This is a question to anyone and not just those voting in the American elections this year (I think it affects a lot of the world)...What do you think of George W. Bush?

I don't think he should be running for elections at all. He should've done what Johnson did during the Vietnam War and have stepped down. Although, that wouldn't be likely considering his arrogance and pride...that's my view anyway. I don't know how wars and terrorism would go under other presidents but under Bush it will just get worse. We don't need another bad leader in this world. Another reason I don't want Bush elected is because of John Howard. He will just do whatever Bush says whether it is bad for Australia or not, or the rest of the world.

George Bush is running because George Bush has a good chance of winning. Its debatable whether that’s right or not, but it does show that many Americans want him for a second term. I personally don't like him, and won't vote for him, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't run. Arrogance might just be confidence in his own ability. I personally agree with you that he is arrogant, and I dislike how he has not made one apology on how he was asleep at the wheel and let September 11th occur. He is the commander in Chief of the United States of America and has an obligation to admit his mistake.

I'm going to comment on an issue that seems to keep on popping up. Foreigners trying to convince Americas not to vote for Bush. Whether by a conversation like this, or the case of Brits mailing letters to Ohio to tell people to vote for Kerry, it seems like Foreigners are trying to influence the election. There is a reason that only Americans can vote. It is our decision who becomes President, not anyone else's. Do we have conversations about how Tony Blair or Vladimir Putin should not be re-elected, hopefully not.

Sorry to get on a rant , but I wish that the people of the world would just relax and let Americans choose who OUR next President is.

Fair enough. Your 're saying that since America shapes the world, the world should have a say on who the shaper will be. I hear that, but you must relize that you don't have a say. Maybe you should, but the choice is ultimatly left up to Americans, and I should warn you, when you tell us to do one thing, we WILL do the opposite . You should be embracing Bush. Then we will definitly flock to Kerry, which I wouldn't mind.

Actually, I quite understand that we don't really deserve a say, after all, it's your country. All I was trying to do was explain why there's so much worldwide interest here.

Quote:

---

and I dislike how he has not made one apology on how he was asleep at the wheel and let September 11th occur.

---

WHAT!? And if he had gone into his presidency with guns blaring I can imagine how you'd be carrying on now about that! Please don't forget that the actions of the terrorists started on someone else's watch. Did Clinton apologize when the terrorists bombed the towers in 1993? Did Clinton apologize when terrorists bombed the USS Cole? Did Clinton apologize for letting Bin Laden go when he was practically handed over on a silver platter? I can't understand why you would blame President Bush for not apologizing for 9/11, and yet blame him for doing something about it afterwards.

Clinton is no longer President. It would be nice if he apologized, but unnececary. Bush is like the captain of a ship. Whatever happens aboard the ship, no matter whose fault, the captain must take the blame for it. It is therefore Bush's fault, and he needs to apologize. Since he hasn't, I'm not voting for him, and don't think anyone else should.

I don't really think blaming anyone but America's own general sense of invulnerability and the terrorists themselves is at all useful.

As for foreigners having a "say" in who America elects, well...
Are foreigners allowed to vote? No. Not unless they go through the channels to become citizens. Should it stay that way? Sure. But why be offended that people from outside the US are more than a little interested in the outcome of this election? Why bother telling them to keep their noses out of it? We don't keep our noses out of the governments of other countries, in fact we don't seem to have much problem just muxing about as we see fit. And American citizens are concerned regularly with the outcomes of elections in other countries. I'm quite sure more than one American has thought something about the French leaders needing to go. Believing that our governments should be entirely our business is a little short-sighted. If a foreigner is interested enough about the outcome of the election to take an active part in campaigning for an elected official, I see no issue. They still can't vote. They only have so much power. And, for my part, I'm just as interested in what foreigners have to say about the candidates as I am other Americans.

Americans should remain aware that this does concern everyone else. The rest of the world is watching this election, and being served it twenty times a day on their TV and in their papers and having it analyzed for them.
It is unfortunately their business, but Americans are the stockholders so to speak who have a vote.
Is it any wonder that so many people are asking them to look at things differently because it affects them too?

I was living abroad when all this happened. Even the Bush election was commented on daily. I bet more Europeans knew who was running than some Americans!
I had to resent the charactural way Bush was represented in the aftermath of 911 as I found it unfair, then as things progressed I saw Afghanistan unfold and though there were many who protested this, many still applauded it.
But the Iraq war was unbelievable in terms of public perception...I watched several European channels at that time and the minute that war was entered in to, credibility fell to an all time low.
Yet, people could still be convinced that not all Americans necessarily endorsed the views of the president.
Time went on, and now, though more people are voting than before, people outside the States are seeing that Bush may win again and they simply cannot comprehend why they would.
There are very few leaders in the world who would comment favorably in public right now.
So if you really don't see why people are interested in the decisions Americans are making, imagine if you were not allowed to vote on an election that concerned your well being. Or if your son or daughter or spouse were in an army of a country who'd lended support to America.

