Obama through foreign eyes

I'm from New Zealand. I think your friend's report about European attitudes to Obama is pretty similar to the typical attitude here among those with a general interest in the elections. It is a very superficial perspective and perhaps reflects more than anything else the disillusionment with the US through the Bush years (Iraq in particular) and a longing for a redeemer - someone who will come and make all things new. When focused on Obama - or perhaps anyone - it is naive and unrealistic of course, but a response nonetheless to a visceral desire that the US be better than it is seen to have been in recent years.

My relatives and I (from Eastern Europe and the Middle East) are pretty ignorant of U.S. politics as well, but Obama comes across nicely because he sounds so intelligent, his speaking sounds very nice and makes a good impression, unlike many past American presidents. The fact that Obama also has something of international ties/experience in his own family background also gives hope that he'd know how to (and care to) lead the U.S. for more peaceful relations with the rest of the world. Obama doesn't seem to have a cultural baggage (American "cowboy" or "hillbilly") that would so perversely set him in ignorance, stubbornness, or hostility against other citizens of the world. The worst one hears said about him is that he's a socialist. So many people only do know us as Americans through the actions and personalities of our leaders, and Obama could indeed reflect very well on our desire to be informed, peace-loving, sincere and good people.

They hold our debt; yes it does matter what they think.

I think the perspective of outsiders is quite valid - and certainly lacks some of our more myopic tendencies. But it makes me wonder if ultimately it is more important to have a president who "looks good" to the rest of the world, or one who will best serve the country. Are the two mutually exclusive? Would one lead to the other perhaps?

Just curious.

I will admit to not voting in the primaries due to a mixture of apathy and indecision. I'm still young enough to believe that all politicians are inherently evil, and most of my experience supports this theory. Plus, I work in the master control center for two television stations - nothing cements a hatred for election years like having to watch the same political commercials over and over, sometimes in stereo.

Mr. Cosimano, aping Metternich & Talleyrand exquisitely, as is his perpetual wont. Want some Freedom Fries with that triple cheeseburger, Charles?

From a Scottish perspective, it's pretty much the same story as you're seeing from the rest of Europe in which it is assumed that Obama is a type of centre-left social democrat who would probably feel at ease in the EU.

As with other countries, the understanding of US politics here is pretty dire (The Federalist Papers, for example, is a completely unknown document - which is a pity given its relevance to the growth of the EU). Current US politics is only seen in terms of Bad Redneck Jesus Freak Republicans vs Nice Cosmopolitan Worldy Democrats and the national broadcasters do little to enlighten us that it might be a more complicated situation than than.

I think that smaller countries tend to make a virtue out of their weaknesses (and I don't necessarily use that term pejoratively)and would think that once it is realized that a US under Obama hasn't rolled over and decided to become like a Scandinavian country, then it will be business as usual among the European intelligencia with Greatest Satan Nation renewed.

I don't have a deep interest in American politics beyond visiting a couple of websites but Obama always comes across as a complete lightweight. Maybe he is just playing the holding hands and sing songs kinda candidate and he has depth but it doesn't come across to me. McCain I like more but the last thing the world needs to another republican. He probably can't distance himself enough from the last 8 years to make me happy (and he has little reason to if it wins him no votes) and still keep the party. Plus the Iseman thing hurts him in my eyes irrespective of the romantic element. That just leaves Clinton who isn't that appetising , pickings are quite meagre this year.

Between the dollar going down against most major currencies for the last 2 years, the price of oil and the credit crunch I hope whoever ends up winning has the guts to do whatever needs to be done to put the economy on an even keel.

I'm in Ireland btw.

I'm a conservative Australian, and I must say that I have been impressed by Obama, and that is in spite of his leftest politics and the Pastor Wright kerfuffle. The guy seems genuinely Presidential, honest and moral in both his public and private lives, and thoughtful without being condescending. I haven't talked much about this with people I know, and haven't heard much talk, so I can't offer you much beyond a vague personal impression. My current liking for Obama is actually similar to what I felt about McCain in 2000, but I have since become disillusioned there, and may well be making the same mistake with the senator from Illinois.

I don't think it's just foreigners that "view him as almost a magical figure who can fix everything that's wrong with America," "have a totally unrealistic understanding of who Obama is," or "are completely ga-ga over Obama." Well for that matter, "understand[ing] US politics except at the crudest level" is not exclusive to the rest of the world, either.

Hey there all. God Bless you all and God Bless America too.

I am Canadian but as I have worked with Americans overseas with an American organization, studied and trained in America, have American anscestors and spent quite a bit of time in America in general etc...I feel very sensitive to America and the people of America...America is like my second home.

I don't really know Barak Obama. But I did read most of his most recent book "The Audacity of Hope." I think that is the title, I read it in the Fall of 2007.

Based on this I really think that Obama is somewhat naieve, albeit in a pleasant sort of way. And based on this, and my general impressions based on the clips and bits of his campaign, I don't think he is really ready to be the president of the United States of America. Vice- President? -- Maybe, with the right President of course.

Also in regards to "race relations"... I don't think anyone should vote for someone primarily based on this... I do think the US needs healing in this area... Don't most of us, in relation to ethnic diversity?

I am not overly impressed with Hilary Clinton either, although I do think she would do a passable job, provided her husband could stay in the background and not get in the way...But what is the likliehood of that happening? And after their previous stint in the WhiteHouse, why would they put themselves through that again? Go figure. Why doesn't she just continue as a Senator and have a nice retirement writing or something? I mean come on! Are they gluttons for punishment?

