Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 1, 2008, 5:56 pm

As far as the things that actually effect the lives of Europeans, neither candidate will change anything. I would be curious to see if Obama makes any difference in the America-hatin’ I have been feeling from Europeans, but any progress in that area would wear off quickly, I fear.
IMNTBHO, Europeans that like Obama tend to do so because they believe that he hates the same things about the U.S. as they do.
He hates those same things about Europe, too.
In four years, there will be no changes that depend on the Executive Branch, and its presidency, that could possibly be felt in our lives over here in Europe, unless Ron Paul got in, and managed to institute his monetary policy, and even then, it wouldn’t necessarily be an easy transition, even if it were statistically possible for it to happen.

Obama would still be the president of the same old USA, and being positive about his “potential” and “hope” will get old, as the realization sinks in that he doesn’t actually control the world economy, and improving good feelings among the diplomats of the world doesn’t spell into making individual European’s lives any better.

I am going to go so far as to say that large U.S. companies, once faced with the new tax burden that he has implicated for them, will cause negative effects in world markets as they try to adapt, and Europeans certainly aren’t going to benefit from any of the federal programs that the new tax revenue will be funding.

Happier poor people in the U.S. ? happier people in Europe.

Any change that is felt here in SPain, will largely be psycho-somatic.
No matter WHO the guy living in the WHite House is.

Comment from Margot
Time: November 1, 2008, 7:38 pm

@Ben: “….Hope he wins, even from a not-very-political European’s perspective, the alternative just looks like more of the same… ”

…which actually means: A continual downward spiral

Comment from James
Time: November 1, 2008, 8:18 pm

¡Sí se puede! ¡Sí se puede!

Comment from John
Time: November 1, 2008, 8:41 pm

I think the whole world echoes your thoughts! Lets hope the US voters hear it!

Comment from Edith
Time: November 1, 2008, 9:18 pm

James, I was just about to write those very words when I read your post!

¡Ojalá que sea así! ¡Adelante Obama!

Comment from Margot
Time: November 1, 2008, 9:49 pm

The atmosphere now in the States is absolutely electric with a charge unlike anything I’ve ever experienced before during an election.
Mind you there’s never been a campaign that’s gone on for so long…almost 2 years, and there have never been so many different media sources (24/7 cable news, internet, blogs etc.)
contributing to the din already provided by the blah-blah-blah of the more traditional news sources but most important of all:
It’s never before mattered so much to so many ie: The Entire Planet.

Comment from Tom
Time: November 2, 2008, 12:39 am

@Ray - what the hell are you talking about? You seem to think that one President can’t make a difference. Are you totally unaware of what the last 8 years has given us? Don’t you see that Bush’s tenure has led to a unequalled level of disapproval overseas?

The US President is an important office and it affects the world. That’s why bloggers are talking about it.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 2, 2008, 1:00 am

@Tom
Approval in the press and among politicians, luckily, doesn’t have much to do with real people’s actual lives.
Curiosity makes me want to see if Obama as president would actually translate into people around the world changing their opinion of ‘America’ but I don’t think it will.
At least it would make those who happen to be racists in Spain sound all the more ignorant when they try to excuse their bigotry with the excuse that, “well the U.S. is racist.”
But, seriously, my point is this: The differences between the platforms of the two frontrunners in this race are not disparate enough to expect that either will make much of a REAL difference around the globe.
I fully expect Obama to win, just as I expect it to not make any real difference in our lives. At least not in the things most of us find important when we turn off the T.V. The charm will wear off, markets will slowly correct themselves, before any economic policies get instituted to be able to have been the cause, OPEC will continue to play with production and prices of fuel, and the prices of everything else will follow suit, just as they have under this president. And none of the major influences on world economics would be significantly different no matter which one of the politicians wins.
The U.S. presidency is highly overrated, despite it being on the verge of becoming unconstitutionally over-inflated.

