Poll: Many in world look to US election .

[china]

Subscribe to free Email Newsletter Home|China|BizChina|World|Opinion|Sports|Olympics|Entertainment|Lifestyle|Culture|Citylife|Photo|Forum|Weather
WORLD / Top News

Poll: Many in world look to US election for change

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](Agencies)
Updated: 2008-06-13 13:44[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

Presumptive Democratic Presidential nominee Senator Barack Obama is pictured on stage during a campaign rally in Bristow, Virginia, June 5, 2008. [Agencies]​

Washington -- People around the globe widely expect the next American president to improve the country's policies toward the rest of the world, especially if Barack Obama is elected, yet they retain a persistently poor image of the US, according to a poll released Thursday. The survey of two dozen countries, conducted this spring by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, also found a growing despondency over the international economy, with majorities in 18 nations calling domestic economic conditions poor. In more bad news for the US, people shared a widespread sense the American economy was hurting their countries, including large majorities in US allies Britain, Germany, Australia, Turkey, France and Japan.
Even six in 10 Americans agreed the US economy was having a negative impact abroad.
Views of the US improved or stayed the same as last year in 18 nations, the first positive signs the poll has found for the US image worldwide this decade. Even so, many improvements were modest and the US remains less popular in most countries than it was before it invaded Iraq in 2003, with majorities in only eight expressing favorable opinions.
Substantial numbers in most countries said they are closely following the US presidential election, including 83 percent in Japan -- about the same proportion who said so in the US. Of those following the campaign, optimism that the new president will reshape American foreign policy for the better is substantial, with the largest segment of people in 14 countries -- including the US -- saying so.
Andrew Kohut, president of Pew, said many seem to be hoping the US role in the world will improve with the departure of President Bush, who remains profoundly unpopular almost everywhere.
"People think the US wants to run the world," said Kohut. "It's not more complicated than that."
Countries most hopeful the new president will improve US policies include France, Spain and Germany, where public opposition to Bush's policies in Iraq and elsewhere has been strong. Strong optimism also came from countries where pique with US policies has been less pronounced, including India, Nigeria, Tanzania and South Africa.
Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon have the strongest expectations the next president will worsen US policies, consistent with the skepticism expressed on many issues in the survey by Muslim countries. Japan, Turkey, Russia, South Korea and Mexico had large numbers saying the election would change little.
Among those tracking the American election, greater numbers in 20 countries expressed more confidence in Obama, the likely Democratic nominee, than John McCain, the Republican candidate, to handle world affairs properly. The two contenders were tied in the US, Jordan and Pakistan. Obama's edge was largest in Western Europe, Australia, Japan, Tanzania and Indonesia, where he lived for a time as a child.
The US was the only country where most expressed confidence in McCain. Besides the countries where he and Obama were tied, McCain's smallest gaps against his rival were in India and China, where neither man engenders much confidence.
[/FONT]

1 2

1 2

Print This Article

E-mail​

Comments on the story (total 7)





Top World News

• More Americans believe Obama's ability to handle economic issue: poll
• Inflation to cause global recession
• Yahoo ends all talks with Microsoft, shares plunge
• Bush threatens Iran with new sanctions
• Kenyan ministers killed in plane crash

Today's Top News

• Beijing, Taipei agree on direct weekend flights
• Tightening concerns sink stocks
• Many look to US election for change
• Frugal life for pandas in Chengdu
• Landmark Straits talks yield full agreement

Most Commented/Read Stories in 48 Hours

Cuba's Robles breaks men's 110m hurdles world record

Findings published on quake fund diversion

Beauty contest in India

College girls go nude before camera for eternal beauty

Straits talks yield full agreement

Nepal leader eager to visit China

 

[darkbeaver]

That's very hard to believe. Most of the world expects no difference whatever in US policy, even if they elect a dead man/woman.

 

[talloola]

That's very hard to believe. Most of the world expects no difference whatever in US policy, even if they elect a dead man/woman.

What they have now, is 'dead in the head', and it will take a while for a new president
to bring back some respect and confidence toward the u.s.

 

[Scott Free]

That's very hard to believe. Most of the world expects no difference whatever in US policy, even if they elect a dead man/woman.

I agree with you. Anyone who thinks that doesn't know their history very well. Like Winston Churchill said: You can count on the Americans to do the right thing after they have exhausted all the other options.

 

[scratch]

That's very hard to believe. Most of the world expects no difference whatever in US policy, even if they elect a dead man/woman.

Good morning dark,
And I quote `even if they elect a dead man/woman`. Please explain.
Assassination?
Since I believe that "real" American policy is governed and controlled by the MIC, why bother?
Regards,
scratch
:?::?::?:

 

[L Gilbert]

If the administration would just get rid of the Central Idiot Agency, I think the rest of the planet might have a little more respect. In major issues, I doubt the CIA has been right more than wrong. Iraq's WMDs, El Salvador's "communist" guerillas killing of civilians and clergy, etc.

 

[Praxius]

"Andrew Kohut, president of Pew, said many seem to be hoping the US role in the world will improve with the departure of President Bush, who remains profoundly unpopular almost everywhere."

Ok, now they got me curious.

Almost Everywhere? Besides Texas, Where else in the world do the majority think positively towards Bush? Seriously I'm curious to know.

"People think the US wants to run the world," said Kohut. "It's not more complicated than that."

