mirevolver

Link

Personally I find this infuriating. If I ever recieved a letter from someone in another country trying to tell me who to vote for, I would promptly send a letter back telling them to shove it. This is an American Election and the only place for foreigners is to sit back and watch.

When I was in Germany during the summer, they were holding elections for the EU Members of Parliment. I said nothing of my opinions to the Germans. The only time I gave an opinion was after the votes had been counted, then I said that I was pleased with the result.

But on the other hand, I had several Germans tell me how I should vote in this election. In every case I told them that this is an American election and the opinions of Germans bears no weight. If they pressed the issue further I replied with, "Meinetwegen." (Translation: I don't care) And in every case it just pissed me off that these Europeans thought they knew how to run America better than the Americans themselves.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

Lockjaw

I don't know whether to be offended honored or just flat out laugh.
This if nothing else proves America's place in the world and nobody can really deny it.
If you have people that concerned about your internal politics that they would go through the effort to beg Billy Joe in bumblefuck Ohio to vote all the way from England
you know you've got the power...no matter what certain places beginning with F might think.
I kind of wish I lived in that town just so I could see what kind of letter I would get. lol.
Have to give those guys props for thinking outside the box on this one. I highly doubt their efforts will do any good as I would think the average American would give two craps about someone from another country telling them how to vote.

Flyguy

Foreigners trying to tell us how to run our country:

It's already begun......

Congress wants to amend the constitution to alllow "Ah-nuld" to eventually run for the White House. This makes me sick. We can't find an American to run the fucking country? We have to turn to foreign movie stars? We have to put people in positions of power just becasue they're "popular with the masses?" Never mind that he's not the most qualified for the job. He's popluar!! That's good enough according to right-wing Washington.

Pathetic.

mirevolver

Arnold has earned American Citizenship so he has a right to participate in our political process. However, I am against amending the constitution to allow naturalized citizens to run this country. Our founding fathers had wisdom in saying that people who want to run this country should at least be from this country.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

Flyguy

I didn't say that Arnold couldn’t vote. I don't want him to be president because he's not an American born citizen. Even though he became a citizen, he's still a foreigner from another country (this is outlined in the constitution itself) and I don't want foreigners running our country.

tuffrr

America, or more accurately George Bush, tried to influence the Australian election. And why shouldn't people outside of America try and influence the result of the US poll. The result of the US election will have a clear influence on the rest of the world given the US's desire to meddle in so many different countries affairs!!!

maximusveritas

There's a thread on this in the politics forum, which I think is the more suitable forum for this discussion:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=72454

TheFu

I've had friends who are non citizens give me input on who they think I should vote for. I've always found it interesting when they do that. They care, but not enough to pursue citizenship. I'm not offended by it. I don't see this UK thing as a big threat either. People will probably treat it as spam. Now what would be funny is if Iran or North Korea had this campaign. I wonder how Bush would react.

mirevolver

I ran a search but didn't find anything. Mods, feel free to do as you see fit.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

guthmund

In reality the American Presidential election is an important issue for everyone.

Granted I'm not a big fan of the methodology, but I can't fault the British from becoming involved the only way they know how. They certainly can't cast a vote, but they can plead the case.

Rest assured, my fellow Americans, the fate of the Presidency isn't in the hands of foreigners and it's not like they're trying to rig the election; they're just writing letters. It's no different then when you write letters to express your concern with corporate policy; it's no different when churches write letters to the networks. They're just letters. I just don't see how it could hurt. If anything, it might, god forbid, get people talking.

The world at large has as much to lose as the American people in this next election. American Presidents have always had a heavy hand in the world forum, nevermore so than the present and America's influence in world affairs doesn't seem to be declining anytime soon.

We should be interested in the elections of other countries. We should be knowledgable in worldwide politics. Their elections affect us as well. We should give a shit about who's in charge in Canada, Mexico, England, France, Germany and the list goes on.... It's knowledge, I'll admit, I wasn't too interested at first, but I'm doing my best to correct it.

BTW, I don't give a shit if Arnold Schwarz...whatever ( I can't spell it ) wants to be President. I would imagine the first question should be "Is he qualified?" not "Is he naturalized or not?" That, however, seems to be the first requirement culled when running for public office lately.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

mirevolver

As the lone superpower, of course our descision for president affects the whole world. But it's still an American election for the American President.

I would argue that it is indeed different. They are attempting to affect the political process of a country which is not their own.

In truth, it has only been since World War II that the US president has carried a big infleuence on global affairs. In less than two hundred years we were able to go from being oppressed by the redcoats to top of the world. Other countries have had longer histories and never achieved the status we have. That tells me that we managed to do something right and the rest of the world should pay attention rather than tell us how to be more like them.

