• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Oops. Looks like the

fff

Well-known member
LA Times is even going to investigate the sacred area of McCain's military record. Why, oh why hasn't he released all of his military record? And why, oh why aren't you guys screaming for it. After all, you insisted on seening John Kerry's?


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-aviator6-2008oct06,0,7633315.story
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
fff said:
LA Times is even going to investigate the sacred area of McCain's military record. Why, oh why hasn't he released all of his military record? And why, oh why aren't you guys screaming for it. After all, you insisted on seening John Kerry's?


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-aviator6-2008oct06,0,7633315.story

McCain hasn't denied any of this happening. Looks like it's pretty much public record. At least he didn't get a Bronze Star for rice in the ass. Too bad Kerry couldn't have been his roomate at the Hanoi Hilton.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Next they'll be checking in on the Keating Five which included McCain and that's all been handled as well:
Lincoln Savings and Loan collapsed in 1989, at a cost of $2 billion to the federal government. Some 23,000 Lincoln bondholders were defrauded and many elderly investors lost their life savings. The substantial political contributions that Keating had made to each of the senators, totalling $1.3 million, attracted considerable public and media attention. After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings, with Cranston receiving a formal reprimand. Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment".
All five of the senators involved served out their terms. Only Glenn and McCain ran for re-election, and they both succeeded. McCain would go on to become the Republican nominee for president in 2008.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
TexasBred said:
Next they'll be checking in on the Keating Five which included McCain and that's all been handled as well:
Lincoln Savings and Loan collapsed in 1989, at a cost of $2 billion to the federal government. Some 23,000 Lincoln bondholders were defrauded and many elderly investors lost their life savings. The substantial political contributions that Keating had made to each of the senators, totalling $1.3 million, attracted considerable public and media attention. After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings, with Cranston receiving a formal reprimand. Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised "poor judgment".
All five of the senators involved served out their terms. Only Glenn and McCain ran for re-election, and they both succeeded. McCain would go on to become the Republican nominee for president in 2008.

Yep- The Obama campaign has decided McCain violated the ethics agreement they had (McCain agreed verbally, but would not sign) by bringing up "guilt by association" so now its all fair game- the Keating 5-- his knowledge/influence/coverups of his wifes drug/theft investigations, his abandonment of his first family for a rich heiress, etc...

An e-mail I got today:

They previewed the Keating 5 one on C-SPAN today...

Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama.

In the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to change the subject from the central question of this election. Perhaps because the policies McCain supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend.

But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time.

During the savings and loan crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, McCain's political favors and aggressive support for deregulation put him at the center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan, one of the largest in the country. More than 23,000 investors lost their savings. Overall, the savings and loan crisis required the federal government to bail out the savings of hundreds of thousands of families and ultimately cost American taxpayers $124 billion.

Sound familiar?

In that crisis, John McCain and his political patron, Charles Keating, played central roles that ultimately landed Keating in jail for fraud and McCain in front of the Senate Ethics Committee. The McCain campaign has tried to avoid talking about the scandal, but with so many parallels to the current crisis, McCain's Keating history is relevant and voters deserve to know the facts -- and see for themselves the pattern of poor judgment by John McCain.

So at noon Eastern on Monday, October 6th, we're releasing a 13-minute documentary about the scandal called "Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis" -- it will be available at KeatingEconomics.com, along with background information that every voter should know.

The point of the film and the web site is that John McCain still hasn't learned his lesson.

And this time, McCain's bankrupt economic philosophy has put our economy at the brink of collapse and put millions of Americans at risk of losing their homes.

Watch the video to see why John McCain's failed philosophy and poor judgment is a recipe for deepening the crisis:

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo

It's no wonder John McCain would rather spend the last month of this election smearing Barack's character instead of talking about the top priority issue for voters.

