True, many of the current parties started relatively recently, usually when one member of the LDP had a falling out over who failed to sufficiently scratch whose back and said “screw you guys! I’ll start my own party, with hookers! And blackjack!” and took an assortment of toadies with them. Ideologically, there’s almost zero difference.
The exception is the Japan Communist Party, which has gradually turned into a knee-jerk opposition party. Since the LDP has the greatest influence on spending projects and general pork, the Communist Party’s official platform in the general elections several years back was to eliminate government-funded construction projects and increase privatization.
The US elections are one of the few times I place a bet. I backed both Gore and Kerry in the past and lost… I didn’t believe Bush would win once, let alone twice. Not sure who I’ll back this time.
US citizen in the UK and I can confirm that most track the news, but only really to the level of ‘who do you support, Clinton or Obama’ in conversation. Yes, it absolutely matters, yes, people do care, but that’s my take on the ‘man on the street’s’ view of the US Elections.
That said, the election’s in every newspaper that I read (all the free London daily tabloids, plus the Times when I want something meatier, and the Sun whenever I find it on a bus seat) pretty much every time I open it, but I don’t think most folks care that much. So, yeah, I think most folks in the UK, or at least that part I live in, both care about and know about the US Elections this year.
As to why, I won’t comment but instead will focus on the OP.
I personally would like Obama, but it’s a long way to November and as I’ve not lived in the US for over 6 years I find it’s a bit hard to get focused this early because I’m not aware much of the state politics driving the primaries.
That absolutely applies here too; UK banks are getting hammered by sub-prime exposure. City (of London) Traders are already calling 2009’s Christmas bonuses the worst ever.
As for media, check out Sweden’s largest morning newspaper at http://www.dn.se/ for example. I can’t know what’s on there right now, but I bet Clinton, Obama, or some other blue-red-white-backdropped image will be placed somewhat prominent on the first page.
We don’t understand the procedures of the primaries, though. We notice the hubbub and wonder when the new president is announced. Some of us don’t know that Bush can’t be re-elected. We can name both Clinton’s wife and the African-American one, but not the republican ones. We recognise both Clinton and Obama as progressive choices, not for their policies, but because of their nonstandard gender and skin-colour, respectively.
We care a bit extra this year partly due to the potential firsts, partly due to “No more Bush. Stop the war.”-stuff. In short - we’ll care and pay attention when the real election starts. Both parties are considered rightwards of Sweden’s entire political spectrum, so we’ll root for the leftiest of the Democrats, but we’re not sure which one that is. (It’s Clinton, right?) I haven’t mentioned all the smugness and enlightender-than-thou we will participate in when the US election is discussed, simply because we don’t do stuff like that, officialy.
It’s debatable. Rhetorically there’s not too much space between them, except that he’s committed to pulling out of Iraq, and her health-care package seems more comprehensive than his; but HRC came out of the centrist pro-business DLC takeover of the party in the early '90s, while Obama made his way up in Chicago politics by working with and being supported by local left-progressive organizations. This article provides some background.
In 2000 a lot of folks here felt that it didn’t matter a lot who won, it was all boring politics, a rich white male Washington insider was going to win so what difference did it make which one?
Turns out, it mattered a lot. A very very very lot. World history was changed by the outcome of that election.
So yes, there’s a lot more interest here this time around. Not only is it the most interesting election campaign season in the US in a generation - actually maybe two generations - but we’ve just had a generational change of government ourselves and - since or because of that - our decade-long ennui with politics has just evaporated. Interesting times.
She’s a Hillarist–Whatever will help her, she will say.
I’m in the US, so not the target of the question–but Obama vs McCain would be the toughest choice for me.
(If I voted for McCain–it would be the only time I’d voted for a republican–I’ve gone dem or independent.)
I’m tired of the Bush/Clinton years–it’s time for something new.
The Clinton clan has been notoriously pro-business, pro-free-trade and pro-war for a damn long time, so I would say they’re further to the right than most politicians who aren’t actually Republicans or Libertarians.
the local Irish pub announced last week that it would have the Suprebowl on its big screen on Sunday, and the primaries on the big screen on Tuesday night. The owner is a savy business man who knows his market, so he must have assumed that would bring in the clients.
a young guy in the office mentioned yesterday that he and his buddies have been getting together to watch the primary results regularly since Iowa.
It’s literally on every news program, in every news paper, and discussed by almost everyone with any kind of intelligence on an almost daily basis here.
And shame on your media for not following Canadian politics with more interest. We’re possible heading into a confidence vote in the house of commons regarding Canada’s military role in Afghanistan soon: story here.
FTR I saw a similar story on Yahoo! earlier today (I bet a google search would turn up the story on most of the major web news agencies…though perhaps not on the front page). Though you are right…US media should have more about Canada (and Mexico) in the news than they currently do.
BTW, did you read the comments from Canadians at the bottom of your cite? Wow. I thought I was critical of our European allies. Me thinks that while Canadians may not be to happy with the US that they resent the hell out of the fact that they (and we) are carrying the majority of the water over there while the Euro’s (with a few notable exceptions) sit in their safe bases and observe.
Not to hijack my own thread but…thought that was very interesting.
Shame on Canada for continuing to carry any weight in Iraq despite being blatantly disrespected by Bush’s regime of terror, like a battered girlfriend who just keeps coming back. The difference is that Canada’s military leadership gets no sympathy from me for its situation.
