(OMG LOVE THAT BAND)! Did they know something???
 

Diane O. (149)
Sunday October 28, 2012, 4:53 am
Phyllis, thank you for weighing in on this topic....and I believe you! Just because an article is written by one person, an opinion piece, which suggests that the WORLD WANTS OBAMA simply doesn't make it so.

Obama isn't a leader. In fact, he has been Leading From Behind for four years. He isn't capable or motivated to make the hard decisions. Even Nancy Pelosi had to carry the ball for ObamaCare and from what I've read she was so frustrated with Obama that she was livid and became more determined to get it passed. Meanwhile, Obama played golf or when asked to sit down and approve or disapprove of the bill, he didn't commit and often times just stood up and walked out of the room.

The American people made a huge mistake electing Obama who had no experience whatsoever to manage a company much less a country. This is why Obama will be a one term president.
 

Susanne R. (249)
Sunday October 28, 2012, 12:40 pm
Diane said: "Just because an article is written by one person, an opinion piece, which suggests that the WORLD WANTS OBAMA simply doesn't make it so."

A legitimate poll was conducted --which served as the basis for the article that you refer to as an "opinion piece." The poll was conducted by the BBC/GlobeScan/PIPA between July 3 and September 3, 2012. A lot of time, money and effort went into conducting that poll. To refer to the article that resulted from that poll as an "opinion piece" is insulting to the author of the article and those who conducted the poll and misleads anyone who might read your comments. So whom should we believe? An official poll conducted by reputable sources --or your personal and highly-biased opinion? Ironically enough, you refer to polls often --without even citing the name or source of the poll-- and always claim that Romney is leading in them. And you expect to be taken at your word?

Every comment you make, using the words you addressed to me, "is your personal feeling and nothing more." Personal feelings tend to be biased. Most of us prefer facts. That's why I always cite credible sources to validate my comments. You might want to consider doing the same.
 

Diane O. (149)
Sunday October 28, 2012, 1:19 pm
Susanne, first of all, I don't know if the study/poll is credible. There's always an element of a biased poll being conducted. Secondly, who cares if the world wants Obama? They don't have to deal with his leading from behind and his failure as Commander In Chief. We, the taxpayers have to deal with two credit downgrades, innocent Americans killed in Benghazi because Obama ignored their requests for more security....the list goes on and on.

So, quite frankly, I'm not impressed and I'm not suckered in my articles like this mainly because they don't mean anything....not at the beginning of the day and not at the end of the day. I am concerned about my country not who "likes" Obama around the world. It simply has no relevance to the issues our country faces today.

Yes, I do offer my opinions, however, they are well researched. I've been doing this for a very long time here and other places. Anything I say can easily be googled. If you don't agree with my opinions, google what I've said and get your answer then you can return to me with a researched rebuttal if that is what you want to do.

I don't like your sources so you can give me ten links and I will know by the name who they are and what they stand for.
 

Stephen Brian (23)
Sunday October 28, 2012, 2:32 pm
Hi Kit :)

Where are the comments about the world liking strong American leadership coming from?

Mostly, I have heard comments about how many countries don't want the U.S. military playing a role in international politics because they don't want American interference in their affairs. The major dissenter is the one country in the study where the U.S. has been militarily active, where they have actually seen the "strong, steadfast hand". They don't like it.
 

Diane O. (149)
Sunday October 28, 2012, 3:02 pm
Stephen, which country would that be? Is this country practicing Sharia Law? If you have the time, please elaborate on your comment. I'd like to know who you are referring to.
 

Susanne R. (249)
Monday October 29, 2012, 1:29 am
Oh Diane! I hope Mitt appreciates how much you sacrifice for him!

First of all, we both knew the credit downgrades were caused by the Tea Party refusing to lift the debt ceiling and refusing to allow the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to expire. Yes, President Obama signed an extension of them, but only because the Republicans were holding the extension of unemployment benefits. The President wasn't willing to take the chance that American families might have to go without food and/or shelter.

HEADLINE: GOP Causes S&P Downgrade, but Republican Candidates Blame Obama
The Nation: Ben Adler on August 8, 2011 - 12:10 AM ET

"It is clear from Standard & Poor’s statement downgrading the federal government’s credit rating that it places the blame squarely on Republican actions and policies. Two of S&P’s biggest concerns about whether the United States will pay off its debt are whether Republicans will be so insane as to refuse to lift the debt ceiling, a possibility Republicans intentionally stoked fears of, and whether the United States will raise much-needed tax revenue. Specifically, S&P changed its baseline assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire on schedule in 2012 because Republicans are so insistent that they must be renewed. “We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues,” wrote S&P. That adds $4 trillion over ten years to the projected deficits.

So, how are Republican presidential candidates responding? By blaming President Obama, instead of their co-partisans in Congress who are actually responsible."
............
If your opinions are well researched, why do they never include a source? You don't like my sources, which are all highly respected and credible, because they don't happen to agree with your "opinions."
 

Carol H. (229)
Monday October 29, 2012, 6:42 pm
interesting post with even more interesting comments!! already voted for Obama-Biden!!
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in US Politics & Gov't

Cal Mendelsohn

Cal M.
Cal's contributions:
Stories noted recently: 178
Stories submitted: 23534
Front Page stories: 20459




 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.