I never quite thought of the London option. I mean yeah London has a lot of money and is an extremey expensive place and such, but could it really have a relationship with the American Presidential campaign of '08? Obama found a way in which London will definitely play a role in the presidential campaign. His wife will host a campaign dinner in London to raise money for her husband's campaign. Times Online's headline read :Obama’s wife takes fight to Hillary Clinton . And I was intrigued so I clicked on the link. And while the page was downloading all I thought was a descrption of a major showdown between Hillary and Michelle Obama. I was disappointed. There was no such fight. It was Michelle responding to the claimed inevitable victory of Clinton in the election. She said there was no inevitability mainl because her husband was a "uniter" unlike Hillary who could potentially create a polarizing audience. She said she understood the Clintons were well known around the US but she claims that the more people meet her husband the more they like him.
The article also highlighted the fact that Obama was continuing to vocally discredit Clitnon and said she gave the administration a blank check for the Iraq war. And that she was too close to lobbyists to care about her people.
I like obama because he has a vision that he seems adamant on materializing. I like Obama because he is new. He will bring a fresh perspective to the history of the White House.
I do not know what will happen in the elections'08. But i only hope that the American voters do not make the same mistakes that they did in 2004.
But right now I hope the London campagn is sucessful for the Obamas.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article2652770.ece
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You brought up an interesting point about headlines vs. the actual articles. I myself thought this was going to be a celebrity death match type of news but then read the article finding it slightly disappointing. But in all the paper got what it set out to achieve -- me reading the article.
And I'm glad you ended it with your feelings about the candidate. You should expand more on that to help others...like myself...understand what you think about the election.
Really interesting. I guess candidates need more money that the United States can give. :) So they're going abroad. Who knew that the millions they get from American companies wasn't enough. I too would have not expected fundraising to be taking place overseas. I suppose it is a testament to globalization. What is happening in the rest of the world is just as important to candidates, if not more important, as what is happening in our own country.
Bouncing off what Tricia said: Yeah, I do think candidate's do take global politics into consideration when running for president...but they only discuss global politics from the American perspective. "What's happening in the rest of the world" is important to candidates, but only because they need to worry about how global decisions are going to affect America -- they're looking for what new issues they will need to address in their campaign speeches.
And I'm not sure if what's happening globally is more important to candidates than what's happening in our own country...mostly because domestic issues are more important to American citizens -- the voters -- to global issues, save for one major exception -- the Iraq war.
Post a Comment