I was interested in the EU elections that went on while I was in Germany. But when asked what my opinion was by Germans, I refused to tell them. Instead I told them that it was a European election and as an outsider, I had no right to infleuence it in any way. I only gave my opinion after the votes had been counted.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

Reese

Naturalized citizens should have every right to become president. You can't fault a man for being born in another country. He's lived in the US longer than I've been alive and he's obviously qualified for the job, well at least more than most people.

I'm curious who other countries want me to vote, not just british, but german Iraqi, Japanese, Korean, whoever... I always welcome to an outside opinion.

__________________
“It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry

PulpMind

you people are rediculous, you're missing the point. America has made itself the police of the world, and the way WE United States citizens vote will effect the rest of the world greatly.
For instance.. the US' decision to invade Iraq has sent armies from not just here, but Canada, the UK, Germany, etc.. None of those countries had anything to do with it, except for their loyalty to the US, and vice versa.
They have EVERY RIGHT to voice their opinions on an issue that WILL effect them.

If this were Pre-WW1 U.S. then I'd agree.. we don't mess with ya'all, ya'all don't mess with all. But with the responsibilities of position(s) the US has elected itself into, the rest of the world should AT LEAST be able to voice their opinions about this very crucial election.

mirevolver

The British are also coming up on an election in 2005. That is a descision that will effect the US, specifically in regards to Iraq. Yet there aren't any letter writing campaigns in the US telling the Brits whether or not to reelect Tony Blair.

And Canada and Germany did not send troops to Iraq.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

jwoody

I'm just guessing here but, of the 350,000 people who read 'The Guardian', only a tiny percentage will bother to write to the people of Clark County.

If your preferred candidate doesn't win the election don't look back on this as the reason.

Now, breathe...





and...




...relax.

roboshark

I think the point was not whether anyone would bother doing this (I can't imagine why anyone would). The point is about non-US citizens "influencing" US-citizens on how to vote come Nov. 2.

This only goes to show that Europeans (among others) feel that the outcome of the US election will have a significant impact on the world as a whole and Europe in particular. But as usual, we (the Europeans) are short-sighted: Bush was "bad", cos he went to Iraq. So he should not be reelected. Seriously, I've yet to meet someone, anyone who is actually for Bush over here.

What most of us here don't bother to realize is that the elections concern primarily the domestic politics of the US, so lecturing Americans on what to do is way out of line.

Just so you know, personally, I don't give a rusty fuck who gets elected.

__________________
I want no escape.

Lockjaw

Hehe maybe I should put up my vote up on eBay and see what happens.

tecoyah

-snip-

Guess I had better stop watching BBC news, and ask for my money back from NPR. The media influence is far more effective when it comes to changing minds, and I for one, use these "Foreign" sources for information due to the slant (both ways) of American Media.

Am I being influenced?

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

jimbob

We Europeans generally don't give a flying toss how you guys run your own country (except maybe that you ought not to pollute so much). It's just when your President launches an illegal war and uses the power and influence built up by previous generations in your great country to draw us into it as well that we get a little upset. He's set a very dangerous precedent in launching a preemptive invasion, which if adopted worldwide could see, for example, North Korea launch a nuclear strike on the US (Bush has already labelled them evil after all, and the US has a history of invading countries both overtly and covertly) or an attack by Iran/the whole Arab world on Israel. That is how outrageous his attack on Iraq was and that's why he's considered a danger to world peace. And we don't believe he went into oil-rich Iraq to free the people - they're suffering in many other countries where he won't help out. Take Uzbekistan for example: even the British ambassador is writing home about human rights violations but President Karimov lets the US use his air bases so it's hushed up, just like in the good old days when Saddam was shaking hands with Rumsfeld. The neocons are just playing the same old game that's been going on for thousands of years - using your money to make themselves and their class more powerful, and it has to stop, whether it's americans, british, french, dutch, spanish, portuguese or romans doing it.

Anyway, with this thread being about foreign involvement in the choosing of others' governments, I'm surprised nobody mentioned South America yet.

mirevolver

The thing Europeans don't realize is that the US changed when we were delt an unprovoked attack on September 11th, 2001. Though I would hate to ever see this happen, but I believe that Europeans will never understand it truely unless there is an attack of the same magnitude in Europe. We're not going to just sit around and wait for another attack. We have the power to deal with percieved threats in the world, so why not use it?

I am not convinced that France's opposition to the war was purely a desire for peace. The French oil companies had a lot of contracts with Saddam that were just waiting to go into effect as soon as the sanctions were dropped. And it is also coming out that the French recieved bribes from Saddam through the corrupt "Oil for Food" program.

