An American idol in Germany

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...567919,00.html

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by Skybird

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...567919,00.html

from the link above:
"...the new leader of a lofty democracy that loves those big nice words -- words that warm our hearts and alarm our minds"

And occasionally gets us killed?:hmm:

Germany and no other European country will change stance and adopt new policies based solely on charisma...
Let him sit on the autocrat's throne, manuver his sub through the shallow waters of Iraq and Afganistan, face the problems of internal and global economy, balance terrorism vs human/civil rights and ... and... and...
And after that we'll see if we still belong to the "old Europe" or not!
With political candidates it'w always "trial by fire". Words are cheap and their value is dropping faster than the dollar!

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Skybird

But of course: in case of Obama there is the IF. It remains to be seen if as president he would put his deeds to where his mouth is (not sure if that phrase is correct?). the brains he seem to have for sure. And that may be enough to search and find the experts he need to help him over fields of politics where he is unexperienced.

No you phrased this correctly. If Senator Obama gets elected he will have a pretty big bill to pay the first term. People will be looking close at him. I don't mean the Republicans whom I predict will be harassing him starting 22 Jan (Look for the Barack Obama countdown calender in your stores by Christmas 08). I am talking about the Democrats. The Democrats and the citizens of the US will be waiting and watching for this change that Obama has been promising.

The American people can be a tough audience once they elect a President. They want to see results, good results, and they better come sooner than later.

So no, you were quite correct. Using another American idiom. Senator Obama can talk the talk, let's see if he can walk the walk.

[Skybird]

At least one thing certainly all can agree on: the phenomenon "Obamamania" shows that there is a very widespread, very intense, very hot burning desire for a massive substantial change of fundamental politcal course and orientation. Not only in america, but Germany and probably all Europe as well. 215.000 gathered at the victory column. They said on either CNN or ZDF yesterday that inside the US his record crowd size so far had been 75.000. Also, this yearning seem to be most intense amongst surpringly young generations. On ZDF they said the avergae age of the crowd could not have been beyond 25. But German politicians hardly can activate such public interests anymore, nor amongst such young people. Most are very frustrated and disillusioned and no longer interested in politics. Obama seem to have, internationally, an activation potential that only is rivalled by the feeling of starting new that Kennedy once should have caused (had not experienced him myself,and also I am no fan of him, I think he is overestimated).

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Skybird

215.000 gathered at the victory column. They said on either CNN or ZDF yesterday that inside the US his record crowd size so far had been 75.000.

This is bad news for Obama. US media and the McCain campaign will eat this up.
McCain campaign statement -

While Barack Obama took a premature victory lap today in the heart of Berlin, proclaiming himself a 'citizen of the world,' John McCain continued to make his case to the American citizens who will decide this election. Barack Obama offered eloquent praise for this country, but the contrast is clear. John McCain has dedicated his life to serving, improving and protecting America. Barack Obama spent an afternoon talking about it.

It's stupid and rather weak, but one can see the tack.It will be easy to paint Obama's trip as arrogant and that he is more at home in Europe than America, convincing dodgy voters that he really isn't one of them. Notice the word choice, Obama - world, McCain - American.
Wait for it.



EDIT - Just found McCain eat his own face while attempting to play the More-American-than-you game.

"I would rather speak at a rally or a political gathering any place outside of the country after I am president of the United States," McCain told O'Donnell. "But that's a judgment that Sen. Obama and the American people will make."

It's rather hilarious. Remember his Canada trip only a month ago?

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N20408282.htm

EDIT 2 - Something to keep in mind when the right attacks Obama for being a "citizen of the world"

[Skybird]

But he introduced himself to the crowed as "a proud citizen of America, and a citizen of the world.". Also, no illusions about it, any sympathies he gained in Germany are only a bonus. While holding his speech, his eyes and his words were aiming directly at americans at home - not so much at us germans. I think it is possible that Mccain underestimates the tremendous desire of the young americans for a discontinuity of the Bush-way of going. and by choosing his conventional, traditional tactics to attract the masses in his speeches - he maybe does exactly what will keep the young ones away from him.

