Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on And Another Sign of the Times


Uh huh.

Posted by Mr. Poe | April 2, 2008 9:02 AM

I think the return of Elvis would do more to raise the positive image of our country than Obama.

Posted by Cato | April 2, 2008 9:03 AM

Don't get ahead of yourself, Charles. It's going to be interesting to see how the man is perceived once the new car smell wears off (that is , if he is actually elected).

Posted by Rotten666 | April 2, 2008 9:13 AM

Even though I'm an Obama alternate delegate, I don't think this is a fair assumption -- I think either Democratic candidate would improve foreign relations and it's my understanding that the Clintons are warmly regarded by most of the world (recent Irish eye-rolling about Senator Clinton's peace process claims nonwithstanding).

I can't imagine a McCain Presidency would be welcome news to most of the world. Also, I wonder how notorious Cindy McCain is outside of the US for her having to resign from the international aid organization she'd founded, over stealing painkillers from it...

Posted by Peter F | April 2, 2008 9:23 AM

Might've been before your time, Charles, but there was a guy named Bill whose global popularity was (and is) much higher than his (record-setting) US approvals.

In fact, US failure to appreciate Bill was a factor in declining global approval of the US. "If you don't want him, he can be our President" was a common response.

Global what, now? Barack Obama may be cool and hip, but he's no MONGO FORTRAN.

Posted by RonK, Seattle | April 2, 2008 9:27 AM

Have you considered that it is our tanking economy? Those polled probably hate us less because we're less threatening.

But never put it past an Obysmal to draw these grandiose conclusions that he is improving our image *ahem* MONTHS before the general and even more *MONTHS* before being a sitting President.


Posted by Non | April 2, 2008 9:37 AM

I'm with the earlier comments... I would love it if Obama were a world President, but I don't think you can uncategorically state that he "will be" at this point. I also think that Clinton would be a significant improvement as well, in terms of world opinion.

Are there any international polls on this topic (Obama vs. Clinton vs. McCain's impact on world opinion)? I'm too lazy/busy to look right now...

Posted by Julie | April 2, 2008 9:39 AM

I hope that Obama is nothing like Mugabe.

Although, I kinda suspect that some things are just in the blood.

Why is Africa such a shite hole?

Posted by ecce homo | April 2, 2008 9:41 AM

Either Dem as president would improve our international image, at least in comparison to McCain.

I have to agree with the others - I'm an Obama supporter, but I still think it's a little early in the game to be kissing his ass with this much vigor.

Posted by Hernandez | April 2, 2008 9:49 AM

obama won't be the world president, but his election will be seen as evidence that rationality has (re-?)appeared in america.

the planet is going to be sorely disappointed when he can't wave a magic wand & make all the problems go away.

for the reasons an earlier poster said: our economy is entering a precipitous & sustained downturn. our power & influence got thrown in a ditch by president cheney.

we MUST contract our military significantly (leading to more unemployed, undereducated, unskilled young men in the work force), stop employing the rest of the planet, stop killing the atmosphere, and address our energy future. we have no choice.

Posted by maxsolomon@home | April 2, 2008 9:51 AM

WTF? "Clinton (like McCain) will be nothing more than another American president..."

Having a female president is far more radical for the US than another color of wealthy man.

Posted by Carollani | April 2, 2008 10:12 AM

@11, wealthy woman running on her husband's reputation > wealthy black man running on his own reputation? That is silly.

Argentina already had two presidentas like that. And guess what. They weren't very radical. On the other hand, Zimbabwe successfully replaced its white presidents with a black one and woo boy. That went well. But radical it was, nevertheless.

Posted by john | April 2, 2008 10:25 AM

"Zimbabwe successfully replaced its white presidents with a black one and woo boy. That went well. But radical it was, nevertheless."

Current events not withstanding, people forget that the first half of the Mugabe presidency was actually quite stellar.

Posted by Deeply Depressed | April 2, 2008 10:31 AM

I think they'll both be pretty radical... my opinion is that a woman would be more radical from a US-perspective, but I'm not sure about the international perspective. Suspect it would be the black man (since many countries have already had female leaders), but I really don't know.

Posted by Julie | April 2, 2008 10:34 AM

john @12 is right.

seriously, having a female head of state is something most nations did LAST century. it's not a big deal ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | April 2, 2008 10:49 AM


Hillary is much, much more wealthy than Obama. I've also heard that Michelle earns more than he does. I haven't seen corroboration, but if true, that's pretty damn cool.

Posted by keshmeshi | April 2, 2008 10:56 AM

Exactly, Charles. Hilliary is just more of the McSame.

Posted by Grant Cogswell | April 2, 2008 11:25 AM

I love how your OPINION is stated like it is the ultimate truthnomatterwhat.

Posted by D | April 2, 2008 11:27 AM

@13 Mugabe's presidency tanked when his wife died. Apparently she was the one who was really running the country.

Posted by Cat in Chicago | April 2, 2008 11:39 AM

So if I hear the Hillary supporters right--we shouldn't have a black President, and Obama's supporters are saying we shouldn't have a woman President.

Can't we find common ground in a white man as President, then?

Posted by NapoleonXIV | April 2, 2008 11:45 AM

Way to ensure we never get an Obama presidency, Jinxy McJinxton.

Posted by Matthew | April 2, 2008 11:47 AM

I don't buy the world president concept, but I think Obama's election would be a landmark in race relations in the US and a sign that this country isn't run by juveniles. I do think that Hillary's election would also by a real sign of maturity.

@8, you should buddy up with 528, he/she claims to be going to dinner with McCain, Cheney and Rove. I would guess they share your views on Africa.

Posted by left coast | April 2, 2008 1:19 PM

@16 - The only fact I have on the topic of Michelle and Obama's earnings is that apparently her salary before she quit was $215k (not sure about bonuses). More than a state or US senator salary, for sure, but he also has book earnings... I'm sure the info is out there with their taxes being released and all...

Posted by Julie | April 2, 2008 2:27 PM

Everybody, shut the fuck up. Gossip Girl is on!

Posted by Mr. Poe | April 2, 2008 6:27 PM

It baffles me how Dan Savage can get on HBO and scream Hillary is a liar due to her "Bosnia Fantasy" yet he fails to point out that Obama is a liar too! Obama claims he is a Professor of Law at the University of Chicago while he is only a lecturer. Obama also claims to have been conceived at the Selma march ( which the first march was in 1963) yet Obama was born in 1961. Here is a big one because it is one of his campaign bites he does not accept money from Lobbyist yet he has accepted money from The Cherokee Nation who btw have ousted fellow Cherokee because they are black. Come on Savage from one queer to another. Stop your hypcritical HATE towards Hillary and support the democratic party and let the election process work itself out!!! Jeeez!!

Posted by Bleu Northam | April 3, 2008 7:10 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).