And France holds a veto vote in the UN security council. So this pretty much shows that going to the UN is a waste of time.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

jimbob

You need to focus on where the attack came from. I don't know anyone who is against the war in Afghanistan, even though there are suspicious oil contacts there too.

We had an unprovoked attack in Spain and if you believe the reports then numerous terrorist cells have been broken up, so preventing other atrocities.

There were American individuals and corporations listed in the report too. They were the ones under the big black marks. The report also found that Saddam had no capacity to attack the US and was only maintaining plans to rearm because he felt a threat from Iran. We'd have known that years ago if the US hadn't been so quick to dismiss the UN. That's another reason we'd like to be able to influence your election - we've learned since WW2 that a multilateral approach and negotiating is much better than unilateralism and war. We're also greatful for the US (and not forgetting Russia's part in the liberation of Europe) for giving us the chance to learn that lesson. It's very sad that so much is talked about Europeans being anti-American when this just isn't the case. On 12 September 2001 a French newspaper headline read "We're all Americans now". Bush has thrown away so much of the good will that America had post 9/11 and we're anti-Bush, not anti-American.

drawerfixer

That depends entirely on your definition of 'doing something right'

Now to get to the point, I would be very interested in opinions from people in other countries. It's one more opinion, one more viewpoint to bounce mine off, to check the validity of my arguments. US actions have implications throughout the world. If citizens of other countries need/want to tell me something they see that I don't, or that doesn't travel through US mass media, be my guest. I'll certainly try to factor it into my calculations. Now this doesn't imply that I'll be doing things without America's best interests in heart. However, I trust my own judgement. If one email from a Brit is enough to significantly alter my vote, my arguments weren't all that strong to begin with.

Screw nationalism. We're all in the same boat. *shrug*

Halx

This thread reaks of rotten nationalism. Get over yourselves and listen to someone else for a change. We're not the center of the world. I gladly welcome the opinions of others.

__________________
You have found this post informative.
-The Administrator
[Don't Feed The Animals]

mirevolver

With all due respect. I feel that whether the election be American, British, French, German, Russian or any other country. That election is for the people of that country and people in other countries should stay out. While it is true that we live in a world that has been globalized to the point where the descision of one country will have an effect on another, there are still domestic issues of that country that need to be decided by the citizens of that country. Sovereign rights need to be respected.

When I see the Guardian doing this, I see yet another example of European arrogance where they feel that they are better qualified to select the American President that the American people themselves are. They make this descision based purely on how the American president will effect them and give no regard for the domestic issues of the United States which is what will have the primary effect on the American people who are the ones voting.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

guthmund

I understand the point. Keep in mind they're just words. The British aren't loading up gunships and tri-corner hats to come over and "monitor" the election situation. They're writing letters. No invasion of the homeland. No horrible tories running through the streets and setting up shop in your attic. Just letters.



Again, just letters and in one state of the blessed union. They're not rigging the election, not travelling the country with postcards for everyone and pushing their opinion off when it's unwarranted. They're just letters. Letters from someone other than Bill from down the street. Opinions from folks who come from a different culture and can offer a different viewpoint.



In truth, it was WWI when the United States Government, against the better wishes of President George Washington and in spite of the Monroe Doctrine, became involved in political affairs across the pond.

America is hardly alone in her achievements of world domination. The Macedonians, Romans, Persians, Mongols, Carthaginians and the Chinese all did fairly well in the world, all things considered. For more recent examples, WWII Germany and Russia all held sizable deeds and carried some influence with the world at large. I've even heard China mentioned in the same breath as America when speaking of the sacred "superpower."



That's admirable. Were you living in country? Not a soldier on a base, not passing through, etc.... I ask this because if you were living in country why on earth wouldn't you offer an opinion. You were living in the affected territory, right? Doesn't that allow you to share your opinion? Not vote, but at least address the issues as it affected you both directly and indirectly.


I just can't see where hearing a wide variety of opinion to help frame your decision is so terribly evil.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

ForgottenKnight

I agree with MiRevolver. It's an American Election, and thus has no place for influence by foreigners in any way. Just as elections in other countries have no place for influence by us in any way.
I'm glad that they're not sending those letters to my state. I'm unaffiliated politically because I don't agree with any party enough to register as a member of that party. I'm an independant free thinker who agrees and dissagrees with aspects all polical parties. But being unaffiliated would have me on that list to recieve those letters, and that would piss me off to no end! I already recieve enough junkmail trying to persuade me one way or another from political groups on campus, and I hate it! I don't need more of it from a foreigner who has no right to tell me how to vote in my election!