A week or two ago I critizised Obama for certain turnarounds he just had shown, and that the long democrat's race possibly has damaged him, and that I see McCain gaining advanatge from that. But that founded on the assumption that he would run normally and would not damage himself - then I see McCain as having slight advantages. but his opponent ir running an almost perfect media campaign, and MacCain seem to be incapable to do anythin against that - media interest in him is only a fraction, compared to Obama. All mmajor networks have major personnell following and travelling with Obama on every tep he makes. And McCain? some days ago I read that during a planned stop in some american town where he held a speech - he was greeted by just one single lonely reporter at the airport.

In Germany, Obama already is seen as the next president. the assumption here is that McCain is almost chnaceless. that is also a lot of opportunistic wishful thinking, of course, and I do not buy it. But I see Obama despite the disadvantage from the long Democrat'S internal battle winning the presidency eventually - because McCain simply is unable to make use of this advanatge and to win by his own power, by that handing over victory to Obama. IF Obama should win, I think this will be the most likely explanation for his victory: that he could not lose because McCain cannot win by himself.

[Platapus]

I think there will be a number of Americans who will casting their vote "not for McCain" and just defaulting to Obama instead of voting for Obama.

What this number will be I don't know but I am pretty sure it is more than zero

This is what is disappointing about American politics. More often we are forced to vote for the person we hate the least as opposed to voting for the person we like.

I think South Park summed it up well: A decision between a turd and a douche.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Platapus

This is what is disappointing about American politics. More often we are forced to vote for the person we hate the least as opposed to voting for the person we like.

First, it is the same over here as well, Second, nonody forces you to vote. I am a string defenr of actively deciding to boycot elections and by that bpoting against pliticians instead for them. I juust insist oin people not to jump elections, buit to give an invalid vote instead - so that non-voters cannot be accused of keeping away for reasons of comfort and laziness, or avoiding responsibility . I give a vote indeed when chosing to make my billet invalid.My vote says that I actively refuse to legitimize what I consider to be bad and undefendable, that I do not trust the system and it's representatives.

That choice you have over there as well. but if you give a valid vote, it means much more than just voting for a candidate. I means you accept the system itself, and it breeding the same kind of untrustworthy profi politicians all time long, and that you actively accept this to be carried on by parties who rate their own power interests higher than the interests of the national community.

In Germany, for the first time ever, the conservative CDU has more members than the SPD, that has been reported in the news today. but that means only that the SPD is loosing members faster than the conservatives do. Fact os both parties have a massive decrease in numbers of memeberships, and since many years. Why under this condition participating in election still is above 50% , can only be explaoned by that bad habits die hard. Like people jump into churches at christmas, even if it is the only day in the year they do so, and for many of them relgious content means nothin for them - many do it for sentimental reasons while remembering their childhood when their parents took them to church as well on christmas evening. The common phrase "But soembody you just have to vote for" in the main illustrates just one thing: fatalism.

[Platapus]

I will have to respectfully disagree with you. I see no point in not voting. If our candidates needed a minimum number of votes instead of a majority of electors I might see some advantage. But they don't. For the office of President there is a minimum number of elector votes that is needed. Electors do not have a choice of not to vote.

If I don't vote, how can I communicate my choice to my electorates? Not that they have to listen to me, but if I don't vote there is a 100% chance they won't know.

One of the problems we have in America is getting people to vote. For a country that likes to fling the word democracy around the world, we are lousy examples. We are lucky to get 60% of our citizens to even give a crap.

Boycotting an election is undemocratic in my opinion.

1. Either my boycott will go totally unnoticed as I would be lumped in with the 40% who don't care and are normally ignored or

2. I would, somehow, influence events by my boycott (somehow make a statement which politicians will notice) which should not happen. Not voting in a democracy should not count more than voting.

I really don't see any advantage to boycotting unless someone wants to call attention to the fact that they did not vote. I don't know how it is in your country but in America once people find out that you did not vote, they usually tell you to STFU. Our culture is that if you did not vote, you have no right to complain.