But if we work together, we can make sure the focus stays on the economy -- and how to fix it.
 

leanin' H

Well-known member
Except for the fact that the KEATING 5 has been vetted and examined for 20 years and all of Obama's relationships are covered up and glossed over by the Media who stumble on their selves kissing butt! McCain is far from my perfect canidate but Obama is so left he will be coming around right one of these days. When will somebody not named Stephanopoulus ask that man a question about the many, many radicals he associates with? When will He answer for his record or lack of one? When will he be held accountable for his reckless & ignorant comments about the country and some of it's people? When will he actually define change and what exactly the change be? Way too many questions for me to get my vote. But ya'll vote for him if ya can....... Hope you will enjoy the 2nd great depression that WILL FOLLOW CAUSED BY HIS PRESIDENCY!! I wonder if all the unrest on the markets has something to do with the certainty of higher taxes (Capital gain, income, death tax, taking away child tax credits, and all other "Unpatriotic practices". Joe Biden) and the knowledge that America may elect Obama? But then again it's probably just President Bush's fault>
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
OT...it's always been "fair game". We need to know about the background of the person who may be the next US President. Both should be straigh forward....But Obama is the one that wants to keep things hidden. I believe McCain has already gone over many times the things in his past, accept responsibility and moves forward.

WHAT IS OBAMA HIDING ??????????????
 

Vision

Well-known member
The Bottom Line on the Keating 5
October 6, 2008 — iusbvision

The Democrats own lawyer in the “Keating 5″ investigation, Bob Bennet, said that McCain did absolutely nothing wrong and should never have been dragged into the investigation, but he said that the Democrats did it anyways because they wanted a Republican to make the scandal look “bi-partisan”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331651,00.html

Video: Watch Part 1 of the interview | Watch Part 2

Democrat Lawyer and Power Broker Bob Bennet

BENNETT: You know, I’m in a pretty unique position to talk about John McCain. First, I should tell your listeners, you know, I’m a registered Democrat, so I’m not on his side of a lot of issues. But I investigated John McCain for a year and a half, at least, when I was special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee in the Keating Five, which, by the way, this New York Times article goes back to and discusses, goes back years and years.

And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the New York Times to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain’s public statement about this is correct. It’s a smear job. I’m sorry.

COLMES: It’s OK, sir. In your book, you actually talk about the Keating Case and how you suggested they not pursue John McCain. The Washington Post reported back in December that you sent prepared answers to written questions submitted by the New York Times concerning the breaking news we are discussing tonight. Can you elaborate on that?

BENNETT: Yes. All of the matters that they allude to - I mean, they are not even very specific - we answered fully to the New York Times. We showed them that there was just nothing there. And, unfortunately, they have just obviously disregarded all of the hard evidence that we presented.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
It appears to me that McCains suspending of all positive ads and going to all negative campaigning is backfiring and not only taking him down- but taking the Repub party down too....
Too many people are tired of the "swiftboating" and Karl Rove tactics ...

Gallup Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 51
McCain 42
==========
Obama +9

Rasmussen Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 52
McCain 44
==========
Obama +8

------------------------------------------------
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Democrats 48.2
Republicans 37.0
===============
Democrats +11.2
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
It appears to me that McCains suspending of all positive ads and going to all negative campaigning is backfiring and not only taking him down- but taking the Repub party down too....
Too many people are tired of the "swiftboating" and Karl Rove tactics ...

Gallup Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 51
McCain 42
==========
Obama +9

Rasmussen Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 52
McCain 44
==========
Obama +8

------------------------------------------------
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Democrats 48.2
Republicans 37.0
===============
Democrats +11.2

OT you should then be happy about the negative ads...but Obama started it months ago...(check it out). And noone has yet disproved the Swiftboat guys....Kerry didn't try then and he hasn't tried since.
 

Vision

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
It appears to me that McCains suspending of all positive ads and going to all negative campaigning is backfiring and not only taking him down- but taking the Repub party down too....
Too many people are tired of the "swiftboating" and Karl Rove tactics ...

Gallup Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 51
McCain 42
==========
Obama +9

Rasmussen Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 52
McCain 44
==========
Obama +8

------------------------------------------------
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Democrats 48.2
Republicans 37.0
===============
Democrats +11.2


The Swiftboats Vets told the truth. The recent ads have little to do with these numbers, it is about how the economic crisis has been spun.