__________________
"People say I'm strange, does that make me a stranger?"

mirevolver

I realize that we did start taking a role in foriegn affairs even before World War I. I would trace it back to Teddy Roosevelt. But even after World War I, the United States was still a minor player in the world. President Woodrow Wilson had to bow to the British and the French at the end of WWI in order to get them to sign on to his "League of Nations" idea.

There have always been hegemons throughout history, and there will always be a hegemon. The only noteable exception was the cold war when there were two hegemons, the United States and the Soviet Union. It's one of the most fundemental aspects of global politics and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I was there as part of a summer work program. I did not have any permanent residence status there. I was just there to get real life practice with the German language.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

jimbob

At some point in the run up to the Iraq war at least 2 surveys found that over 80% of the US population believed that Iraqi nationals were hijackers on the 9/11 flights. Something in the domestic Media/Political circus managed to get 200 million people to believe a lie that would influence them to support a war which has since been proven to have no positive effect on homeland security. I'm sure this could happen in every other country on the planet too so it would be prudent for any nation to listen to outside voices once in a while - at least on foreign policy.

Macheath

Ha, now you know how Australia feels. We get "influenced" by an AMERICAN citizen who owns a whole ton of our newspapers. Heck he even used to be one of us until he RENOUNCED his Australian citizenship - but he'll still pretend to be Aussie when some idiot asks him who to vote for.

You may of heard of him, he owns a little channel called "Fox News".

DJ Happy

For all those who feel outraged that a foreign country is attempting to influence the US elections, now you have some idea how it feels for citizens of other countries when the US not only attempts to influence their elections, but actually tells them who the candidates they can vote for are.

Europe has been dealing with terrorist attacks for far longer than the US. For the US to think that they are alone in this smacks of the insular attitude they've long been accused of (and probably a good reason for some foreigners to write to them and set them straight on a few issues).

The other day I was listening to a US radio station doing their daily "Today in History" spot. The date was October the 12th. I heard about some American ladies who got their pilot's licences, I heard about a US soldier who threw himself on a grenade in WWII and so on. There was one glaring omission, however, that I could not believe went unmentioned. See if you can guess what it was.

filtherton

Mirevolver, i don't see how this is really that big of a deal. Our democracy is not being subverted. It seems to me like your issue with this is based on you personal idea of what is and is not acceptable behavior for a foreigner with respect to our national elections. It seems like an ettiquette issue to me, since they aren't actually breaking the law, or even acting unethically. Besides, just because you thought it to be in poor taste to comment on the elections of another country, doesn't mean that doing so is in poor taste under all circumstances. Especially in light of america's perpetual habit of attempting to influence the governance of myriad countries.

Blackthorn

I find the whole concept amusing and in fact I'm humbled and quietly proud. I live in a country and in fact the actual state that would be the target of what I would consider to be an effort akin to a senoir high school project. Face it...if you get a letter/email or other correspondence from someone claiming to be from another country that asks you to consider voting for a particular candidate because that's who they would like to see get elected.......even being the cynical bastard that I am I have more faith in the electorate than that. No one worth their right to vote in this country would be influenced by such a contact. In fact I'd think an email like that would most likely be considered SPAM-O-La and get tossed out with the ads offering me the ability to regrow my hair. Even the most simple minded dumb ass who gets one of these and actually has the free time to waste reading it isn't going to be overtly influenced to vote for a candidate of preference for some spam-bot from another country. It's not happening....but I do find it amusing.

__________________
What are you willing to give up in order to get what you want?

Tophat665

So what's the problem here?

It's not like England has invaded to take Bush out of power, as we did in Iraq. (They've pretty much given up on that route since 1812. Would that we had learned that lesson too.) They're just writing letters to plead with voters in a key state to remove a criminally incompetant leader. They aren't sending the SAS to kidnap him and haul him out of the country and into court as we did with Manuel Noriega and Slobodon Milosevic. They aren't sending assassins, as we did with Manuel Allende and... who was that fellow in charge of Iran before the Shah? They aren't trying to strangle us as in a fit of pique like we're trying to do to Cuba.

All they are doing is informing people, politely, that they believe it would improve our country, their country, and the world at large if he would vote that jackass out of office. That leads to a more informed electorate, and there is no harm in that. Maybe they should be asking us not to elect him this time either. Does it make you angry that the rest of the world has an opinion of Dubya that's somewhere between toe fungus and Tammerlane? It's not like he hasn't earned it. Look, these people love America. We are, or were four years ago, anyway, the country every other country wanted to grow up to be. If your favorite Aunt had a wart the size of Wisconsin on her forehead, wouldn't you suggest that she go to the doctor and have it removed. Bush is that wart to the rest of the world.

