Nice Article. I would add that speaking of the view from abroad is really a double-edged sword. He's running for president of the United States. Proceed with caution...

Yeah, it's not like we would want one of the campaigns to make a deal with Canada to plant false stories in their press in order to influence an election.

Agreed. Good post.

Excellent take. In France for one thing a lot of people are so thrilled by the primaries that they are taking sides, blogging and posting on the subject with an eagerness similar to yours. Both candidates have their champions, and the primary in itself (the kitchen sink strategy lose a bit of its edge over here) does wonders for America as seen from France. Do the French favor Obama ? Possibly — with caution though, since their disappointment with Sarkozy. Not that there is any relation between these two, but alas ! Tout ce qui brille n'est pas d'or. (All that shines is not gold). That from a regular Obama fan, deep down in Paris...

Great post, Bill -- thanks. I think the enthusiasm for Obama's candidacy overseas says a lot more about his likely effectiveness in advancing US foreign policy than other measures of foreign policy "experience" -- like whether a candidate has faced "sniper fire" or not ;)

As an immigrant (from Canada), that's an important factor in my enthusiasm for Obama. But QTip, I think you're very right that foreigners' enthusiasm for Obama could be a "double-edged sword" ... as Clinton enthusiast Desidero has said, Obama wants to sit down with "our enemies", by whom I suppose she means everyone in the world outside the United States.

Obama is the candidate likeliest to bring in a strong Democratic majority that will rehabilitate American democracy at home, and introduce (or restore) policies that are good for ordinary Americans. Foreigners' enthusiasm for him is important primarily because that will make him more effective in earning their co-operation in matters that affect America's interests.

And, of course, under an Obama presidency, America's (inter)national interests will be defined to mean something different from an American "empire" assuring a steady supply of cheap oil -- we've seen how well that's worked out so far.

My favorite fantasy scenario following an Obama victory has long been the prospect of watching his first address to the United Nations General Assembly.

I have no doubts that his reception would be SRO and overwhelmingly enthusiastic from the vast majority of the members of the audience. The whole world will be watching, live.

Whether or not US foriegn policies undergo an immediate recalibration, Obama's election will signal possibilities of new paradigms.

Hill 'n Bill and McCain are both too compromised by their long histories of deal making in DC and beyond to represent anything but the shopworn and discredited status quo.

I live in France and I agree that the French press has been in a "honeymoon" period with Obama due to his novelty. The Wright footage is hurting Obama's image, however, in a country whose politicians are mainly white and whose ethnic minorities are largely under-represented.

I live in France and I agree that the French press has been in a "honeymoon" period with Obama due to his novelty. The Wright footage is hurting Obama's image, however, in a country whose politicians are mainly white and whose ethnic minorities are largely under-represented.

Well, no one ever said racism was confined to the United States of America.

But I refuse to believe that this country wouldn't elect Obama because of a handful of words said by his pastor. This is only the first day of April - there are many months to go.

And to every person who posts that they or someone they know "just can't understand why he'd stay there" you need to unclutch those pearls. This is just silly. The man is an ordained pastor of a mainstream Protestant Church and everyone from my Democratic gubernatorial candidate to John McCain has said that this whole thing is patently unfair - it is guilt by association.

And I happen to think Americans have enough good in them to understand that it is guilt by association. Obama's numbers rose on the heels of this smear.

Unfortunately (and I'll take some heat for this but bring it on) people here in the U.S. are terribly myopic. See the foreign policy blunders of the last 7+ years.

Like you think we don't know that?

Dude.

Freerepublic this ain't. :) Bush is the worst thing that ever happened to this country.

I'm English and was just back there. The Brits I met were eager for a change and equally interested in Hillary and Barack - there is great residual fondness there for the Clintons and the ins and outs of campaign nastiness don't make it onto the news there, so that hasn't affected them the way it has us (me!).

They are not keen on McCain but with one caveat ... the Brits I met do NOT favor the US pulling out of Iraq. They didn't support the war in the first place but a pull-out now feels to them like a repetition of a familiar pattern. If the US makes a mess, they want the US to clean it up.

So I have a feeling that when the positions of all 3 candidates become clearer over there, McCain will become more popular.

Britain is always different from the rest of Europe though, but I just wanted to let you know what I heard while there.

Bill,

Your enthusiasm for Senator Obama is respectable, legitimate and not the least, warranted by the immense qualities he possesses both as a human being and a politician. However I also believe that it prevented you from capturing a far more diverse political reality of Europe’s relationship towards America than you have outlined.

Your analysis strikes me, a French national who’s been a permanent resident of the US for two decades, as somewhat too simplistic in its generalization. Let me explain if you don’t mind.

Perception of America and its policies varies greatly depending upon which geographical part of Europe one decided to analyze. Although public opinion in Western Europe has had a very difficult time accepting the attitude and the policies of the Bush administration, new European countries born out of the shattering of the Eastern bloc do not necessarily harbor the same resentment and disdain.

Undermining Russia’s influence and power in the region has been a constant political motivation of the Bush White House. The unequivocal haste this administration has demonstrated in advocating the expansion of the EU to new members as well as its rush to support the expansion to NATO to countries that have only recently declared their independence has given these same countries a much more favorable view of the US. It also has influenced these new countries to take a more supportive stance to the American invasion of Iraq (with the help of that dangling carrot known as “economic support”).

It is also important to understand that in some of these recently created countries, ethnic tensions and rivalries have exploded with dire consequences, not the least of them being racial tensions due to intense nationalistic sentiments that are not the best example of democratic racial tolerance. Couple matters such as these with economic realities that make these countries highly dependant on foreign financial assistance (US being an major player amongst them) and you will understand why the overly positive attitude you attribute to European countries toward Senator Obama’s candidacy is not as widespread as you may want to believe. In certains confines of eastern European countries, homophobia, racism and ignorant bigotry towards minorities is unfortunately quite rampant.

As far as Western Europe is concerned, it is much more nuanced and while there is indeed a certain fascination for the excitement that Barack Obama has generated with American voters, if you follow European politics closely you will discover that most of the enthusiastic support he enjoys comes from liberal progressives. Whether they are Social-Democrats (Germany, Italy), Socialists (Spain, France) or Labor (England). In that regard, it would appear misleading to state that Senator Clinton does not enjoy a more favorable public opinion than she seems to face at home.

It is also important to note that people that are politically to the right of center are not as favorable to the Democratic candidates positions ideologically. They are desperately trying to alter the strong social fabric many Western European countries enjoy in favor of far more deregulated free market principles. The fact that America may move towards a stronger social agenda (greater governmental financial market regulation and oversight, universal health care, etc.) runs quite contrary to their agenda. The mere fact that the bastion of capitalism that America has always represented may move towards a more progressive agenda would highlight a rather inconvenient reality.

A greater in-depth study would reveal even more nuanced positions all across Europe, but I’ll refrain from pretending I can expose of them all.

In short, my conclusion is that while your analysis is indeed valid, it is not as overwhelmingly widespread as you seemed to indicate.

Cheers to all.

Michel,

Thanks for your more comprehensive explanation of circumstances & attitudes in Europe than that which I presented. Very helpful.

My information largely comes from reading the foreign press.

And yet, Clinton still leads in all the polls in Europe. I wonder why that is never mentioned?