Comment from Tom
Time: November 2, 2008, 1:28 am

If you knew anything about geopolitics, you’d be aware that (much as we hate it), the US Presidency has an uncanny knack for dictating how the world works.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 2, 2008, 1:38 am

Please enlighten my ignorance.
What will Obama do that will effect your life?
Or give me an example of the average European’s life that will be effect by Obama’s policies.
How long will that take to happen?

Okay, now tell me what will be different in that example if McCain’s policies are instituted, instead of Obama?

I will concede that the U.S. government, its people, and especially past presidents should be ashamed of how much the role of president has been exaggerated, and the manner in which the executive branch has been allowed to bully its way into the position it currently has.

The world should be ashamed for buying this, hook, line and sinker. The U.S. president has influence on global politics, but is certainly no dictator, and the world needs stop pretending like it is the be-all and end-all of what goes on in our lives.

But of course, perception tends to become reality, especially when it sells so many TV ads.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 2, 2008, 2:31 am

I have re-read my comments.
I feel I need to clarify, and no, I am not a very smart person, and I don’t think that I fully understand politics.

I have been arguing that the U.S. presidency isn’t as important as many people in Europe seem to perceive it to be, although I do recognize it is important.

What I mean to express is that after this election, barring something very unexpected, either McCain or Obama will be president. However, the policy differences between the two are not enough for it to really matter to the typical European which one of the two it is, despite the perception that it will.

McCain will not make decisions that are so significantly different from Obama that the effects, (on the economy of the average European,) will be noticeable.

The differences WILL be in their popularity, approval, cooperation, dog and pony.

Would the economic decisions that the European Union makes actually be significantly different if Rajoy was president of Spain, instead of Zapatero? Would Rajoy have been invited to the summit? More than likely, Not. The policies would be basically identical, despite Spain having a large and important economy. 8th in the world, right?

It’s a big dance, the world economy, and the U.S. president isn’t the band, but just another dancer. It reminds me of Will Smith’s line in Men in Black, “You know the difference between you and me? I make this look good…” But they are all dancing to the same music.

Natural resources, especially fossil fuels, and system the entire world uses to create ‘money’ through banks lending money, hold much, much, much more sway over the actual price of things, and the value of the money that individual families have to spend, than whoever happens to be in the Oval Office.

It has a certain significance, but it is almost irrelevant when compared to the larger influences that are in play.

Just one example: OPEC has a big influence on what the worldwide costs of fuel are going to be. The U.S. president may make decisions that have some small pull with this cartel, but do you actually think that it matters if that president happens to be named “McCain” or “Obama?”

Maybe they will pal-up with him because his middle name is Hussein? Get real, right?

The Russian president has a much more immediate effect on the price of an important fossil fuel, natural gas in Europe, than the U.S. president ever will. If Russians decide to leverage this influence, and get more value for their natural resource, will it really matter who the U.S. president is? The only thing that can really make a difference in this example is Europeans find ways to decrease their level of demand. What does the U.S. president have to do with Europeans using less gas?

I honestly would like a European to explain what the difference between an Obama presidency and a McCain presidency will have in their life. (I can think of a few things, but I don’t know enough about geopolitics to explain them.)

Comment from jmbrow29
Time: November 2, 2008, 4:20 am

Well, I’m definitely going to do my part this coming Tuesday to put Obama in the Oval Office! If the alternative happens… Well, let’s just try not to think about that. It’s too sickening.

Comment from Tom
Time: November 2, 2008, 11:57 am

Ray - you’re right that both candidates represent a similar set of interests. Personally, I’d have trouble voting for either.

The difference is the sort of attitude a president brings to the world. Bush has been arrogant, petulant and scheming. He is reviled around the world and like it or not, his election has led to an huge increase in global instability and anti-American sentiments. McCain is reactive, moody and irritable. He’s out of touch and appears to have poor judgement. Obama seems to know which advisers to pick, and offers a confident, fresh outlook as well as an apparently redistributive fiscal policy.

The differences aren’t huge but they are there, Ray.

