Reader Poll: How Would Non-USA Voters Vote?

elections Last week I announced who I’m supporting in the presidential race, and while my endorsement obviously didn’t help California, it felt good to bring politics into the subject here. And in keeping with the idea of “gathering” together for common discourse on this site I have question for all you readers who live United States.

  • Who would you vote for in this election?
  • And/or what are your thoughts on the elections?

Why should we care? Well, I think we should value your opinion. Last summer when I had the privilege of living in the UK for 3 months I discovered that just about everyone I met over there knew what was going on in American news (and sometimes better than we Americans!). But beyond whether I think your opinion is informed or not, I think your opinion matters because, for better or worse, American policy has major impact across the globe. With great interest then I welcome your voting choices, thoughts and opinions on the matter.


17 responses to “Reader Poll: How Would Non-USA Voters Vote?”

  1. I’m a fellow Obama fan for a variety of reasons, but mainly related to level of intentionality he gives to thinking through issues. He is not afraid to admit that politics requires more than simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses. The issues are complex!
    This election has been particularly exciting for a myriad of reasons. Both races before Super Tuesday were wide open, and it seems that the democratic race still is. It may be decided by the superdelegates and not the electorate – one of the many checks that the Founding Fathers built into the system.
    I suppose my bottom line opinion with election is VOTE! Even if I disagree with your opinion our government is only effective and meaningful if folks make their views known by engaging in the political process.

  2. First my reasons, then my choice:
    The US elections are elections affecting the whole world, therefore we care.
    1. It is true that there needs to be a lot of clean up after the Bush Administration.
    2. The change mustn’t be too radical, because it will only create a split in the population, and the US and the world needs a bit more unity and less agression,
    3. The new president has to have a lot of experience handling the very difficult transition from the Bush administration to a new era.
    4. It is time for women to take the leadership in the States as in some other countries.

    I go for Hillary because she isn’t too radical, she’s got experience, she is a woman ovioulsy and she is a democrat.

  3. Thanks for the space to do this, Wess. Here are my thoughts so far:

    In the MA primary I voted for McCain, and debated between he and Obama. After doing a little research (I do need to do more) I realized that McCain for me was a good mix of caring for the environment, for the poor, and for global issues, but also demonstrates a care for family values and educational aims I can (somewhat) agree with. So that is where I am now.

    Obama for me is too liberal in a few areas in the sense that values/ethics become too individualized. These are burgeoning thoughts, of course, but where I am now.

  4. Well, here in Oz, most of our foreign policy has been taken straight from whatever the States tell us to do, so I’ve been following this election very closely. It’s got to be Obama, for my mind. He embodies so many of the things that the world still admires about the US, and he genuinely does seem to inspire hope.

  5. I’m also an Obama supporter, but I think it’s more to do with the fact that I like his image. He doesn’t seem arrogant, or mouthy, or war-hungry, or… well – stereotypically American.

    I long for the day when US politics involves more than just one party – much like my home country of Canada, but until that day I hope we strive to elect more minorities, women, youth, and poor to positions of power.

  6. Outside the US, three issues are dominant. Global security/conflict, economics and moral leadership. The “rest of the world” is cautious about the US’ capacity to project conflict, it needs the US economy to be strong and open so that wealth is generated across the world and it needs the US to show moral leadership in making international relations and agencies function properly.

    Of course, the current administration has failed on these three counts and put “the rest of us” at greater risk.

    In some ways, any of McCain, Obama or Clinton would be a vast improvement and, back when the field was still much larger, they would have been the choices. Thankfully the “horror” candidates have dropped out.

    Of those, my preference would be Obama, becuase he is the post-60s candidate. I’m weary of the US’ internal struggles from the 60s – Vietnam, Civil Rights, Culture Wars – defining the global political realm. We’ve had nearly 30 years of that, since Reagan came to power. It’s time to move on from that.

  7. Eric,

    The Founding Fathers did not create the “check and balance” system of Super Delegates. That is a modern invention by the Democratic party to allow the party regulars some say in determining a candidate. It was a reaction to the abysmal campaign of McGovern when he was destroyed in the general election by Nixon. They never wanted such an “un-electable” candidate to be nominated again. The situation of Super Delegates could cause a stir at the convention if they do not pick the candidate who has won the most votes. It will be interesting to see what happens.

