Vote in US Inflames Europeans

[onedomino]

European attitudes toward the election; especially the leftist media.

Vote in US Inflames Europeans
By Jennifer Joan Lee
International Herald Tribune
Wednesday, October 27, 2004

http://www.iht.com/articles/2004/10/26/news/vote.html

PARIS One would think it was their leader being elected - and many Europeans believe it is, in a way. In a tremendous show of interest unseen in previous U.S. presidential campaigns, Europeans on both sides of the Channel have been riveted by the coming American vote, obsessing about the future of the United States as if it were their own.

"Because of the war against terror and the war in Iraq, people feel it's much more than a U.S. election," said Kay van de Linde, a communications consultant at The Hague. "They feel it's a world election, because the U.S. president decides not only what's good for the U.S., but also what's good, and bad, for Europe."

Judging from opinion polls, media reports and conversation on this side of the Atlantic, the overwhelming sentiment on what would be bad for Europe is another four years with President George W. Bush. In Britain, France, Germany, Spain and the Netherlands, Europeans appear to be united by an overwhelming antipathy toward Bush.

"He has the ability to provoke incredible animosity," said Alain Frachon, a senior editor at Le Monde, one of several French newspapers running extensive coverage of the American campaign. "And this gives us even more incentive to be interested in the U.S. election, because Bush is probably the least liked of all U.S. presidents since World War II."

Said Martin Fletcher, foreign editor of The Times of London, which also has devoted much coverage to the election: "There's just something about the president that grates on the foreign viewer - it just doesn't play well here. I cannot remember an issue that has ever aroused such intense interest."

European media are sending correspondents all over the United States in an effort to delve into the American psyche.

"We want to understand why so many people are still on Bush's side; it's a kind of mystery to us," said Peter Frey, Berlin bureau chief for ZDF television in Germany. "We are asking the American people, 'Why are you voting for Bush?' We want to understand why he has this support."

A poll last month by the German Marshall Fund, a research organization with headquarters in Washington that studies trans-Atlantic relations, showed that 75 percent of Europeans disapprove of how Bush handles foreign affairs and 73 percent believe the war in Iraq has increased the global risk of terrorism.

A poll this month by 10 newspapers around the world, including Le Monde, The Guardian in Britain and Spain's El Pais, showed far more support for Senator John Kerry, Bush's Democratic challenger, than for Bush and his administration.

"If Bush remains, American troops may stay longer in Iraq and this will immediately impact our internal politics," said Jean-Gabriel Fredet, an editor at Le Nouvel Observateur, a French weekly that recently carried on its cover, "Why We Must Beat Bush."

"The hope of a peaceful settlement between Israelis and Palestinians is also very important to us, but Bush does not seem too involved in that."

Some Europeans support Bush, and they are equally as transfixed by the election. In Poland, one of a handful of Eastern Europe countries that sent troops to Iraq, people are following the race with unprecedented attention, worrying that a Bush defeat could have negative consequences for a nation that so controversially backed him.

"If Kerry wins, the antiwar countries in the European Union will say Bush lost because of Iraq, which means everyone who supported Bush in Iraq is also a loser," said Bartosz Weglarczyk, foreign editor at Gazeta Wyborcza, Poland's largest newspaper. "If Poland is seen as a loser on the debate on the war in Iraq, obviously, our position in the EU will be weakened."

Some European pundits, meanwhile, even as they condemn Bush, predict that his re-election would be good for Europe, casting the region's intense dislike of him as the one unifying factor that could bring harmony back to the European Union after the friction around the Iraq war. Many others believe a Kerry victory could help repair trans-Atlantic relations. That is the hope of some in Spain, whose new government's decision to withdraw troops from Iraq created tensions with Washington.

"The Spanish government will not say so, but I'm sure they'd prefer Kerry in the White House," said Juan Velazquez, deputy foreign editor at El Pais, which sent five correspondents to the United States. "They're on stand-by; they're waiting to see what happens, because if Kerry wins the election, there is a bigger chance that Spanish-U.S. relations will improve."

For many Europeans, it is not what Kerry would do as president that matters, it is the way they think he would do it.

"The fact that Kerry has an attitude in which he feels he wants to consult the allies and is less arrogant in his relationship with allies, puts him in a much more positive light here," (ahh...the Euro permission slip) said Nathalie La Balme, program officer at the Paris office of the German Marshall Fund. "I don't know whether if Kerry gets elected anything will change. But in terms of attitude and perception and words, it would make a big difference."

 

[theim]

This is gonna sound rediculously shallow, but one of the reasons I love Bush is 'cuz he makes all the Euros go crazy and act funny

 

[NATO AIR]

i hope that poland and the other euro nations that staked their claim loyally with bush and america overcome the anti-US/anti-Iraq war coalition that has taken hold in much of Europe's leadership. kerry says bush lost the allies, i say many of the allies lost us.

 

[theim]

They'll overcome the anti-US forces in Europe, but once Kerry is elected, thats it.

 

[onedomino]

i hope that poland and the other euro nations that staked their claim loyally with bush and america overcome the anti-US/anti-Iraq war coalition that has taken hold in much of Europe's leadership. kerry says bush lost the allies, i say many of the allies lost us.