By the way, I apologise for being a bit ratty in my comments yesterday.

Comment from Joe
Time: November 2, 2008, 3:35 pm

One important quality of Obama’s is that he is a citizen of the world; he has seen and lived in other places besides the U.S. and thinks about America’s position and reputation among other nations. This is rare for an American politician, as many Americans actually see a lack of curiosity about other countries as a virtue. There is a huge difference across the board between him and McCain. He is the first politician I’ve even worked for and given money to… Wish us luck on Tuesday.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 2, 2008, 5:06 pm

@ Joe: I agree with most of what you posted, however while it can be said that “many Americans actually see a lack of curiosity about other countries as a virtue” it can also be said that many Americans place a value in global cooperation and want to get away from the isolationist position that the Bush Administration pit the US in. If there is any question as to the effect a US president has on the world, one need only look to the series of events which were allowed to happen by the Oval office within the US, that led to the economic destabilization in Wall Street and its far-reaching effects globally. How the individual European is affected is that their currency has and will devalue consequently.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 2, 2008, 6:48 pm

@ValenciaSon: Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought that Euros have never been able to buy so many Dollars, as they have in the last few years. While that has dropped slightly in the past month, how did that have anything to do with who’s president? What is going to be so different about an Obama presidency that would keep the value of the Euro up?

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 2, 2008, 6:58 pm

@raytibbitts: The oversite that an Obama Administration would apply to Wall St. could avoid unsafe economic practices which would over time improve investor confidence which could then stimulate the US economy and other economies tied in with it. Lowering interest rates would stimulate the economy further, resulting in an increase not only in lending but in real jobs. More and more, no one exists in a vacuum.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 2, 2008, 8:49 pm

How much lower can they go? They are already as low as they have ever been, (and, no, they can’t go below zero.)

Comment from pat
Time: November 2, 2008, 9:38 pm

Ray, if you’re suggesting that Ron Paul’s free market, laissez faire system would be better for the world, you’re not considering the concept of sustainability at all, not to mention the free market, which the former Federal Reserve president recently said is “flawed”. Yes, under a strictly free market, smaller government world, the economy would grow wonderfully, just like it has in Chile and Poland since they instituted drastic reforms. But then let’s consider what has come of the environment and the social equality created by the reforms… there’s almost nothing positive to talk about. That said, Ron Paul is a smart guy but that doesn’t mean he has everything figured out, especially when he only considers an economic point of view.
I’m not trying to start an argument, i’m just pointing out no one has the golden ticket to ‘fixing’ the world, and at least Obama is putting himself out there as a “socialist” (as the Republicans have branded him) to fix the ridiculous health care and income disparities like countries like the U.S. should not have.
I’m not a huge fan of a lot of Obama’s policies but of the two candidates, he is what the country needs — like someone else mentioned, I’m not sure he’ll have a large effect on the rest of the world outside of improving international relations.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 2, 2008, 10:58 pm

Obviously it takes more than lowered interest rates to regain economic activity but I think the euro, relative to the dollar, has been higher for the most part because poor financial management in the US has caused the dollar to devalue and has eroded confidence in making investments within the US markets from abroad.

Comment from USA_Super_Patriot
Time: November 2, 2008, 11:45 pm

I think that raytibbitts is generally right when he says that whether there’s a republicrat or a demokin in power is going to make that much of a difference. You don’t get to be the presidential nominee of either the democratic or republican party in the U.S. by being truly different.

As a general reminder to folks, almost all of the democratics went right along with Bush and his henchmen as they voted for war, and passed without ever reading them various legislative measures (like the Patriot Act) that erode the freedoms that Americans Supposedly cherish so much.

And while during Clinton’s presidency the republicans tried to impeach him for lying about a f#$%ing blow job, when the democrats gained control of Congress during the last election cycle the did jack after whining for so long that they couldn’t do anything because they didn’t control Congress. Impeached for oral sex, yes!