There are two things that impacted the economy - bad energy policy in which we do not expand domestic sources of energy and the mortgage crisis.

Democrats have been calling for higher gas prices for years and have opposed new energy production. Even Obama said he likes these higher gas prices and only complains that we should have gotten to these prices more gradually.

Obama Declaring His Support for Higher Gas Prices on CNBC - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJLdHfIBnr0

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/




Democrats have also opposed reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years while republicans tried to fix it.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/the-video-that-says-it-all-democrats-on-banking-committee-lying-about-status-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-saying-they-are-fine-and-dont-need-reform/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/alan-greedspan-and-the-federal-reserve-warned-congress-greenspan-testified-for-mccains-bill-to-fix-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-in-2005-democrats-blocked-it-in-party-line-vote/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/bush-administration-warned-congress-over-20-times-reforms-were-needed/

Anyone who cares about economic prosperity should punish the Democrats at the ballot box. The facts are undebiable.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Vision said:
Oldtimer said:
It appears to me that McCains suspending of all positive ads and going to all negative campaigning is backfiring and not only taking him down- but taking the Repub party down too....
Too many people are tired of the "swiftboating" and Karl Rove tactics ...

Gallup Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 51
McCain 42
==========
Obama +9

Rasmussen Tracking 10/04 - 10/06
Obama 52
McCain 44
==========
Obama +8

------------------------------------------------
Generic Congressional Vote
RCP Average
Democrats 48.2
Republicans 37.0
===============
Democrats +11.2


Swiftboats told the truth. and the ads have little to do with these numbers, it is about how the economic crisis has been spun.

There are two things that impacted the economy - bad energy policy in which we do not expand domestic sources of energy and the mortgage crisis.

Democrats have been calling for higher gas prices for years and have opposed new energy production. Even Obama said he likes these higher gas prices and only complains that we should have gotten to these prices more gradually.

Obama Declaring His Support for Higher Gas Prices on CNBC

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/




Democrats have also opposed reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years while republicans trie dto fix it.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/the-video-that-says-it-all-democrats-on-banking-committee-lying-about-status-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-saying-they-are-fine-and-dont-need-reform/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/alan-greedspan-and-the-federal-reserve-warned-congress-greenspan-testified-for-mccains-bill-to-fix-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-in-2005-democrats-blocked-it-in-party-line-vote/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/bush-administration-warned-congress-over-20-times-reforms-were-needed/

Repubs having control of Congress 12 of the last 14 years and the White House for the last 8 had NO impact on the economy -eh :???:

You've drank too much KoolAid at college...You need to get out with the Beer crowd more.... :wink:
 

Vision

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Vision said:
Oldtimer said:
It appears to me that McCains suspending of all positive ads and going to all negative campaigning is backfiring and not only taking him down- but taking the Repub party down too....
Too many people are tired of the "swiftboating" and Karl Rove tactics ...


Swiftboats told the truth. and the ads have little to do with these numbers, it is about how the economic crisis has been spun.

There are two things that impacted the economy - bad energy policy in which we do not expand domestic sources of energy and the mortgage crisis.

Democrats have been calling for higher gas prices for years and have opposed new energy production. Even Obama said he likes these higher gas prices and only complains that we should have gotten to these prices more gradually.

Obama Declaring His Support for Higher Gas Prices on CNBC

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/




Democrats have also opposed reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years while republicans trie dto fix it.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/the-video-that-says-it-all-democrats-on-banking-committee-lying-about-status-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-saying-they-are-fine-and-dont-need-reform/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/alan-greedspan-and-the-federal-reserve-warned-congress-greenspan-testified-for-mccains-bill-to-fix-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-in-2005-democrats-blocked-it-in-party-line-vote/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/bush-administration-warned-congress-over-20-times-reforms-were-needed/

Repubs having control of Congress 12 of the last 14 years and the White House for the last 8 had NO impact on the economy -eh :???:

You've drank too much KoolAid at college...You need to get out with the Beer crowd more.... :wink:

Old Timer - It is time for a Political Science Student to give YOU a lesson in political science.

