Poll - Canadians Prefer Obama

[bush_cheney2004]

A recent Harris-Decima poll answers that burning question...if Canadians were ambivalent before (they weren't), then surely NAFTA anxiety has perked up interest:

"The momentum for Senator Obama that became evident over recent months in the U.S. is now showing up in Canada," said Harris-Decima president Bruce Anderson.

"Not only is he now preferred by more Canadians than the other two candidates, Canadians believe a Democrat will win the White House and that Senator Obama will be that Democrat."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...09?hub=Politics

Maybe Senator McCain's campaign can combine Reverend Wright rantings with former MP Parrish's immortal words...."Damn Americans...I hate those bastards!"

[Oleg Bach]

A recent Harris-Decima poll answers that burning question...if Canadians were ambivalent before (they weren't), then surely NAFTA anxiety has perked up interest:

"The momentum for Senator Obama that became evident over recent months in the U.S. is now showing up in Canada," said Harris-Decima president Bruce Anderson.

"Not only is he now preferred by more Canadians than the other two candidates, Canadians believe a Democrat will win the White House and that Senator Obama will be that Democrat."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...09?hub=Politics

Maybe Senator McCain's campaign can combine Reverend Wright rantings with former MP Parrish's immortal words...."Damn Americans...I hate those bastards!"

America needs reform and in it's present state should be damned. Having said that...Reverend right was right and Obama should have not jumped ship...eg..car companies..owned by old fat white guys - weapon manufacturing - white guys - the pharma dope trade - white guys ...the oil merchants - white guys - the courts - white guys...so if Obama did what was right and stuck to the side of Rev. Wright . His backers the white elite would disown him....now Hillary has promised her old white guy handers one thing..that they would all become billionares for eternity and she would do it by putting every last child on Ritalin..at the tax payers expense and send the money to them...Then the old white elite could stop their shady dealings in the opium and cocaine buisness..get every kid on kiddy coke ritalin...problem sloved...and that lunitic Trotskyite Hillary would actually believe she is doing what is right..when she is left and wrong...and murderously destructive...Obama...well - say good bye to white america---his white handlers want him to destroy white trash america - and he will. He is not black - or white - he is a henchmen recieting Martin King rhetoricals...a liar...besides his head and brain are to small to be legitimate.

[bush_cheney2004]

America needs reform and in it's present state should be damned. Having said that...Reverend right was right and Obama should have not jumped ship...eg..car companies..owned by old fat white guys - weapon manufacturing - white guys - the pharma dope trade - white guys ...the oil merchants - white guys - the courts - white guys...so if Obama did what was right and stuck to the side of Rev. Wright . His backers the white elite would disown him....

Hmmm...Canada is even "whiter", so not much to go on there.

...He is not black - or white - he is a henchmen recieting Martin King rhetoricals...a liar...besides his head and brain are to small to be legitimate.

Hence Canada's love affair with him?

[M.Dancer]

Obama is a danger to Canada....Hillary may even be worse.

Thank God for McCain.

[Riverwind]

bc,

I was thinking that americans might go for obama but hedge their bets by voting republican for senate and congress. Any thoughts?

[capricorn]

Obama is a danger to Canada....Hillary may even be worse.

Which proves that according to that Decima poll, Canadians don't know what's good for them.

[bush_cheney2004]

I was thinking that americans might go for obama but hedge their bets by voting republican for senate and congress. Any thoughts?

I like the windage, only in an opposite direction. Personal bias aside (he he), methinks the Democrats will gain more seats (but not a super majority) in Congress while electing McCain president.

[jdobbin]

bc,

I was thinking that americans might go for obama but hedge their bets by voting republican for senate and congress. Any thoughts?

The Charlie Cook Report which studies those sort of trends pretty much says he believes that the Republicans will have a difficult time overcoming the Democrats in the Senate, Reps and even for the presidency.

Today's article:

So, for McCain to run basically even with either Democratic candidate is amazing, especially when he's also battling the political equivalent of a 50-mile-per-hour headwind. No generic or even typical Republican could fare nearly so well.

Having said that, however, this fall's presidential contest remains a very tough fight for the GOP. It's not difficult to come up with states where Obama or Clinton might top Al Gore's performance in 2000 or John Kerry's in 2004. But it's hard to find a Gore or Kerry state that McCain could shift into the GOP column.

The Senate and House of Reps races are also featured in the Cook Report.

The right wing in Canada might have high hopes for McCain but even his own party doesn't exactly exude passion for the man.