I'm afraid the statement about not telling Americans what to do as they'll do the opposite is true for many people.
I see that every day. Lots of Americans resent the attention it's getting the country but they need to realize that like it or not, these elections are of primary importance to others who would like their say.
Their news coverage is as good as ours and less partial in some instances too.

Loth - I couldn't have said it better.

Also, just thinking about this... Some Americans wanted the UN to come in and observe the US elections. Actually, I think this would be a good idea as I have a feeling that there is going to be more than one lawsuit filed against the outcome of the election. With UN observers, we could prove that we're still a democratic nation.

You think its a good idea to have the UN come in and observe the election? Where is this coming from? America might affect the entire world, but that doesn't mean that the world should have a say. UN inspectors? This is the same UN which is so quick to condemn Israel, right . It boggles the mind . Maybe we should send in the US marines into Britain to 'observe' the elction and make sure Tony Blair wins.

I'm saying UN inspectors would be able to stave off any criticism that would come from anyone in the world that this 2004 election is unfair.

The UN doesn't affect the outcome of elections. They *observe* the elections and report any irregularities. If the country has irregularities, it's up to that country, NOT the UN, to make changes.

If the election goes as it should, where is the fear/harm in letting elections inspectors come in?

LadyMacb29, by having the UN inspectors come in, I think that that would be saying that we can't handle our own elections. Maybe we can't. I mena, look at the last election. Still, I'd prefer everything to stay in country. And so what if the rest of the world thinks the election is unfair. It is up to the Americans to decide if it is.

Sorry, but as was said elsewhere, India conducted a fairer election than we did against the odds.

Well, the truth of the matter is that the world does not have a say. Maybe it should, maybe it shouldn't, but in the end, Americans will ignore outside forces and vote how they personally feel. I hear where you 're coming from Shrivats, but I think differently.

It’s true that the UN was created to combat isolationism, as you said, but the UN has changed in recent years. Its power has greatly diminished and it appears (at least to me) that the "battle lines" have been drawn. The majority of the UN (by majority, I mean like 98%) seems to be giving in to pressure from those countries with a nice amount of oil. Almost every single country in the UN seems to vote against Israel at every turn. It can be debated why that is, but notice that the US does not "go with the flow" and they veto any sanction against Israel. I find it strange that Israel is so in focus, when there are so much more serious issues to deal with. I'm not saying that Israel is not a serious issue, but I think the Darfur crisis is a bit more critical. I get the impression that the UN is falling apart, and it wouldn't surprise me if eventually, the US returns to its isolationist roots.

I'm not trying to offend anyone. I respect everyone's opinion, even if I disagree with it.

I'm afraid eytank and I will never see eye to eye on this topic, but anyway, 'nuff said indeed. Everybody's entitled to their own views, and a person's view is his... er castle?

Getting back to the topic,

George Bush. I must say, I've never seen a world leader villified so much internationally as George Bush has, and in this case, I think it's justified. If there ever was a person more deserving of being kicked out of the White House, well, I haven't heard of him, and I sincerely hope I never will.

If there is one person who has been single handedly responsible for the Anti-American views now so prevalent in the world, it has to be Dubya. Anyway, as you rightly said eytank, in the end I, or any other non-American person can do nothing about it, so let's wait until Tuesday to hear the American people's decision.

Ok, I made a new thread about elections inspectors. So we can keep this one solely about the topic.

I concur Shrivats.

In my opinon (which no one has to agree with) George Bush is one of the worst Presidents the USA has ever had. I didn't think so until really a few months ago when I researched his actions and relized how stupid he was. He didn't really deserve to win the 2000 election, and really shouldn't even be here. I must admit that one of my sources is that excellent film Farenheight 9/11. I can't imagine another four years with Dubya, and I am going to vote for Kerry in the coming election. I don't especially like him, but I think he will be better than Bush. I could always vote for a third party candidate, but what would be the point?

If I were to really say what I think of George Bush I would be edited out by my co-moderator!

Non-Americans would probably be less concerned about the outcome of this election if our countries hadn't been dragged into his war. We are not forgetting all the weapons of mass destruction which we were assured meant that many young men had to be sent to their deaths.

What do you think of George W Bush?
I think he is a man doing a job that few would care to do,or be able to do.
I also think that as this election is so very close there are many Americans that think along the same lines as Bush.
I think it comforting to see that the leader of the most powerful military machine yet has a sense of morality.
I think that the reasons Bush invaded Iraq might not be the same reasons I felt it had to be done but the end result will hopefully be the same: A better standard of living and freedom for those in Iraq.
I think that many Australians also think highly of Bush.
I think it`s going to be interesting to see what his plans are when and if he gets re-elected.
I like him.

All bush talks about is terrorism. I think we should have someone who able to grasp more than one topic at a time. Of course if i had his domestic record i would avoid talking about it as well. "the world is safer with saddam gone" yes prez, you've said that about 456,834 times now. Ugh. I have a feeling he's going to win though. But i hope I'm wrong.