Impeached for falsifying intelligence and lying to Congress and the American people, starting an illegal war that has lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands if not millions, running various secret prisons that make Azkaban look like Disney Land, torturing people, kidnapping and holding Americans and others in prison indefinitely while asserting that they have no legal rights because you’ve created a new class of person called ‘enemy combatants’, outing operatives of your own clandestine intelligence services, an act punishable by death according to American law…shall we impeach W for all of that?…Nahh.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 3, 2008, 12:06 am

I don’t think there is much difference in either candidate’s promises, (and both have promised to regulate Wall Street,) that will be able to significantly help the markets, which are already starting to unfreeze, and whose exchanges are starting to gain confidence.
Does Bush get the blame for the crash? Does he get the praise for it fixing itself? He deserves neither.
Nor would McCain, nor would Obama.

Either would be president while the Dollar gains strength against the Euro, and then loses it again.
Either would see fuel costs (and, of course the costs of most every other good) steady themselves, and then increase again.
Either will see true inflation cause the buying power of Americans to diminish.
But, neither has said they will do anything so different from the other as to believe that one will be better for the recovery than the other.
Except the determination that Obama has to increase the tax burden on large, successful businesses.
In the past, these types of tax increases have been correlated with subsequent increases in already burgeoning unemployment rates.

I agree that the market leaders must first regain their confidence, and then the rest of the market will continue forward with them, in fact this is the whole justification of the $700 billion bailout, not to mention the money just handed out among foreign countries the U.S. has been owing money to for a while. Personally, I think it just delays the inevitable.

The scary thing is, the drops we watched in the bear stock market were nothing compared to the real bear of the non-transparent, back-trading and fake-insurance in the credit markets which can’t even hold a candle to the the way the whole world creates money through debt.

A U.S. president who was willing to fight for a full reform in the whole system, to shine a light on the true causes of the inflation and devaluation of our currency, and to put big bankers in their proper place, and limit the federal government to the roles prescribed in the Constitution; that president might start undoing the real damage to the world economy, the damage that has caused it to balloon-up and pop the way it does. Perhaps, the rest of the players in the world economy would follow the lead of that president, and bring economics back to reality.

Neither candidate is going to become that president.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 3, 2008, 12:16 am

I’ve heard an economic plan come out of Obama but not McCain. Obama’s plan was endorsed by Reagan’s economic adviser, Warren Buffet, to name a few. We will have to wait and see.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 3, 2008, 12:38 am

We don’t have to wait, it turns out I was wrong!

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/e62444aa8c

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 3, 2008, 1:43 am

In the end, he is flawless!http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c13ca335f5/236com-the-mclaughlin-group-with-noah-and-joe-72708-from-236

Comment from vicente
Time: November 3, 2008, 9:33 am

i would vote for obama because mcain would spend a lot of money in the military, and i think right now the states has other things more important to spend in like helping the poors.

And i would vote for obama because he is a liberal and i think not so socialist like the republican party wants that he is

Comment from Parubin
Time: November 3, 2008, 11:17 am

Interesting site :
http://www.iftheworldcouldvote.com/

These would be the results, sorted by country, in tomorrow’s US elections if the rest of the world citizens could vote.

In Spain, 93% of the popular vote would go for Obama.
The biggest support McCain gets within the EU comes from Poland, and still he only gets a 28% approval.

Comment from Edith
Time: November 3, 2008, 11:32 am

In Macedonia, OBama only gets a meager 13,5 (!)% approval. But the country which truly surprises me is Venezuela, with a 56,9% approval rate for Obama. In Holland, the approval rate is 94,8%.

Comment from Parubin
Time: November 3, 2008, 12:08 pm

Ray :
Should McCain will, he’d be 76 at the end of his tenure. That is about the life expectancy in his own country.
Do you think, the event of Sarah Palin taking command on the Oval Office would not affect us, Europeans, either??

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 3, 2008, 1:47 pm

I would love to see Hillary as a Barak’s running mate just to see her debate Sara Palin. It would be carnage.

