I guess all our overseas Dopers are zzzzzzz right now. I’ll be interested to hear their take on the debates. I know most of them come from countries where they also have them.
Kerry, but only as the lesser of two evils.
Bush ignores international law, which has led to a disastrous and destabilizing war in Iraq. Kerry recognizes that the war was a mistake and the USA should give more consideration to the concerns of the international community.
Bush is a religious zealot on an international crusade against religious zealots of a different faith, and who is destroying the semblance of the separation of church and state domestically. Kerry, while far too religious for my tastes, is at least not a zealot.
Bush tramples human rights, both internationally (e.g. off-shore imprisonment to avoid the recognition of legal rights) and domestically (e.g. gay rights). Kerry, while not standing for the protection and advancement of human rights, is at least not so extreme.
Bush does not respect international agreements and standing international trade practices. This has seriously harmed Canada’s lumber, grain and cattle industries. Kerry is a protectionist too, so on this issue, neither Bush nor Kerry bode well for Canada.
Bush has driven the US economy into massive debt. Canada and the USA are each other’s greatest trading partners, so an economically healthy USA is important to Canada. Kerry is aware of the importance of the debt problem.
Bush will not cooperate internationally in protecting the environment through agreements such as Koyoto, and domestically has significantly eroded the effectiveness of environmental protection legislation and the funding and direction of environmental agencies. Kerry has aligned himself with environmentalists such as Robert Kennedy Jr., but has not made this a major plank of his platform.
UK dopers, Boris as in Boris Johnson?? Or is there another one?
You are correct. Boris Johnson.
Another question to display my ignorance. Is he Editor of The Spectator (so mnay Johnsons have done it) and is he related to Paul, the journo-historian?
Given the choice between only Bush the Younger and Kerry, I’d choose Kerry.
Given a free choice I’d probably end up voting for Someone Else.
I know he’s got a column somewhere, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s editor of something, But what, specifically, I couldn’t tell you.
Boris is indeed editor of the spectator, he also has a weekly column in the Daily Telegraph (for which he also writes leaders) as well as a motoring column in GQ (which given that he’s about to lose his licence for speeding will be interesting).
He’s no relative of the sane-and-rational Paul Johnson*
More to the point he’s also MP for Henley and shadow arts minister.
*© Private eye
Actually we don’t have them here (UK). It’s unlikely that we will in the near future (not in the government’s interest).
The general take on the debates (which happen in the middle of the night here) is that Bush got slightly the upper hand after a shaky start.
Our big political story is Blair going in for a heart operation and saying he’ll quit at the end of the next parliament (therebye giving us FIVE YEARS of labour infighting over the leadership - Thanks Tone)
In the interest of balance, while Kerry’s hair is a bit scary, I’d like to point out that the marvellous Boris himself suffers from English hair.
Hasn’t he just…
I’m not remotely bothered about either candidate. *
If I had to choose, I’d give Kerry a go, just to see what (little) difference it would make.
- I really don’t think there is much to choose between than and can’t see either doing anything significantly different than the other. Despite all the blowing and yapping and crying and complaining.
Boris is so funny, he’d be great as PM. Or as host of “Have I got news for you”, permanently. One of the two. 
Kerry.
And another “Hear Hear!” for Boris. He would be class as a PM to a country that isn’t mine 
Dunno, really - not Bush.
Kerry or Bubbles the chimp’s cousin.
What? Bubbles cousin won the last election :smack:
Kerry.
I don’t think our world could survive another 4 years of Bush’s policies.
I’d vote for Kerry for basically the same reasons muffin pointed out. Though she framed it much better than I could have.
First off the US and the world would survive yet another 4 years of George Bush. Personally, anyone who looks at Bush and sees the immanent nuclear death of the west is seriously in need some actual excitement in their lives.
George Bush managed to take advantage of a moment in American history to present simplistic and heroic solutions to a nation that for all practical purposes had left the world alone for 10 years. Suddenly what worked in the past was fascicle, what took thought and nuance was weak willed, what required restraint was labeled gutlessness. What America wanted was a hero and Bush took that desire and ran American foreign relations so far into the ground it will take 10-15 years to rebuild the trust that has been lost.
The Bush administration managed to squander a defining moment in international relations. An engaged America could have worked with its traditional allies to fashion a set of common rules of engagement when dealing with corrupt, tyrannical nation states. They could’ve shaped international rule of law within backed by the actual precedent of military force as shown in Afghanistan.
Kerry at least has the intellectual capacity to doubt, Bush apparently doesn’t. In my, experience a leader free of doubt is a leader unable to adapt.
What just about evryone else said: Kerry, but only as the lesser of two evils.
Kerry, most definitely!
Kerry. Even though, I probably wouldn’t vote for him if I was American.