[bush_cheney2004]

Which proves that according to that Decima poll, Canadians don't know what's good for them.

I think many (not all) Canadians are enthralled with the possibility of what Obama represents in the way of a sea change in US politics (and policy). In practice, it would be very difficult to implement wholesale changes on either the domestic or foreign policy fronts. Echoing your observation, and as an example, Obama is not a proponent of a single-payer health care system overhaul for the USA.

Ironically, Canada's economy has done quite well during "hated" Dubya's two terms.

[bush_cheney2004]

The right wing in Canada might have high hopes for McCain but even his own party doesn't exactly exude passion for the man.

Haven't seen any specific numbers on "right wing" Canada and McCain, but as your own post indicates, that he is still very competitive against Obama or Clinton speaks volumes.

[Kitchener]

Among many other things, the fact that McCain can't seem to remember the difference between Shi'ite and Sunni and how that distinction is relevant to Al Qaeda is going to make the attack ads pretty easy to write. I suspect that even many conservative Americans have had their fill of the Earnest Ignorance model of leadership. He's getting an easy ride while the Dems have their internal bloodletting. But when people finally start paying attention to the history of the Straight Talk Express, the wheels will fall off the wagon.

[Topaz]

I first saw Obama on the Oprah show a year ago this past Feb. and then I thought he was very smart and and very in tune with the "average American". He hadn't make his mind up[ as to run for president then. I wish we here in Canada could find someone like Obama. He's better than Bill Clinton when speaking and makes more sense then a lot of politicians but I also know he's not perfect and will makes mistakes but he's the kind of guy that would admit his mistakes and ask for forgiveness , unlike Bush, who won't admit much!

[Leafless]

Which proves that according to that Decima poll, Canadians don't know what's good for them.

Don't blame poor stifled, oppressed Canadians.

The undemocratic legislative actions of our federal government made certain of that.

[GostHacked]

Wow BC, you never cease to amaze me.

In many threads you talk about how irrelevant the Canadian view point is on American Politics, and yet here you are wanting to talk about just that. This sounds hypocritical to me. But agian my views (Canaduhhhh) don't matter!!!

ATTN fellow Canadians, Nothing to see here, move along.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wow BC, you never cease to amaze me.

In many threads you talk about how irrelevant the Canadian view point is on American Politics, and yet here you are wanting to talk about just that. This sounds hypocritical to me. But agian my views (Canaduhhhh) don't matter!!!

ATTN fellow Canadians, Nothing to see here, move along.

This thread is about the poll, which exists despite the stated irrelevance of Canadian views. Nothing you say in the way of an opinion can change that, but we're happy to let you play too.

[bush_cheney2004]

Among many other things, the fact that McCain can't seem to remember the difference between Shi'ite and Sunni and how that distinction is relevant to Al Qaeda is going to make the attack ads pretty easy to write....

If that be a pivotal issue (it's not), one would think that Senator Obama should remember the difference between the Canadian "president" and "prime minister". But then again he is only a "junior" senator.

[HisSelf]

I've looked at a lot of your posts. I rthink you need to see a psychiatrist. This is the end game, and you are wrong. 80% of Americans know it. Why don't you?

[bush_cheney2004]

I've looked at a lot of your posts. I rthink you need to see a psychiatrist. This is the end game, and you are wrong. 80% of Americans know it. Why don't you?

I've looked at just a few of your posts...not even a shrink can help you. You don't have a clue what Americans know, just like in 2004.

[GostHacked]

I've looked at just a few of your posts...not even a shrink can help you. You don't have a clue what Americans know, just like in 2004.

Not to worry, looks like the Americans did not even know what they know.

[Kitchener]

If that be a pivotal issue (it's not), one would think that Senator Obama should remember the difference between the Canadian "president" and "prime minister". But then again he is only a "junior" senator.

True enough. The fact that Obama made that mistake repeatedly, after being corrected on it, and after six years of a sustained intense war against Canada that he's supported loudly, makes clear your parallel between Obama's remark and McCain's remarks...

Why should some facility with the most basic facts of a long-standing controversial war that one supports be a "pivotal issue", after all?

[bush_cheney2004]

...Why should some facility with the most basic facts of a long-standing controversial war that one supports be a "pivotal issue", after all?

Methinks you have answered your own question. The "long standing controversial war" is rich with policy contradictions and seeming confusion for all the varied set pieces and interests. The sustained and pressing concern of war's detractors (or proponents) does not necessarily translate into a well briefed senator or presidential candidate when many other issues must be mastered, sometimes to a much larger degree than just the "war in Iraq".

