Axel Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 It seems to be a new fashion that newspapers site with US- candidates. I saw it in Europe, but in Thailand it is a new one to me. Not that I would disagree with The Nation: The Nation backs KerryPublished on Oct 30, 2004 In today’s editorial (page 9A), The Nation says, “It is to be hoped that good sense will prevail and American voters will pick the candidate who will make the world a safer place through positive engagements of US political, economic and military might with genuine respect for the multilateralism that the great majority of the international community swears by.” We therefore endorse John Kerry for the US presidency. The full editorial is here: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/pag...-10-30&usrsess= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jockstar Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Isnt it funny that the rest of the world can see what Bush is all about and dont trust him and would prefer that he wasnt in power. Yet some / maybe most Americans cant see this. I know who i would like.And I'm Scottish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Newspaper endorsements are worthless these days especially foreign ones. I know the Guardian was actually having its readers write letters to voters in an american state. Pretty much it just pissed the average yank off and had the opposite effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Isnt it funny that the rest of the world can see what Bush is all about and dont trust him and would prefer that he wasnt in power. Yet some / maybe most Americans cant see this. I know who i would like.And I'm Scottish. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps the world is looking at a seperate set of values not important to the average American citizen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbkudu Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Isnt it funny that the rest of the world can see what Bush is all about and dont trust him and would prefer that he wasnt in power. Yet some / maybe most Americans cant see this. I know who i would like.And I'm Scottish. Perhaps the world is looking at a seperate set of values not important to the average American citizen. Or perhaps most Americans are blind to the hurt and injustice in the rest of the world that is either directly or indirectly caused by US foreign policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Isnt it funny that the rest of the world can see what Bush is all about and dont trust him and would prefer that he wasnt in power. Yet some / maybe most Americans cant see this. I know who i would like.And I'm Scottish. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps the world is looking at a seperate set of values not important to the average American citizen. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or perhaps most Americans are blind to the hurt and injustice in the rest of the world that is either directly or indirectly caused by US foreign policy. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps it is because of people like you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted October 31, 2004 Author Share Posted October 31, 2004 Newspaper endorsements... ... Pretty much it just pissed the average yank off and had the opposite effect. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree to this although it is a pity. Put it to Thailand, any negative comment to events in LoS by farangs are taken bad by Thais, even if they might agree that the farang is right. It's human reaction. As for the NATION, they have my respect since the '92-revolution, when publishing the paper with 30% white spots, explaining that those have been stories cut by the censors. Mr. Th. is not happy with them, neither would be Mr. B. The average American citizen does not care what happens beyond the US-borders, members of this board should have a broader mind and be willing to listen what others think. No need to accept, but listen and think. That is the advantage of free press, of excersizing democratic rights and for any citizen a right of free travel, which for sure broaden one's mind, or does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiquila Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 The Nation is an English language newspaper. Some of its readers are Americans, including online readers in the US. Thus, it is in the position of influencing real voters. The reality is that newspaper endorsements have very little influence. Apparantly, the important things are physical height of the candidate, sense of humor, and which person you would prefer to share a beer with. I don't make these things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr_Pat_Pong Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 The Nation is an English language newspaper.Some of its readers are Americans, including online readers in the US. Thus, it is in the position of influencing real voters. The reality is that newspaper endorsements have very little influence. Apparantly, the important things are physical height of the candidate, sense of humor, and which person you would prefer to share a beer with. I don't make these things up. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Would you take a convivial glass with either of them ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boon Mee Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 The Nation is an English language newspaper.Some of its readers are Americans, including online readers in the US. Thus, it is in the position of influencing real voters. The reality is that newspaper endorsements have very little influence. Apparantly, the important things are physical height of the candidate, sense of humor, and which person you would prefer to share a beer with. I don't make these things up. It's seldom I agree with Khun Thaiquila but in this case I certainly do. Look at the example of Bill Clinton who was immensly popular in LOS and very much less so in the states. Or, Jimmy Carter, who was widely derised in Thailand but within the confines of America, looked upon as a good president. In the case of the current election it's a different case. Folks are just supporting John Kerry because they hate Bush. Go figure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Would you take a convivial glass with either of them ? sad.gif Dr. actually I'd more likely have a chang with Bush than Kerry if the truth be known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Well one thing we can all agree on - come wed this should be all over with. Or least I hope.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff1 Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I think that it will take at least a week before we find out who has won . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantarei Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Isnt it funny that the rest of the world can see what Bush is all about and dont trust him and would prefer that he wasnt in power. Yet some / maybe most Americans cant see this. I know who i would like.And I'm Scottish. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps the world is looking at a seperate set of values not important to the average American citizen. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Or perhaps most Americans are blind to the hurt and injustice in the rest of the world that is either directly or indirectly caused by US foreign policy. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog..._of_Appeasement 2/15/2003: Echoes of Appeasement “Neither the protester holding this sign nor the Reuters copy editor who captioned the photo have any idea of the historical significance of its message, or what it says about the so-called “anti-war movement.” The sign says “peace in our time”. “In September 1938, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain returned from the Munich Conference after throwing Czechoslovakia to the ravening Nazi wolves, and gave a speech that lives in infamy as a symbol of craven appeasement: Peace in Our Time. "We, the German Fuehrer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for two countries and for Europe. "We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again. "We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries, and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference, and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe." Chamberlain read this statement to a cheering crowd in front of 10 Downing St. and said; "My good friends this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honor. I believe it is peace in our time." The irrational cowboy Bush doesn’t want to emulate Neville Chamberlain. The rational, flip-flopping, gigolo Kerry seems to believe that history doesn’t repeat itself. PS Wasn't President Reagan called a warmonger, cowboy, etc when he referred to the Soviet gulag state as "evil empire". Who played a crucial role in liberating hundreds of millions of bolshevik victims - the pissant American and Western European "intellectuals" or the "second-rate" actor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted November 1, 2004 Author Share Posted November 1, 2004 I think that it will take at least a week before we find out who has won . <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 'The citizens vote on the first Tuesday in November, but when does the Supreme Court appoint the "winner"?' From Bangkok Post Nov 1, 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boon Mee Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I think that it will take at least a week before we find out who has won . 'The citizens vote on the first Tuesday in November, but when does the Supreme Court appoint the "winner"?' From Bangkok Post Nov 1, 2004. The decision could go to the House of Representatives this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usatrader Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 In this regard, having already voted along with 30% of the registered voters in my area who utilized their early voting prerogative, I demure to my Life Credo as to my commentary on the Nations endoresement: “Opinions are like butts, most are inflated, everybody has one and, when examined under the light of day, most stink. Mine as most being no exception to this absolute rule of nature”. That is all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff1 Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Please remember that , because of the high turnout expected . Republicans will be voting on tuesday November 2nd and democrats will be voting on November 3rd . Be sure to tell your friends Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frequentatore Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I think that it will take at least a week before we find out who has won . <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Many weeks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sriracha john Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Would you take a convivial glass with either of them ? sad.gif Dr. actually I'd more likely have a chang with Bush than Kerry if the truth be known. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure wouldn't trust Bush driving the car afterwards.... convicted Drunk Driver that he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axl Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 try to give Bush a brain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveh Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 The Nation is an English language newspaper.Some of its readers are Americans, including online readers in the US. Thus, it is in the position of influencing real voters. The reality is that newspaper endorsements have very little influence. Apparantly, the important things are physical height of the candidate, sense of humor, and which person you would prefer to share a beer with. I don't make these things up. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is the problem with the media. In particular, the American media. They don't report what is going on in the world as they should. They try to influence people. That is not their job. They should be a nonbias source of information on ALL candidates. And the people should make up their own minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jockstar Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I remember seeing a few weeks ago on CNN that some research company had polled many other countries about how they would vote.IF THEY COULD. Kerry came out on top in all but one or 2. If i remember one of them was in Asia some where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Remember too if I recall it was the Philippines! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jockstar Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Brit your right. I might have been wrong saying 1 or 2. I think i might have been only 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaphat Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 I think that it will take at least a week before we find out who has won . <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Many weeks... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Technically the outcome is not final until the Electoral College votes. This will take place on December 18th this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jockstar Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 So the world has gotta wait that long to say goodbye to Bush? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tornado Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 ihatebush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tornado Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Would you take a convivial glass with either of them ? sad.gif Dr. actually I'd more likely have a chang with Bush than Kerry if the truth be known. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure wouldn't trust Bush driving the car afterwards.... convicted Drunk Driver that he is. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i hate bush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britmaveric Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 Really Tornie never knew you felt that way about Pres Bush! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now