It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass any significant legislation. It is called the Filibuster Rule. Republicans never had 60 votes in the Senate and Democrats voted in mass to block reforms. Maybe they didn't teach government where you went to school.

Now how about you go and read those links and look at some facts backed up with verifiable evidence.

You typed here before you could even read the links and examine the facts.

Maybe your daddy never told you this so I will. Learn what you are talking about FIRST - then open your mouth. The order of those things IS important.

PS - I rarely drink alcohol and I hate Kool-Aide.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Vision said:
Oldtimer said:
Vision said:
Swiftboats told the truth. and the ads have little to do with these numbers, it is about how the economic crisis has been spun.

There are two things that impacted the economy - bad energy policy in which we do not expand domestic sources of energy and the mortgage crisis.

Democrats have been calling for higher gas prices for years and have opposed new energy production. Even Obama said he likes these higher gas prices and only complains that we should have gotten to these prices more gradually.

Obama Declaring His Support for Higher Gas Prices on CNBC

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/




Democrats have also opposed reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years while republicans trie dto fix it.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/the-video-that-says-it-all-democrats-on-banking-committee-lying-about-status-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-saying-they-are-fine-and-dont-need-reform/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/alan-greedspan-and-the-federal-reserve-warned-congress-greenspan-testified-for-mccains-bill-to-fix-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-in-2005-democrats-blocked-it-in-party-line-vote/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/bush-administration-warned-congress-over-20-times-reforms-were-needed/

Repubs having control of Congress 12 of the last 14 years and the White House for the last 8 had NO impact on the economy -eh :???:

You've drank too much KoolAid at college...You need to get out with the Beer crowd more.... :wink:

Old Timer - It is time for a Political Science Student to give YOU a lesson in political science.

It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass any significant legislation. It is called the Filibuster Rule. Republicans never had 60 votes in the Senate and Demovcrats voted in mass to block reforms.


Now how about you go and read those links and look at some facts backed up with verifiable evidence.

You typed here before you could even read the links and examine the facts.

Maybe your daddy never told you this so I will. Learn what you are talking about FIRST - then open your mouth. The order of those things IS important.

Yep- Filibustering has been going on forever- and was made easier with the rules changes where they don't even have to control the floor anymore-- but did you look at which bunch set the new record for the most filibusters ever :???: I'll give you a little hint- the (R's) and it was this last current Congress...

So don't whine and use the filibuster excuse...Remember GW ran on the promise of being "the great uniter"- and how he could use his Texas Governor experience to reach across the aisles and work things out...Then he turned into the greatest Divider this country has ever saw in the 50+ years I've watched politics- even worse than Nixon was ( the reason his approval polls are the same as Nixons before he stepped down)....

But I imagine you believe all those folks are wrong- and only you are right-eh :???: :shock: :wink: :lol: :lol: :p
 

Vision

Well-known member
Old Timer - are you afraid to talk Fannie Mae and the energy bills with me?? Bush tried to be a uniter and set his hand out, and hateful people, who care nothing for the facts, stuck a fork in it.

Sure both sides have filibustered things, but only one side FIGHT for less domestic energy and higher gas prices. Only one side FOUGHT changes in the mortgage industry because they were getting paid.

So what are you afraid of Old Timer... afraid that I will kick your buns all over this site in talking about these two issues??

Obama took more money from these people than all but the chairman of the committee that the mortgage industry reports to.

Maybe you only raise chickens on your ranch.


Democrats have been calling for higher gas prices for years and have opposed new energy production. Even Obama said he likes these higher gas prices and only complains that we should have gotten to these prices more gradually.

Obama Declaring His Support for Higher Gas Prices on CNBC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJLdHfIBnr0


http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/if-you-ever-wanted-proof-that-democrats-want-higher-gas-prices/



Democrats have also opposed reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for years while republicans tried to fix it.

