If the Entire World Could Vote
By: Lisa Walsh Thomas - 11/01/04
In an inspiring attempt to catch some feedback from our global neighbors, Daniel Young of Texas and Berlin and Kevin Frost of California and Budapest have created a website asking just that question, "If the entire world could participate in the upcoming U.S. presidential election, how would they vote?"
The poll, like all online polls, is not scientific, nor does it purport to be. It asks the question and leaves it up to readers to find the site, look it over, and vote honestly. We can all put our own two cents' worth in at:
If we ever had a need to feel isolated from the rest of the world, studying the results here should fulfill our wildest dreams.
All countries are listed, with the voter stating his/her country and whether he would vote for Bush or for Kerry if the presidential election were held today. Then the votes are regularly tallied, by numbers of voters entering and by the percentages, per country, voting for each candidate.
I began by looking for those nations filled with Kerry lovers. I counted thirty-five countries in which ninety percent or more of those voting would choose John Kerry. The thirty-five:
Austria, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, France, French Guiana, French Polynesia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Martinique, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, New Caledonia, Norway, Peru, Portugal, RE union, Senegal, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.
The UK? Our ally? Tony BLAIR'S UK?
That's what the votes say as of Monday, October 3, 2004: Ninety (90) percent of the people choosing to vote from the United Kingdom cast their 5788 online votes for John Kerry.
So I checked our other allies. Mr. Bush is quick to tell us that with a global coalition against "terra," we have the goodwill of the world with us. The word "coalition" has been a bit wobbly from the start, despite our having to admit that yes, Tony Blair -- if not the people who voted him in -- supported the invasion of Iraq. And now we read that ninety percent of his people would, given the opportunity, vote against his friend George Bush. Sure, their votes would go to Kerry, who does not claim an anti-war stance, but with whom most of us agree we have a better chance of getting out of this nightmare. A vote for Kerry is about the best one can do to vote against "shock and awe," "preemptive first strikes," and the other achievements that will go beneath George Bush's picture in the encyclopedias.
The "coalition" never did come to much after the UK, but nevertheless they signed on, regardless of whatever rewards, benefits, or lack of threats might have been included in the deal. Australia. As of this writing, over 5700 Aussies have participated in the poll, 88 percent of them choosing to vote for Mr. Kerry.
Does this mean that down there in the Outback, the folks think swagger isn't enough to make for a good Commander-in-Chief? Is this a referendum on Mr. Howard? What it DOES mean is that our ally, the Australian people, do not gaze at Bush adoringly.
Well, what about Poland? Mr. Bush refers to Poland quickly when told that the coalition doesn't amount to much. Six hundred forty-four Poles vote for Senator Kerry, giving him 68 percent of all the votes cast by this ally. (And now it appears that those voices are being heard; the Poles are making plans to pull their troops out of Iraq. One more notch made with invisible ink.)
Is there a difference in opinion between the leadership and the citizenry? We already faced that in Spain's last election and saw that people DO still have clout. After winning their victory to pull out the Spanish soldiers from the occupation of Iraq, eighty-nine percent of the Spanish who participated vote today for Kerry.
Italy. Despite those millions who demonstrated in Rome against the war, our commander-in-chief has been fast to call his friend Berlesconi an ally. Now I don't know whether Mr. Berlesconi cast his vote here or not, but 1736 Italians HAVE voted as of the moment, and out of those 1736, eighty-eight (88) percent prefer Kerry over Bush.
One last look. Israel, of course. I blinked several times when I saw that more than half (57 percent) of the Israelis who participated in the poll voted against Mr. Bush. This is not to say that Kerry may well be too much a friend to Israel, but it does show displeasure with what we KNOW is happening, even in the country where one would expect Bush support to thrive.
So who DOES support George Bush? I decided to make a Bush column, listing those countries where ninety percent or more of the voters chose Mr. Bush. Fair play. I made the list, checking it twice, and it STILL came out to be a list of one: Niger. With 397 votes, 95 percent of those from Niger would vote for Mr. Bush. (Be sure you don't confuse Niger with Nigeria.) George Bush ROCKS in Niger.
Alas, we then have quite a gap. The second most supportive country toward Mr. Bush is the Congo, where 64 percent of its participating citizens would vote him back into the office. But Niger and the Congo are not alone in their preference for Mr. Bush. Along with them, Azerbaizan, the Faroe Islands, Kuwait (with 56 percent favoring Bush), and Libya would choose to keep the U.S. commander-in-chief.
And that's IT. Six countries have more than fifty percent of their voters choosing Bush. Six countries as opposed to 234 countries where more than half the voters prefer Kerry. AND, thirty-five (THIRTY-FIVE) of those countries are not lukewarm; they have 90 percent or more of their people voting for Kerry.
Study over it. Fascinating numbers; chilling implications. Makes new math look like old Greek.
It's worth a repeat that the poll doesn't claim to be science, but it doesn't take the rocket kind to see that this time, God may NOT be on our side.
Lisa Walsh Thomas, a contributing writer for Liberal Slant, is a veteran activist and poet, former arts columnist and high school teacher, whose book of dissident essays and poems is available through http://www.pitchforkpublishing.com. In her pocket, she carries a photo of her 12-year old son taken soon after the Supreme Court chose George Bush to run our country. In the photo, the then 8-year old Bryndan holds up a large sign that says, "Mr. Bush, you give me BAD DREAMS." [email protected]
Liberal Slant Online-Store
Find more articles by Lisa Walsh Thomas in the Liberal Slant Archives
Back to: Liberal Slant
views expressed herein are the writers' own
and do not necessarily reflect those of Liberal Slant
LIBERALSLANT Web Publications.
All rights reserved.