Comment from US Bob
Time: November 3, 2008, 2:00 pm

First things first. Hello Ben. Best wishes for you, Marina and family. Let us know how that is going!

It is Monday morning here in the U.S. and the election is the news of the day. I enjoyed the comments on this topic, and generally tend to agree with those who think there are factors other than the U.S. presidency that will impact life in Europe. These would include overpopulation, scarce resources and worldwide banking and credit practices.

One aspect of the comments intrigues me. It seems that respondents want the U.S. to be ‘like them’. They cite opinion polls from various countries, U.S. isolatioinism, and call (mistakenly) Obama a “world citizen”.

An essential and unique aspect of the United States is that it is a democratic, capitalistic model of government. In general, citizens do not want more government intrusion in their lives.

A previous NFS blog focused on the choice of giving taxes to the Catholic Church or the Spanish government. Many commenters said they did not like either choice. Most Americans would agree. We value personal freedom and have a real distaste for socialism. That’s why the sparks fly when one politician calls another any variant of ’socialist’.

So, as a registered Democrat, I’m not happy to elect a candidate who will increase government controls on my life. When one candidate wants to ‘redistribute the wealth’, I get very uneasy.

Which brings me full circle to the impact of the U.S. president on Europe. An Obama victory will likely hearten European socialists; a McCain victory less so. As U.S. influence, good or bad, wanes, European politicians will likely increase their efforts to control your lives. Good luck, because I believe that the U.S. will not be ‘have your back’ (as we say).

Comment from kathy
Time: November 3, 2008, 5:47 pm

What no European (or American, for that matter) seems to realize is that Obama and McCain are virtually the same person. Either candidate will just continue Bush’s out of control spending, his growth of useless government programs, and his increase of useless laws. That is not the kind of president we need right now, but it’s who we’re going to get, no matter who is voted in. Both candidates have very liberal policies and Europeans and the media only like Obama because he is liberal by name.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 3, 2008, 6:10 pm

The current , sitting legislature in the Capitol has more influence over the economic forces that can effect change in the lives of the average ‘world citizen’ than the next president will, despite perception to the contrary, and it will likely become all the more unilateral with this election.
At least Sarah Palin (if McCain did keel over) would make them fight for it.
Obama is not likely to disagree with anything they want to push through, despite it being bad for the world economy, and despite it being against his own campaign promises.
Palin wouldn’t make it so easy for them.

And if I see another HuffPo or DailyKos story about Palin on the front page of Digg, I’m switching from Ron Paul to pro-Palin.

Comment from Parubin
Time: November 3, 2008, 7:57 pm

You guys are right. Call me cynic but I care more about Clint Eastwood’s next film that about the outcome of tomorrow’s elections in the US.
Hopefully none candidate will have a significant impact in my life compared to a good and lasting piece of cinema.

I just don´t like a lot the works of President Bush and in my naivety I think that Obama is this noble gentleman that could put some good sense in all this mess of the last years.

But I have to agree this is more likely only wishful thinking and Obama’s charm with us Europeans will probably wear off in the not so distant future. By that time I hope to still have all my friends around and my dvd and stereo properly working.

Comment from John Ross
Time: November 3, 2008, 8:39 pm

@US Bob
>> An essential and unique aspect of the United States is that it is a democratic, capitalistic model of government.

Sounds like you are claiming that he US is more democratic than anywhere else, which would not just be not true, it would be absurd.

>>We value personal freedom and have a real distaste for socialism.

Again, it sounds as if you think the two are antithetical, which is ridiculous. This is Spain, you know? Forty years of Franco, remember? The opposite of personal freedom isn’t socialism, it’s fascism.

>>When one candidate wants to ‘redistribute the wealth’, I get very uneasy.

Why? All rulers redistribute wealth, just that in the US you have just had a longish run of presidents redistributing into the hands of the already wealthy.