Not the most friendlest image to have.

"The US was the only country where most expressed confidence in McCain. Besides the countries where he and Obama were tied, McCain's smallest gaps against his rival were in India and China, where neither man engenders much confidence."

Oh geez.... we're all screwed now.

 

[I think not]

The world doesn't vote in the US Praxius, so really it becomes irrelevant.

 

[darkbeaver]

The world doesn't vote in the US Praxius, so really it becomes irrelevant.

But the US votes in the wider world ITN therefore it is relevant.

 

[darkbeaver]

Good morning dark,
And I quote `even if they elect a dead man/woman`. Please explain.
Assassination?
Since I believe that "real" American policy is governed and controlled by the MIC, why bother?
Regards,
scratch
:?::?::?:

The president of the US makes no decision independent of the bankers and the Israelis therefore a dead person could hold the office quite sucessfully.

 

[I think not]

But the US votes in the wider world ITN therefore it is relevant.

Would you cast your vote based on what the world wants DB? I'm not being sarcastic, serious question.

 

[Praxius]

I agree with you. Anyone who thinks that doesn't know their history very well. Like Winston Churchill said: You can count on the Americans to do the right thing after they have exhausted all the other options.

Yeah what's with that?

Are they trying to be like Artists or something? Always wanting to try and be different from everybody else regardless of how stupid it seems?

"You guys drive in that lane? Well we'll drive this way!"

"You guys are using that Metric System? Well we'll use our miles and gallons"

"You say'n Tomater? We'll call it a Tamatee!"

"You got that fancy cheap car, the Kia Spor'tagé? Well we got the Kia Sport'edge!"

"You got French Fries? Well Oohh La la.... We got FREEDOM FRIES!!!!! YEAAAHHH YEEAAH..... USA! USA!"

 

[I think not]

Yeah what's with that?

I dunno, you tell us, you seem to have a better grasp about the US than we do.

Are they trying to be like Artists or something? Always wanting to try and be different from everybody else regardless of how stupid it seems?

Give us some fine examples other than the nonsese further down.

"You guys drive in that lane? Well we'll drive this way!"

You must be thinking about the Brits and former colonies because everyone else in the world drives the same way.

"You guys are using that Metric System? Well we'll use our miles and gallons"

The Brits don't use metric and neither did you up until recently, although you do use kilometers when driving and feet and inches when measuring, must suck when you can't make up your minds eh?

"You say'n Tomater? We'll call it a Tamatee!"

What aboot it? You don't like tamatees?

"You got that fancy cheap car, the Kia Spor'tagé? Well we got the Kia Sport'edge!"

Fancy and cheap don't mix in case you haven't noticed.

"You got French Fries? Well Oohh La la.... We got FREEDOM FRIES!!!!! YEAAAHHH YEEAAH..... USA! USA!"

LOL!

 

[darkbeaver]

Would you cast your vote based on what the world wants DB? I'm not being sarcastic, serious question.

Yes, the world wants to eat, live in peace and be free, that is the desire of the majority and that is democracys promise.

 

[scratch]

The president of the US makes no decision independent of the bankers and the Israelis therefore a dead person could hold the office quite sucessfully.

I like it.

 

[eh1eh]

"People think the US wants to run the world," said Kohut. "It's not more complicated than that."

You're darn right it's more complected than that. But really it is still rather simple.

The US doesn't want to run the world. Who in their right mind would want that responsibility? The US just wants to control access to wealth and resources. That makes perfect sense. What country doesn't want that? Canada does the same thing around the world but because were smaller and weaker we just have to be nice to the assets we decide to control. So the world is watching the US election run up with baited breath. I personally think whoever gets in will make changes that will affect the world. Really that can't be avoided considering the size of and the wealth of the US.

When China starts to have this kind of influence on world dynamics I think we will be looking there too.

 

[earth_as_one]

This makes Obama different:

Good afternoon. Let me begin by saying that although this has been billed as an anti-war rally, I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances.

The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union, and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil. I don’t oppose all wars.

My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton’s army. He saw the dead and dying across the fields of Europe; he heard the stories of fellow troops who first entered Auschwitz and Treblinka. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil, and he did not fight in vain.

I don’t oppose all wars.

After September 11th, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this Administration’s pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.

I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance， corruption and greed， poverty and despair.

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not – we will not – travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

Obama represents change. But then again, by the time he becomes President, he might have sold out. Actions speak louder than words.

 

[china]

I think not ,

I dunno, you tell us, you seem to have a better grasp about the US than we do.

The Canadians think that they have a better grasp of not only the US of A ,China ,but of the whole world .That is judging the posts.

 

[earth_as_one]

I doubt Canadians have a better grasp of the USA than Americans, or a better grasp of China than the Chinese... But I feel confident of making this general statement:

Canadians understand the US better than most Chinese.

Canadians understand China better than most Americans.

Its not that Canadians are more intelligent, rather we are more focused outward while Americans and Chines are more focused inward.

Toronto is the most culturally diverse city I'm aware of. Canada embraces multiculturalism (immigrants are encouraged to maintain their culture), rather than the American cultural melting pot (cultural assimilation).

Anyway that's one Canadian's viewpoint.

 

[Scott Free]

Canadians understand the US better than most Chinese.

If true, I'm not sure that's a good thing. :-?