If you discount armed conflict (WWII) as protest, there has never been a world leader who inspired so many people to protest at once as Bush did. If you don't, he's second to the man who invokes Godwin. Fact, not comparison. Why wouldn't everyone in the world do everything they could to remove him from office? Look, I realize there are intelligent, well intentioned people - Art, for instance - who support Bush, I just can't seem to understand why, and I get the feeling that they don't get why I despise the man so much and believe his administration is a blot on this country's history. It sure seems to me that most of Europe feels that way too. If minds haven't met on this by now, they're not going to.

Maybe Bush supporters can get get John Howard supporters to write letters from Australia.

But, that's just my opinion. I respect that you might have another one. I just don't see how.

__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

Lockjaw

You have got to be joking.

mirevolver

Right, the IRA, the Basque seperatists, minor squabbles. The worst Europe has had is the Madrid train bombings and that still doesn't even come close to the magnitude of the September 11th attacks.

The Iraqi people did not have the power to get rid of Saddam themselves, they needed an outside force to do it. Just like Britian declared war on Germany in 1939 so they could oust the German leader.

The difference here is that the American people, if they so choose to have the power to pick a new leader. And by interfering with that process, the Guardian is violating the sovereign rights of the United States. I doubt the British would be happy if next year we started sending letters to them telling them to reelect Tony Blair.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

flamingdog

You seem to be saying here that the American electorate is such that they would be 'influenced' by a letter from a stranger? If that's the case, then you have much bigger problems to deal with than who gets to sit in the daddy chair next. I know Americans personally who are intelligent enough to try and give themselves a balanced opinion, and the nationalists in this thread seem vastly outnumbered by the globalists, lending further credence to the argument.

You're either going to get people who look upon it as an unwelcome intrusion on their patriotism and disregard it, probably laughing at the sheer audacity of John Q Smith from Shitt Town, Greater Manchester as they do so. Or you're going to get people who read the letter, consider its contents and decide how well it fits with their own view, and if they care to take it seriously.

Why did we go to war in Iraq? Why have 24 British soldiers, hundreds of American soldiers and several thousand Iraqi civilians had to die? Why did the World Trade Organisation rule US tariffs on steel imports to be illegal? Why will the US not ratify Kyoto? Your president does not just act for American interests, his decisions have very real and, as we can see, potentially damaging consequences on the global stage.

I would further argue that were you to feel personally aggrieved by the actions of my Prime Minister, I would give you the benefit of a hearing before I chose how to use my vote. That said, I think it very unlikely that you do, since his influence and power are much less than those of your president.

Here's the thing, I don't care enough about any of it to want to write to you or anyone else. I don't think lobbying for you to vote Kerry is going to change a fucking thing, whether you listen to me or not. But some people aren't as laid-back as me. If they feel aggrieved, they will want to lash out, especially people who are grieving relatives lost in a war the basis of which your own Iraq Survey Group has undermined, or the steelworkers in Yorkshire who lost sleep over the future of their jobs when the already shaky industry took another knock.

Fact is, nationalism has a very reduced role in today's society. We live in a globalised world, where people of all nationalities are able to communicate at the drop of a hat. Nationalism is appropriate in sport, science and invention, and about nothing else.

Of course, Europeans should never be given an American vote, which would actually equate to what you describe as the power to 'influence' your electoral process. But as long as America is taking decisions that affect the citizens of Earth as a totality, your own dearly held ideals of democracy demand that you at least arm yourself of the broadest range of knowledge, information and experience that you can acquire before you take a decision on who runs your country. In my opinion, that involves taking account of everyone involved, American or not.

filtherton

There is a difference between interfering with the process and talking to someone. How exactly are they violating the sovereignty of the united states by writing letters? I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Maybe you'd be happy if the government completely shut out any form of foreign media and limited our internet access only to sites originating inside the 50 states so as not to allow any "interference" until after the election.

mirevolver

The media sends messages to the general population as a whole. These letters are targeting specific voters.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.

dobster

What?

You dont have a clue about the fear that having the IRA on your doorstep creates. This is an attitude that alot of people here in Britain cannot understand. This dismissal by people in the US of an issue that people in our country have had to deal with for decades.

Just be careful with your throwaway comments.

mirevolver

I spent two years living in Britian. The worst I ever saw the IRA do was leave a bomb in the occasional pub. Like I said, nothing compaired to the magnitude of the September 11th attacks.

__________________
Aside from my great plans to become the future dictator of the moon, I have little interest in political discussions.