@kathy
>>…Europeans and the media only like Obama because he is liberal by name.

Well, less military interventionism and more economic interventionism would be nice, please. We’ve had nearly half a century of Kissinger-style what’s-mine-is-mine-and-what’s-yours-as-well diplomacy and thirty years of Milton Friedman just-don’t-ask-me-to-do-the-maths economics, and we’re pretty fed off with both. Keynes, now, there was an economist.

Comment from jon hundt
Time: November 3, 2008, 9:57 pm

it’s great to read American’s comments on the USA political scene. No wonder I moved away from there!

Do Europeans really hate Americans? My friends in Holland think I’m a great guy. My friends in Spain look forward to my visits, they love me like a brother. I just now came back from Paris where I was treated like a friend and valued guest by people I never even met.

Comment from Edith
Time: November 4, 2008, 12:23 am

If most Americans are so much against government spending, why are the Republicans among them still in favor of the war in Iraq? Talking about government spending spiralling out of control… all this government money could have been spent on socialized health care insurance, education, and other things which would benefit every citizen.

P.s.: and yes, U.S. elections usually affect us all, whether we are Americans or not. We are not talking about elections in Belgium here. So in a way, Obama is definitely a citizen of the world!

Comment from kathy
Time: November 4, 2008, 12:51 am

before pres. bush took office, he seemed conservative. he said he would minimize government. well, that turned out to be a huge lie as he expanded government to be larger than any previous president. Obama and McCain already promise to expand govt. even more. so they’ll probably be ten times worse than even Bush. but i may as well ignore it all and like parubin said, i better just make sure my dvd player is in working condition…as long as the govt. doesn’t start censoring what I watch…ok, so that’s a little extreme, but it is the way things are slowly going over here.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 4, 2008, 2:35 am

McCain and Obama are polar opposites in every sense of the term. How anyone could say they are not different enough from each other to care makes me wonder if this lack of awareness is real. It also makes me wonder how when describing “Americans” as if describing a monolithic entity.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 4, 2008, 3:02 am

Keynes?

“Instead of furthering the inevitable liquidation of the maladjustments brought about by the boom during the last three years, all conceivable means have been used to prevent that readjustment from taking place; and one of these means, which has been repeatedly tried though without success, from the earliest to the most recent stages of depression, has been this deliberate policy of credit expansion. . . . To combat the depression by a forced credit expansion is to attempt to cure the evil by the very means which brought it about; because we are suffering from a misdirection of production, we want to create further misdirection — a procedure that can only lead to a much more severe crisis as soon as the credit expansion comes to an end. . . . It is probably to this experiment, together with the attempts to prevent liquidation once the crisis had come, that we owe the exceptional severity and duration of the depression.We must not forget that, for the last six or eight years, monetary policy all over the world has followed the advice of the stabilizers. It is high time that their influence, which has already done harm enough, should be overthrown.” Hayek, 1932

…please.

Comment from Parubin
Time: November 4, 2008, 10:29 am

Socialism is disliked? Government intervention is not welcomed? Getting uneasy because of redistribution of wealth?

What do you call Bush’s mega-plan to nationalize banks and finantial corporations in the US at tax-payers expense?. This is redistribution of wealth all right !!!. Not even Hugo Chávez in his wildest socialist dreams could match that!!!

@ Jon : Most people I know (in Spain) like American culture, so I could say they like ‘Americans’ as a concept. Personally I just love American music, film, literature and I admire a whole lot of things about that nation and its people. I feel very influenced by American popular culture, I’ve visited the country a number of times and I plan to keep doing so. I too, have American friends who I almost consider family. One of them is coming for Christmas dinner to Spain (it’ll be the third time at our family Christmas table).

I think Europeans being American-haters is a bit of a cliché encouraged (because of their own agendas) by certain groups of people both sides of the Atlantic.

Comment from US Bob
Time: November 4, 2008, 1:51 pm

Good Morning. It’s 06:30 in the US and I’m getting ready to go and vote. I’ve enjoyed all the comments, especially Parubin and John Ross.