Politics in America is always a compromise. It is very rare that there is ever a canidate for any office that a citizen agrees with 100%. There is always a trade off.

Sometimes we are lucky and get a chance to choose between the best of two candidates. More often we are unlucky and get a chance to choose between the worst of two candidates.

But choose we must. Voting is a duty to a citizen.

Just an old guy's opinion.

[JoeCorrado]

Originally Posted by Platapus

No you phrased this correctly. If Senator Obama gets elected he will have a pretty big bill to pay the first term. People will be looking close at him. I don't mean the Republicans whom I predict will be harassing him starting 22 Jan (Look for the Barack Obama countdown calender in your stores by Christmas 08). I am talking about the Democrats. The Democrats and the citizens of the US will be waiting and watching for this change that Obama has been promising.

The American people can be a tough audience once they elect a President. They want to see results, good results, and they better come sooner than later.

So no, you were quite correct. Using another American idiom. Senator Obama can talk the talk, let's see if he can walk the walk.

The Republican Party enjoyed a majority in the House of Representatives as well as the Senate- along with the office of the President for 6 years. Six years when they had their way and ran roughshod over any who stood in their way. They had the means and they had the will to impose their wishes upon America, her economy, and her people. And that is just what they did.

Look at where we are today because of it. Americans losing their homes at a rate not seen since the great depression, financial institutions driven by greed and now about to collapse under the weight of that greed, unemployment at higher rates than we have seen in two decades, good paying jobs lost and replaced with service sector jobs that do not pay a living wage, an attack on the middle class that has been as unrelenting as it has been unheralded, undeserved and unfair. An attack upon our very Constitution and our rights such as I had never believed possible in the United States. The PATRIOT act was closer to an act of treason and it had absolutely nothing to do with patriotism!

The war in Iraq was the wrong war, wrong place, and for the wrong reasons. The "War Against Terror" has been on the back burner for too long. The War Against Terror was the right war, right place, for the right reasons but today our soldiers in Afghanistan fight for their lives and are told that no support is available. No reinforcements are forthcoming. You are on your own. That in itself is evidence enough for me just how misguided and inept George Bush and company have been- how vulnerable they have left our nation.

In debt to our gills and unable to sustain the war on terror with the resources needed. For Heaven's Sake, what did they spent the trillions of dollars on and what have we gotten in return?? War, poverty, disillusionment and hopelessness???

Barack Obama does represent change and that is what I believe he will deliver. He offers hope to a country in need and he offers us an opportunity to fix what is broken in our country. BUT, in order to make that change possible, we must do for him what we did for George Bush- give him the means to accomplish the task.

Today, the only people who trust America less than our traditional allies around the world, are her own citizens. The Republicans and George Bush have behaved as if they would never have to pay for their foolishness, but the time has come at last.

Give Barack Obama a strong majority in both the House and the Senate and let him impose the will of the PEOPLE around here for a change.

For a change we can believe in.



I believe in Barack Obama and I approved this message.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Frame57

G.W. is not the best President we have had.

May I nominate that "the understatement of the year"?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Politics in America is always a compromise. It is very rare that there is ever a canidate for any office that a citizen agrees with 100%. There is always a trade off.

I would say IF you vote you have no right to complain - for you have legitimized the cause of the problem itself, and by that have allowed to be turned into an accomplice. What party you vote for, for the most is totally unimportant, the differences in their policies are minor. no matter whom you vote for - you legitimize the system itself by that - amnd today we have reached a astatus where this is the porblem of all corrupting of what democracy ones meant.

i also say that there is no real demoicracy left in the West anymore. Oiutside the West, this is realsied by people in all the world, and that is why the attractiveness of democracy worldwide is in delcine, and acceptance for othert government systems inclduing dicatorship, is high, and even rising. I linked some news essay on that some weeks ago.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Fish

May I nominate that "the understatement of the year"?

Sure, don't stand on ceremony!

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Sure, don't stand on ceremony!

That's probably the one point/statement most people on this thread will agree on. :hmm:

[Frame57]

"Kazakstan supports George Bush's war of terror" Borat