[Kitchener]

Methinks you have answered your own question. The "long standing controversial war" is rich with policy contradictions and seeming confusion for all the varied set pieces and interests.

No doubt it's terribly confusing. It would be sad but understandable if, nearly 7 years after 9/11, there were voters in remote corners of the USA who didn't understand that Al Qaeda is Sunni and not Shi'ite; that the Iranian government (and population for the most part) is Shi'ite and not Sunni. Still, I don't seem to have required the use of any higher mathematical or analytical abilities in order to master that particular elementary fact.

For an alleged military specialist and aspiring C-in-C, who has consistent defended the occupation of Iraq and mooted an expansion of hostilities to include Iran, having a basic clue about who's allied with who would seem to be rather important. Of course you may disagree; I didn't say that everyone has come to think that informed, intelligent leadership would be a pleasant change.

[bush_cheney2004]

No doubt it's terribly confusing. It would be sad but understandable if, nearly 7 years after 9/11, there were voters in remote corners of the USA who didn't understand that Al Qaeda is Sunni and not Shi'ite; that the Iranian government (and population for the most part) is Shi'ite and not Sunni. Still, I don't seem to have required the use of any higher mathematical or analytical abilities in order to master that particular elementary fact.

You are missing the point entirely....such distinctions are irrelevant to the average American, and even the not so average ones. Bombing Christian Germans in WW2 or Serbs in 1999 did not evoke deep thought about Eastern Orthodox, Lutherans, or Reformists. Hell, Americans are often accused of being quite ignorant of just a world map, let alone interpretations of the Qu'ran. The GPS guided bombs can't distinguish between Sunni and Shia either.

For an alleged military specialist and aspiring C-in-C, who has consistent defended the occupation of Iraq and mooted an expansion of hostilities to include Iran, having a basic clue about who's allied with who would seem to be rather important. Of course you may disagree; I didn't say that everyone has come to think that informed, intelligent leadership would be a pleasant change.

Again, you are projecting your own interest and bias on the matter to the American voting public, which has plenty of other distractions / considerations, and has grown quite bored with Iraq/Iran manifestations. I don't even think the average Canadian obsesses on it, and certainly not that this singular issue should drive candidate choices in a foreign election.

Sorry, but Jimmy Carter cannot legally run again.

Edited April 16, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Kitchener]

You are missing the point entirely....such distinctions are irrelevant to the average American, and even the not so average ones. Bombing Christian Germans in WW2 or Serbs in 1999 did not evoke deep thought about Eastern Orthodox, Lutherans, or Reformists.

And if the American invasion and occupation of Germany and potentially of surrounding nations in 1945 had depended crucially on whether German Lutherans were collaborating with Austrian Catholics, and if an American presidential candidate (who trumpeted his competence as a potential C-in-C and was a cheerleader for the war) had nevertheless been demonstrably, repeatedly, publicly ignorant of which was which, even after years of war... then that too would have been bizarre and shameful.

Obviously.

The GPS guided bombs can't distinguish between Sunni and Shia either.

Hence the value of having someone with a clue in charge of deciding whether to drop them.

Sorry, but Jimmy Carter cannot legally run again.

I didn't ask for Jimmy Carter, so you can save your memorized lines for situations when they actually make sense. I'd just prefer to see someone who knows the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites, when he presents himself as the candidate best equipped to manage (and possibly expand) the war. My suspicion is that a residual lump of voters will take belligerence over intelligence, but that many potential Republican voters will not -- and will, at a minimum, vote with their feet by staying home, even if they can't stomach either Obama or Clinton.

[bush_cheney2004]

I didn't ask for Jimmy Carter, so you can save your memorized lines for situations when they actually make sense. I'd just prefer to see someone who knows the difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites, when he presents himself as the candidate best equipped to manage (and possibly expand) the war.

Your irrelevant preference has been noted, but if you don't mind (and even if you do) the Americans will nominate party candidates and elect a president and vice president just as they always have. The only requirement for office is that they be natural born citizens and at least 35 years of age. Since President Bush and Vice President Cheney clearly know the difference between Sunni and Shia, I presume that they have your blessing.

My suspicion is that a residual lump of voters will take belligerence over intelligence, but that many potential Republican voters will not -- and will, at a minimum, vote with their feet by staying home, even if they can't stomach either Obama or Clinton.

Is that what this is all about? An elitist judgement about belligerence vs. intelligence in American foreign policy? Way too late for that (by at least 100 years).