We have a saying (maybe there is a similar one in Spain) that “I’m going to hold my nose and pull the voting lever”. Neither candidate is what we would prefer, so we pick the lesser of evils.

@John Ross. You are right, I do think that capitalism is vastly superior to socialism, especially when individuals do value personal freedom. Here in the U.S. our most socialized organizations are among the problems, not the solutions. I think it is an issue of both opportunity and innovation.

You can use Franco as a shield, but I’m still thinking that Spain is a bit farther down the socialist road than the U.S. or most of Europe. What is the name of the ruling political party in Spain? But that is a discussion for another thread.

@ Parubin. Before you lay all blame at the feet of republican president Bush, it is a bit more complicated. Why? Because the democrat congress specifically prompted the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac financial institutions to make loans to people who should not have had them. That was one proximate cause of the current banking crisis.

But you are crystal clear on two important points! First, we all appreciate the creativity and accomplishments of others. And second, we have friends in many countries and enjoy their company and customes. I could not agree more.

Enjoy the day!

Comment from luke
Time: November 4, 2008, 2:21 pm

“Notes from Spain for Obama!”
You don’t hear many celebrities in England revealing who they’d vote for (Vanessa Redgrave and Billy Bragg are notable exceptions). Secret ballots were created for a reason. To reveal your vote is akin to revealing how much money you make. But how did it become so common for celebrities in the US to us tell us who they want for president?
How much money do you make Ben?
Luke for Obama! (Mind your own business.)

Comment from bill (Legazpi)
Time: November 4, 2008, 3:02 pm

As a “European” I can only envy how those in the U.S.A. actually get to vote for their president. In fact I can’t even remember the name of the European president we had chosen for us…erm…some Portuguese bloke I think.

Comment from John Ross
Time: November 4, 2008, 3:37 pm

@raytibbitts
George Orwell: “But he does not see, or will not admit, that a return to ‘free’ competition means for the great mass of people a tyranny probably worse, because more irresponsible, than that of the State. The trouble with competitions is that somebody wins them. Professor Hayek denies that free capitalism necessarily leads to monopoly.”

Hayek went on to head the Chilean Centro de Estudios Públicos under Pinochet. To let you know where I stand, one of my own most prized possessions is a signed letter of thanks from the Madres de la Plaza de Mayo for the very small part I played in Baltazar Garzon’s (successful, thwarted by Jack Straw) Pinochet extradition attempt.

So yes, Keynes. Or Galbraith, or Krugman. Not Hayek, not Friedman.

Comment from Ben
Time: November 4, 2008, 4:23 pm

@Luke, obviously very little if I’m supporting the liberal candidate

Comment from John Ross
Time: November 4, 2008, 6:28 pm

@bill (Legazpi)
As a Brit, you have to envy the US twice as much for their democracy. At least there was a sort of democratic process in the selection of Soares, unlike that of our own dear head of state.

Comment from jon hundt
Time: November 4, 2008, 8:41 pm

There were a few amusing scenes in the campaign so far. I remember in the 2nd (?) debate when McCain wanted to really nail Obama to the wall for his “socialist” ideas. He accused Obama of secretly trying to arrange a single-payer medical insurance plan… “Like in England! Like in Canada!!!” he shouted triumphantly. But as far as I can see most Canadians and most English are pretty content with their health-care systems. Not perfect, maybe, but working well for most people. Neither Obama or any audience member made any comment about that, which struck me as really missing an opportunity.

Americans are truly blind, ignorant and uneducated when it comes to foreign politics and government. Obama said (casually, in a passing remark) “let’s spread the wealth a little”. The McCain camp pounced, and painted Obama as “a SOCIALIST” who is trying to take YOUR MONEY AWAY FROM YOU!!!!!!