As for Senator McCain, it seems to me that he just might be the best person for the job, at this point. I really wish all those other great candidates for both parties didn't drop out, however. It has left the race for the leadership very polarized, in what seems to be an increasingly ugly sort of way.

Getting back to Obama, I think that maybe, in about ten years, he could make a good president... but I think he still has a way to go... some things to learn...Not that he isn't obviously smart and charismatic. That is obvious enough. But it is looking beyond the obvious which is important.

Well that is about it for now. Nice "chatting" with you all and hearing (reading) what you have to say.

Best Wishes and may God be with the American people as they elect their next leader and may God Bless the candidates and draw them closer to Himself as well!

In sincere, Canadian style--

Tess

I'm from Eastern Europe but not Russia. Here, Obama is popular among the kinds of people who don't think about politics much. To liberals, he is considered tainted by socialism, but also as sufficiently pragmatic for this not to be a deal-breaker. To social democrats, he is much better than Jesus. To Christian democrats, he is a rather elusive figure who has not tipped his hand on many substantive issues.

Obama's style is very appealing. He has the polish, patrician qualities, and educational pedigree that our public expects from a man in his position. He contrasts sharply with Bush in his manner (which is funny, since Bush is as blue-blood and old establishment as it gets,) and even people who dislike him for intellectual reasons feel a kind of residual affection for him in spite of themselves. He looks, acts, and speaks like the kind of guy who placed at top of his Gymnasium class and then went on to a leading foreign university or something.

Too be honest, the black thing is a part of the legacy of segregation- basically if you looked black (or in some cases if you were even 1/16 black) you were black-- its the same reason Tiger is considered Black even though he's half Asian.

I'm a Catholic philosopher, from Ireland, resident in the UK.

In both countries, the overwhelming consensus across the political spectrum seems to be that he is a Very Good Thing Indeed. Those of us on the left seem to have rather more problems with his policy platform than on the right; he is, by European standards, a right-of-centre moderate; the "tainted by socialism" comments upthread are rather ludicrous. But then, the Obama candidacy was never especially to do with policy.

That is not to repeat the old "style/substance" mantra. His policy platform appears just as detailed as that of any other candidate; it's just that given a finite amount of coverage for each candidate, the media has tended to focus a disproportionate amount of *his* coverage on rhetoric.

What most people I have spoken to in Ireland and the UK seem to agree, regardless of their personal politics, and of his, is that Obama's candidacy calls the US polis to have a conversation with itself that is long overdue. The absence of such a conversation, such a sense of internal honesty and goodwill, is - I think - a large source of the "anti-American" sentiment - much, but by no means all of it, ill-motivated - on the part of conservative and liberal Europeans alike.

The speech yesterday was remarkable by the standards of any polis, but all the more by those of the USA. The recent passing of Bill Buckley has rightly been regarded as casting the current level of public political discourse in a very cold light. The rise of the blogosphere, perhaps, has done a great deal to address that. But yesterday's speech, and Obama's whole candidacy, looks from the outside like an invitation to the whole United States of America to engage in nuanced, sensible debate, where passion does not come at the expense of reason, and rhetoric does not trump logic.

That is perhaps the most appealing aspect of Obama's candidacy to the foreigner, and the most bemusing aspect of the coverage it receives. "All style, no substance"; the bromide could hardly be less accurate. It is *precisely* because of his style, that Obama can express so much substance. Whether or not he wins, and I pray that he does, the USA needs more like him. hell, we all do. Reagan was called the Great Communicator for speaking to all Americans in their language. Obama is doing something far more profound, he's inviting them to speak in his.

"Obama's ancestors were indentured servants and serfs under British rule so there is a similar legacy of racial degradation and humiliation. "

Firstly, do you actually know what Obama's ancestors were doing under British rule? They certainly were not indentured servants - it was just Indians that had that status in E Africa. They might have been oppressed, but, for all I know, they could have been chiefs or had other positions of privilege.

Secondly, I don't see where you stop with this kind of argument. In the 19th century my ancestors were 11-year-old coal-miners.

Thirdly, if Obama has any inherited anger against any country, it should be against the UK. You'd have a point were he standing as the British prime minister.

I can see the argument that it's good for someone from a Third World background reaching a position of such power, as the Kenyan commenter said. What I can't understand is what it has to do with Black Americans as a People.

Although the fact that dark-skinned immigrants to the US from the Caribean and Africa often do better than their native-born African-American brothers and sisters deserves a lot more study than it gets.

Another brit here.

What I think is key about Obama's appeal in Europe is that he seems like a European, or at least much more European in style than the other two. I can't put my finger on exactly why this is. In comparison though, McCain and Clinton (and pretty much every other American politician, to be honest) probably seem a bit too warmongering, authoritarian, overly-emotional, hyper-nationalistic, hyperbolic, shouty and just generally rather naff to your average Brit.

I just read that over and I think the last bit might come off as a bit offensive - I don't necessarily think that way myself, these are just the sort of things that I hear my friends say after seeing a clip of McCain/Clinton speak: 'Wow, he/she sounded pretty warmongering / authoritarian / overly emotional etc...'

We can also learn a lot about Eastern European politics:
The worst one hears said about him is that he's a socialist.
To liberals, he is considered tainted by socialism

Isle politics:
Those of us on the left seem to have rather more problems with his policy platform than on the right; he is, by European standards, a right-of-centre moderate

What I think is key about Obama's appeal in Europe is that he seems like a European, or at least much more European in style than the other two.

it is assumed that Obama is a type of centre-left social democrat who would probably feel at ease in the EU.