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/28/the-video-that-says-it-all-democrats-on-banking-committee-lying-about-status-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-saying-they-are-fine-and-dont-need-reform/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/23/alan-greedspan-and-the-federal-reserve-warned-congress-greenspan-testified-for-mccains-bill-to-fix-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-in-2005-democrats-blocked-it-in-party-line-vote/

http://iusbvision.wordpress.com/2008/09/21/bush-administration-warned-congress-over-20-times-reforms-were-needed/

Anyone who can defend this behavior is a bad American.
 

don

Well-known member
oldtimer: and only you are right-eh

starting to talk like a canadian there ot. at least you're making some progress!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
don said:
oldtimer: and only you are right-eh

starting to talk like a canadian there ot. at least you're making some progress!

Well I have been thinking of running for VP- since I can look to the north and see a foreign country...I must be a foreign policy expert :???: :wink: :lol: :p

Looks like the majority of Canadians think Obama could make world relations a whole lot better....


Obama win preferred in world poll

Most thought US relations would get better under a president Obama
People outside the US would prefer Barack Obama to become US president ahead of John McCain, a BBC World Service poll suggests.

Democrat Mr Obama was favoured by a four-to-one margin across the 22,500 people polled in 22 countries.

In 17 countries, the most common view was that US relations with the rest of the world would improve under Mr Obama.

If Republican Mr McCain were elected, the most common view was that relations would remain about the same.

The poll was conducted before the Democratic and Republican parties held their conventions and before the headline-grabbing nomination of Sarah Palin as Mr McCain's running mate.

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the results could therefore be a reflection of the greater media focus on Mr Obama as he competed for the presidential candidacy against Hillary Clinton.

The margin of those in favour of Mr Obama winning November's US election ranged from 9% in India to 82% in Kenya, which is the birthplace of the Illinois senator's father.

On average 49% preferred Mr Obama to 12% in favour of Mr McCain. Nearly four in 10 of those polled did not take a view.

On average 46% thought US relations with the world would improve with Mr Obama in the White House, 22% that ties would stay the same, while seven per cent expected relations to worsen.

Only 20% thought ties would get better if Mr McCain were in the Oval Office.

The expectation that a McCain presidency would improve US relations with the world was the most common view, by a modest margin, only in China, India and Nigeria.

But across the board, the largest number - 37% - thought relations under a president McCain would stay the same, while 16% expected them to deteriorate.

In no country did most people think that a McCain presidency would worsen relations.


Some 30% of Americans expected relations to improve under Mr McCain

Oddly, in Turkey more people thought US relations would worsen with an Obama presidency than under Mr McCain, even though most Turks polled preferred Mr Obama to win.

In Egypt, Lebanon, Russia and Singapore, the predominant expectation was that relations would remain the same if Mr Obama won the election.

The countries most optimistic that an Obama presidency would improve ties were US Nato allies - Canada (69%), Italy (64%), France (62%), Germany (61%), and the UK (54%) - as well as Australia (62%), along with Kenya (87%) and Nigeria (71%).

When asked whether the election as president of the African-American Mr Obama would "fundamentally change" their perception of the US, 46% said it would while 27% said it would not.

The US public was polled separately and Americans also believed an Obama presidency would improve US ties with the world more than a McCain presidency.

Forty-six per cent of Americans expected relations to get better if Mr Obama were elected and 30% if Mr McCain won the White House.

A similar poll conducted for BBC World Service ahead of the 2004 US presidential election found most countries would have preferred to see Democratic nominee John Kerry beat the incumbent George W Bush.

At the time, the Philippines, Nigeria and Poland were among the few countries to favour Mr Bush's re-election. All three now favour Mr Obama over Mr McCain.

In total 22,531 citizens were polled in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Singapore, Turkey, the UAE and the UK. A parallel survey was conducted with 1,000 US adults.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7606100.stm
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
don said:
oldtimer: and only you are right-eh

starting to talk like a canadian there ot. at least you're making some progress!

Well I have been thinking of running for VP- since I can look to the north and see a foreign country...I must be a foreign policy expert :???: :wink: :lol: :p

Looks like the majority of Canadians think Obama could make world relations a whole lot better....


