US versus China for world position

Interesting…

I just read a poll of roughly 600,000 people worldwide, as to who they would choose for president.

Every country except 1 elected Obama, and Obama won 80% to 19%.

The only country that would have elected Romney?  China

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/11/05/poll-most-of-the-world-would-vote-for-obama-except-china/

[admin]I don’t see any problem with this post.[/admin]

Obama annoyed China a lot during last years. Here’s why they don’t like him

I’m serious. Chineses were annoyed by Obama, thats it.

Islands issues, Philippines issues, Rare metal issues etc…

My head has shaken too much. OK, I say the following as:

A. A US voter who didn’t support or vote for either choice
B. A moderator who understands the rules and will not be debating the politics of the poll, but rather it’s implications and relevance

570,000 people voted who they would have preferred for president? This poll had several sketchy parameters:

A. It was not scientific. It was a polling of all the online readers of MSN. I don’t care if you support Obama, that’s not really being honest about wanting an intellectual answer to “Who does the world support? Which candidate?”

B. 36 Countries = The entire planet? Also, consider “the entire planet” is just the online readership of MSN. I could just as easily garner enough international supporters of “clean energy,” poll them, and then state I had found “The Entire Planet” supports one candidate or another. They all have something in common, it must be an accurate data collection! No.

C. Somehow, the “Middle East’s” support for Obama doesn’t bother anyone and China’s support for Romney does? And you can’t use the argument, “The people support us, the rulers do not.” I could use the same argument with China, and considering China’s development and broad access to the internet compared to the Middle East, I would probably have the better argument.

D. The “thoughts” of one MSN China affiliate represents the viewership of China? Did she poll these people, ask them questions? She doesn’t even say, it just says, “what she thought.”

There is no reason anyone should trust this poll as accurate in correctly predicting who the “world” supports (a terribly obtuse claim), and also explaining why the same “world” voted for one candidate or another. Remember, I am merely talking about the validity of this poll, not generalizations about how world politics are, etc.

GG

Another political thread. Perhaps a ban on threads with US somehow implicated in something…

Because people deliberately bring up threads about the USA for the sole purpose of indirectly or directly ridiculing some aspect of US policy, the nation itself or it’s people. It is so obvious that is the only point of these threads, it shocks me that that was not understood by 99.99999999%.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

GG, I would agree that nobody should trust the poll.  MSN is left leaning, had the poll been that of Fox news readers it would carry more weight.

I wouldn’t think a FOX news poll would have anymore weight to it, if it was of FOX News viewership. My point is one of intellectual honesty, not of political opinion (remember, I don’t have a horse in this race). Both are unscientific, and choose a slanted audience as a majority audience. If they had done this at Gallop, their would be… well someone would get fired for sure.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

I would posit that in general the world does seem to favour Obama.  I think Canadians favour him which is surprising since he is against the keystone oil pipeline and Romney is for it.  I suspect Obama will now be for it.

I probably would agree, about the world being more favorable for Obama. I am not sure if that has quite the desired affect on the electorate that the world wants, or that specific news outlets want. I would be interested to see if there is a US poll of voters to see what were the reasons for choosing who they elected, and add global affirmation as an option. I still would suspect the economy was the overwhelming reason.

GG

Probably if it’s true that other nations favors Obama, it might be that they didn’t like Bush’s foreign politics and they associate him with any other Republican.

This is just my opinion, there’s no fox polls for it.

The other countries wanted Obama for 2nd term because he 's too soft on foreign politics. MPO.

I know that this poll was bandy about the airwaves a bit:

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/10/31/surprise-obama-winning-90-of-northern-european-vote/

I don’t know that they give the reasons why, but it says here that Obama is considered right of center, or even right wing, when it comes to European politics. That said, it is likely that politically Europeans choose Obama because, while still too far to the right for them, he is more to the left than Mitt Romney. Similar to the situation that many conservative Americans would vote for Romney because while he is not conservative enough for many, he is much more conservative than the president. With only two choices it becomes the lesser of two evils mindset.

I am not saying it is true or not, only that the pattern again emerges where a thread about US “going down” and another nation rising…China is this case.

@Imperious:

I am not saying it is true or not, only that the pattern again emerges where a thread about US “going down” and another nation rising…China is this case.

Maybe this is due to reality. Unfortunate, but true.

Not debating that. Just that it is yet another thread to make USA look bad. From a Canadian.

Mr. Crunch,

You’re a hard one to figure out.  You mention the “bullying of the US” against other nations while at the same time advocate the US, not the world or a coalition or something, enforcing environmental, labor and human rights rules upon China.  I would like to see human rights recognized for everyone, but isn’t that just the sort of thing other nations would call bullying, when the US attempts to use its strength in one arena or another to force a policy on another nation?

I still believe the relatively benign policies of the US toward other nations given their relative strength is commendable.  We’re not perfect but we do a pretty fair job.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

the Progressive Conservatives (why anyone would have an oxymoron as their name is beyond me but its historic!).

Hahaha… yeah, that is really odd.

@MrMalachiCrunch:

I see somebody gave you a thumbs down for saying this, I find that strange.  It seems to me to be factual and free of opinion much like stating 2+2=4.  I hope you don’t feel I am slandering the US by daring to mention the US by name as some seem to feel I am.  Perhaps i ought to speak in code, assign an alias for the US in order exist here……

I did not even notice that they did… but yes, I was trying to simply be factual and not throw my opinion in there. Certainly I could just start spewing my political guts, but that is not what this thread or these forums are about. I try to limit how much of my political opinion comes out. Though I will not shy away on principles.

Since you asked, and for the record, no, I do not feel as though you are slandering the US or in any way trying to demean Americans and their policies. I have not read all of the posts on this thread, but enough to realize that such is not your goal. I believe your sincerity in support for the US, why would any Canadian not want the US to prosper and be strong? (That is my thought) I would consider myself a patriotic American, and I can take a punch if someone really wants to give it. I can also deal them back in the American way. I have seen some people on these forums who really are more-or-less USA haters. Their loss.

To my fellow Americans here: good; defend our country when it is necessary, but don’t be too quick to get offended. The Canadians are our good friends and ally and the few I have met here (MMCrunch, Canuck and Garg) all seem to love the US in their own way. No need to make enemies over nothing.

Although, I really love hockey, so maybe I am a traitor.