Let’s face it folks, that is the stupidest political analysis you’ve ever seen… but many Americans believed it, and McCain (to his everlasting dishonor) kept on hounding that point like a blind male Jack Russel terrier who thinks he’s found a new mate when it’s really just the leg of your visiting mother-in-law.

I think any half-aware American person who has set foot outside of the USA (oops, that might exclude Ms. Palin!) will realize that socialism is not a monolithic face-of-evil.

Ahh, why am I wasting my time explaining this? My European friends know this already. My American friends know this too.

Comment from pfmahan
Time: November 4, 2008, 9:47 pm

????

Comment from Bill (Legazpi)
Time: November 4, 2008, 10:08 pm

@jon hundt

The UK health system is a source of constant criticism in the UK. Not that I’m against national health systems in general, it’s just that I think you’ve fallen into McCain’s trap of using the worst possible national health system as an example.

Comment from Maria S.
Time: November 4, 2008, 11:59 pm

I agree with Jon.

I believe even the U.K. health system must be better than having no insurance at all. Here in Germany, we usually don’t have such a long waiting period to see a doctor or schedule surgery.

The only exception is when you want to see a dermatologist. As a private patient you get an appointment the same afternoon. I have national insurance and had to wait 9 weeks. I kept the appointment even though I knew my rash would definitely be gone by then. And it was…

Twice I lived in the States and both times I was not able to afford private health care. One of my friends, earning a good salary, has such a very high deductible and other restrictions on her insurance policy, and she is not happy with it either. In European terms, her policy looks almost worthless. She might as well go without it.
Then again - she won’t have the wait as she has to pay and they will always take her in (they don’t care where the money is coming from).
Some Americans will conclude that socialism is not good for them. They would rather keep their freedom of losing everything and building it up again. This - they are really good at. This is one thing we should learn from them.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 5, 2008, 1:12 am

I wonder how many subjects of the empire have to choose between rent or medicine?

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 5, 2008, 3:53 am

I pray that this guy is wrong. (Making me wrong, too.) Since there is nothing I can do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSixu-wxvKI

Makes me wish Obama wins, just to prove us wrong.
I fear either candidate will prove this to be right.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 5, 2008, 5:08 am

Warren Buffett would disagree with Peter Schiff’s assessment as Buffet amongst others has endorsed Obama’s economic plan.

Comment from raytibbitts
Time: November 5, 2008, 6:00 am

I would like to take this opportunity to do something I don’t think enough people do when the guy they voted for didn’t win:

Good job Senator Obama, my new president.

Now let’s see how things can improve between my two countries, my two presidents, and (why not) my king.

Comment from ValenciaSon
Time: November 5, 2008, 6:49 am

Well, after a record number of voters showed up to polls, Barak was elected. The people have spoken. January 20 is the inauguration for President-elect Obama.

Comment from Maria S.
Time: November 5, 2008, 7:47 am

Congratulations, Obama!

Just think - around the time of his birth, his African-American relatives still had to sit in the back of the bus.

Comment from Palmerito
Time: November 5, 2008, 8:01 am

In addition to all the repairs this new administration will have to tackle, I’m hoping we can go about the business of restoring our damaged status among the nations of the world.

Comment from Edith
Time: November 5, 2008, 8:38 am

@ Maria S.,

I was thinking about that too! If only MLK and Rosa Parks had been alive to see their dream come true…

Congrats, Obama!

Comment from Parubin
Time: November 5, 2008, 10:17 am

Congratulations Obama, congratulation people of the US !!!

Comment from ernest nonso
Time: November 18, 2008, 3:08 pm

congratulations obama, you are child of destiny, you will be infulence by the dew on high which groan in ernestly of treasures,there must be landmark of transformations in your goverment,ability will show the intregrity of your wealth through the reason of :’CHANGE” ,, (yes will can) ernest nonso nwachukwu…

Comment from RayTibbitts
Time: December 21, 2008, 5:53 am

@J.R.

Some more food for thought:

http://www.youtube.com/user/afq2007

http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=_0S_nabedW8&feature=related