Obama win preferred in world poll

Most thought US relations would get better under a president Obama
People outside the US would prefer Barack Obama to become US president ahead of John McCain, a BBC World Service poll suggests.

Democrat Mr Obama was favoured by a four-to-one margin across the 22,500 people polled in 22 countries.

In 17 countries, the most common view was that US relations with the rest of the world would improve under Mr Obama.

If Republican Mr McCain were elected, the most common view was that relations would remain about the same.

The poll was conducted before the Democratic and Republican parties held their conventions and before the headline-grabbing nomination of Sarah Palin as Mr McCain's running mate.

BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the results could therefore be a reflection of the greater media focus on Mr Obama as he competed for the presidential candidacy against Hillary Clinton.

The margin of those in favour of Mr Obama winning November's US election ranged from 9% in India to 82% in Kenya, which is the birthplace of the Illinois senator's father.

On average 49% preferred Mr Obama to 12% in favour of Mr McCain. Nearly four in 10 of those polled did not take a view.

On average 46% thought US relations with the world would improve with Mr Obama in the White House, 22% that ties would stay the same, while seven per cent expected relations to worsen.

Only 20% thought ties would get better if Mr McCain were in the Oval Office.

The expectation that a McCain presidency would improve US relations with the world was the most common view, by a modest margin, only in China, India and Nigeria.

But across the board, the largest number - 37% - thought relations under a president McCain would stay the same, while 16% expected them to deteriorate.

In no country did most people think that a McCain presidency would worsen relations.


Some 30% of Americans expected relations to improve under Mr McCain

Oddly, in Turkey more people thought US relations would worsen with an Obama presidency than under Mr McCain, even though most Turks polled preferred Mr Obama to win.

In Egypt, Lebanon, Russia and Singapore, the predominant expectation was that relations would remain the same if Mr Obama won the election.

The countries most optimistic that an Obama presidency would improve ties were US Nato allies - Canada (69%), Italy (64%), France (62%), Germany (61%), and the UK (54%) - as well as Australia (62%), along with Kenya (87%) and Nigeria (71%).

When asked whether the election as president of the African-American Mr Obama would "fundamentally change" their perception of the US, 46% said it would while 27% said it would not.

The US public was polled separately and Americans also believed an Obama presidency would improve US ties with the world more than a McCain presidency.

Forty-six per cent of Americans expected relations to get better if Mr Obama were elected and 30% if Mr McCain won the White House.

A similar poll conducted for BBC World Service ahead of the 2004 US presidential election found most countries would have preferred to see Democratic nominee John Kerry beat the incumbent George W Bush.

At the time, the Philippines, Nigeria and Poland were among the few countries to favour Mr Bush's re-election. All three now favour Mr Obama over Mr McCain.

In total 22,531 citizens were polled in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Panama, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, Singapore, Turkey, the UAE and the UK. A parallel survey was conducted with 1,000 US adults.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7606100.stm


OT I suspect you may be a fluffer on the side! You ignore the Meat and Potato challenge above to debate energy and mortgages and their ties with the Democrats and instead chose to fluff a little with you shot on Palin. :roll:

Besides who cares what the World wants, people by nature are jealous of the success of others, I doubt the World has the best interest of my Children at the foremost of their opinions.
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
hahahaha.....Wow...Kenya loves Obama. What a relief....And of course he's said he would sit down with every terrorist on the planet so you know they're rooting for him.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
OT I suspect you may be a fluffer on the side! You ignore the Meat and Potato challenge above to debate energy and mortgages and their ties with the Democrats and instead chose to fluff a little with you shot on Palin.

I've posted my views on both these subjects probably 20 times each- and am not going back to rehash them with every newcomer and double/triple poster that comes out of the blue...

I've been telling you what Bush and his corrupt/unlawful policies would do to the elections now for 3-4 years...

The American people are slow to wrath, but once that wrath is kindled, it burns like a consuming flame. - Theodore Roosevelt
 

Vision

Well-known member
Old Timer - why are you so scared of me?? You wont even discuss the issues yet you come here as if you are some authority.

Are you a fool or just chicken?
 
Top