You are right NATO.

In some sense, though, we never really had allies in socialist Western Europe. We had acquaintances who first wanted us to shoot Nazis, and then protect them from the CCCP. Now our usefulness is over. We have made sure their former empires stay buried. We flood their sacrosanct cultures with Americana. Worst of all, we ignore them. America and Europe are on different trajectories. We will not meet any time soon.

 

[theim]

Thus proving true the first rule of Alliances: They die when they win.

 

[nosarcasm]

Public sentiment in most of Europe is still driven by the post war consensus
and the agreement to avoid unnecessary warfare. During the first gulf war public sentiment was also against the war. A majority of the public are peacnicks. The governments within the EU are not united, everyone looks out
for their national interests. During the cold war the US could force its allies who depended on US troops to keep the Russians out. Now with that gone they go more for their national interest. It depends in the various countries on who is in power, liberals or conservatives. Conservative governments usually seem to be more up to supporting the US. THe left and their socialist agenda feels morally superior and despite the last example of their failure
the Balkan war have the idea of doing it always with diplomacy only. Another
factor might be the military weakness of Western Europe. My cousin was
for the German army in Bosnia and when they he saw the modern US equipment their soldiers had he said he was ashamed how the German army
still was stuck with cold war equipment, less body armors computer and
navigational high tech equipment. Because the public sentiment is so anti
any war defense budgets have been cut over and over. So jealousy towards
Us power might be another factor that plays a role.

The major disconnect between the political believes in Europe and the US
is secularism. Barroso was facing not to be okd by the EU parliament
because he stated his beliefs that abortion and gay marriage are wrong.
In secular Europe this is a political nono. Since the 30 years war the seperation of church and state has taken on a position that keeps
religion out of politics. Even christian party leaders do not invoke god
in fear of public negative reactions.

Bush's perceived religious fervor has led to the strong resentment against
him in most of Europe's population. While the press reports alot about the Us it is mostly focused on the government and the average European has
no idea about the public more religious sentiment in the US. Often this
disconnect leads to the perception that the US population is misled by
their leaders instead of realizing that US politics reflect the wishes
of their constituents.

Fortunatly I assume that the Islamic agression will bring finally bring
the US and EU closer together. Especially conservatives see Islam as
a threat to the European way of life and with every terror attack they
will become more agressive in their stand against Islam. It will take some
time so be patient.

 

[Hobbit]

"We want to understand why so many people are still on Bush's side; it's a kind of mystery to us," said Peter Frey, Berlin bureau chief for ZDF television in Germany. "We are asking the American people, 'Why are you voting for Bush?' We want to understand why he has this support."

Because he doesn't pander to European hippies.

 

[wolvie20m]

This goes to show you, they make us feel unwated in thier countries. Even resort to offensive statements. I hope all americans for Bush or Kerry decide all the EU is a way for europeans to try and sway voters here. Rather pathetic they care more about ours, then thier own country.

 

[eric]

They should start paying more attention to their impending recession rather than our politics. Though it could be argued if Kerry gets in, American will be an extension of the EU.

 

[Mr. P]

I always mask some letters with this word out of courtesy...BUT,

......... FUCK EM!!!!.........

 

[theim]

The Germans are just trying to lash out because they know the Nazis are making a comeback. They are just practicing for when they start another World War.

 

[Hobbit]

They should start paying more attention to their impending recession rather than our politics. Though it could be argued if Kerry gets in, American will be an extension of the EU.

It was their high taxes and socialist policies that started that recession. Now they want us to shoulder the burden. THEIR recession is THEIR problem, and I fail to see a reason to spend our tax dollars to fix it, especially when their nationalized health care is forcing drug companies to sell to them for barely enough to cover the cost of making the drug, much less do the research. This is why OUR drug costs are so high. They wouldn't even help us depose a violent dictator who posed a significant threat to us, because they had their hands in Hussein's pockets. I say we leave 'em to their own devices.

BTW, for those of you who have bought into the drug importation mantra, let me tell you how it works. First off, you'd think the stuff would be cheaper here because it's ALL MADE HERE, meaning no import/export taxes. However, it's not. What happens is that a drug company spends billions of dollars over several years to come up with a new drug. They then get a five year patent and charge $50-75 a bottle for the stuff in order to cover the cost of researching and provide funding for researching the next drug. After the patent runs out, other companies start manufacturing the 'generic' brand. This can be sold for $20 a bottle because they don't have research costs to cover. That's why the difference between generic and brand-name drugs is so much. Now, when a country with nationalized health care comes in, they tell the drug company that they will but a lot of the stuff, but they'll only pay $15-$20 a bottle. The drug company says that that's outrageous and they won't sell for that much. That country's government then threatens to just revoke the patent and make the stuff themselves. The drug company then sells to make a little bit of profit, but, all in all, is getting screwed. Then, Americans must shoulder the entire burden of funding the research. If we allow drug importation from Canada or France, one of two things will happen. Either drug companies are unable to fund their research and we stop getting any new drugs, or the drug companies start restricting how much they sell to these countries, possibly causing a shortage and depriving the sick of their drugs.

Drug importation isn't feasible.