  8. Well…i should be studying for the huge Gospels exam i have at 8 a.m. tomorrow but i closed the window and then opened it again because I really wanted to answer this question. This is actually the first presidential election i will vote in and have given this much consideration surprisingly. Growing up in an all republican environment has always convinced me that this party was some sort of “christian mandate.” But growing up, moving out of the house has of course shown me differently.

    If i had to vote tomorrow, I would vote for Obama without any second thoughts. He is not an one issue guy and he is concerned with things that i honestly deem important. The election is not just an issue of legalizing abortion or pulling soldiers out of Iraq though I think both of those are important. I want a candidate that will be global with his/her views and speak out against the atrocities that are being committed across this world. I also want him/her to keep our environmental well being in mind. I feel like Obama best represents all of these. I have had this conversation in the institution that i attend and it’s mildly comical how people view Jesus as if he was a Republican. I don’t think it’s this black and white.

    So Obama it is.

  9. @Geoff- I like how you said “obama inspires hope.” i think that is one of the most appealing qualities he displays.

  10. Obama – for so many reasons. He inspires people and creates hope for a better future.

    While many may say that he is inexperienced, he also has the advantage of not being in politics for so long that he’s tarnished by scandal and political manouvering.

    I really hope that he will be as good as he sounds.

    On another note – if the President of the US really is the world leader, shouldn’t we all get a vote? ; )

  11. Hey Wess. Following the election stuff avidly here in Northern Ireland, where it still astonishes me that Mr Bush came to Belfast before he went to the Mid East! Bizarre.

    The world needs a united USA, or at least a less divided United States.

    It’s Obama for me (if only for the rhetoric of New Hampshire which was wonderful and inspiring, and so what if it was only rhetoric…we all need inspired.) He also seems to be getting some bleed-over from Republicans, at least in the polls and can deliver a speech.

    It seems to me that Hillary divides even her own party, and is detested by the Republicans. Her election just would not be a good thing for the rest of us. Anyway, the Bush/Clinton hegemony needs broken. It’s not good for democracy.

    McCain is best of a poor lot in the Republican camp. And at least he would be a major change from the present incumbent.

    Last time round the US consulate here in Belfast hosted an election night party in which all guests got a ‘vote’. A great night, at least for the food and drink. This year’s should be even better.

    PS Is your header a shot of the Giant’s Causeway??

  12. We all have to care about politics. When Jesus was carrying out God’s purpose for him, Jesus was upsetting the Roman applecart. He was getting up the nose of the status quo.

    Now we, if we are his disciples, have to challenge ourselves about whether we can stand aside from politics or whether we should get stuck in.

    Obviously, you’ve got stuck in Wess, but then you’re much closer to the coalface than I am.

    When we bring into God’s light the policies of the politicians, whose manifesto stands up to scrutiny?

    I don’t know much about any of the big four policies per se, as they all seem to blur more or less into one as I look. Sure, the Republicans have a slightly more right-wing approach. But the emphasis is on ‘slight’.

    What wing was Jesus on? Or, like David Beckham, was he better at the set-piece?

    In the UK, we do spend a lot of time monitoring US politics. On one of the early US state votes in January, the Guardian newspaper went to seven editions instead of the usual five, as they sought to keep up with overnight developments. There is definitely interest here.

    On the Democrat side of the fence, there is something of an unfortunate dichotomy going on. Though probably not intentional, you’ve ended up with two important causes going head-to-head – women’s rights v. ethnic minorities. Too bad that you don’t have a black woman in the contest. Sure one can fight the other’s cause, but on the face of it, it looks like one is trying to defeat the other.

    Another view: the first this or that (ie not a white man) to be president is an exciting opportunity, it won’t necessarily turn out good – Margaret Thatcher was our first female prime minister and we suffered her for eleven and a half years.

    Even if Obama or Clinton make it to the White House, aren’t they likely to be the US president with the highest risk of being assassinated simply for who they are?

    So far, I am sitting on the fence in this election race. I’ll take a view nearer the time.

    For now I’m more interested in the London mayoral race, seeing as I’ll actually have the right to vote in that one. Will we have more years of Red Ken, a new era with bumbling Boris, or will Brian Paddick or Sian Berry swing a surprise?

  13. I asked my husband, who is Mongolian, and he said he hasn’t decided who he wants to win yet, but that he has decided who he doesn’t want to win: Obama.

    Unfortunately he can’t vote. Bummer.