Washington File

Just a thought, but if Obama wants to renegotiate NAFTA, and seeing as how Harper screwed up the softwood lumber deal, maybe Canada will get a second chance to negotiate. And if Obama's really for the environment then America should be paying not only for our trees but for the environmental damage associated with logging as well as the cost to replant clear-cut areas. But that's just a thought.

While the openness and honesty of both candidates certainly count towards their integrity (Obama beared all in his autobiography - admitting doing cocaine 'when you could afford it', whilst McCain putts around in the 'Straight-talk express'), this purported honesty is in itself a form of spin, drawing in an electorate beleaguered with the closed-mouthedness and repeated failures of the Bush regime. Dirt (if there is any), will come out - nobody is perfect, and while the parties involved may wish to keep it civil, the media thrives off dischord. Civil debates aren't interesting enough - expect more flogging of the herd of dead horses that are Jeremiah Wright, old age and senility, lack of experience, and being a Muslim. Americans need to learn that bipartisanism can never offer a proper representation of the full political spectrum. Both candidates must water down their policy platforms to avoid alienating valuable swing voters, resulting in two shades of ineffectuality. It is an easy decision - get the Republicans out - 8 years of running up massive current account deficits has put the US in the hole. The economic connectivity that has emerged from globalization has weakened the Fed's ability to manipulate exchange rates. If the US domino falls, so does China, Japan, Canada, Europe - we're talking a 1930s-esque recession. We all know where that led. The fact that paying off their massive debt hasn't been the primary issue of contention for the American electorate scares me as a Canadian.

Mr. McCain aooears to be unable to present himself well, lacks the financial backing to manage a campaign, and is quite boring to listen to, watch, or even read about.

He thinks that he can get Obama to bring in the audience, pay the shot, and perhaps allow him to hitch a ride on Obama's air transport.

This could be his most creative thought, although somewhat transparent. I'd feel sorry for him if he wasn't a Republican.

Thank you Henry for writing such a clear, succinct snapshot of where this important election currently is. I feel I understand the bigger picture a little better now.

I do find it odd, however, that nobody has slammed you yet for fomenting yet another Liberal conspiracy. Perhaps if we just give it enough time, another Conservative zealot will arrive on the commenting scene, and then lather himself into a delicious fury of righteous indignation over your article.

I look forward to reading more of your coverage and thoughts as this election drama unfolds.

Thank you for your explanation which is very important for those who are not up to-date on the net and the TV. I want to add little thing why Obama may not accept the town hall meetings. Mr. McCain cannot attract a big number of audiences. Even the small number would be bored. He wants Barak Obama to do the job for him. Besides, those who usually control the Town Hall meetings would control the kind of questions! At least the reporters are professionals, so there question reflect their back ground.

Integrity, WOW, didn't think I'd ever hear that word connected to US politics. Maybe there is a chance now the "Wicked Witch of the East" has finally succumbed to her self inflicted wounds. Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain should give us an extremely, so long as pattern is maintained. Should be an interesting race, the political addict that I am, can hardly wait to see what transpires. Keep up the good work, Henry, I'll be watching.

One Old (although younger than you) Cynic

For Canadians this is an election where it will be the lesser of two evils. With McCain following the Bush policies of high deficits and open trade in the short term it is good for Canadians as the cost of commodities are so high. But in the long term the Americans can not keep spending forever, and sooner or later it will come back to haunt them. This will be bad for Canada.
Obama on the other hand is looking at protectionist policies that in the short term will probably be bad for Canada, but if the US can regain strength in their economy it may be good for Canada in the long term.
I personally would rather deal with the US for all their faults than China.

I'm a little skeptical of what you are saying
Henry.An American presidential campaign with
no mud being thrown? It has become common
practise in the good old U.S.of A.during elections of past years.However,I hope you are
right and that both of the gentlemen are above
that,it would be refreshing indeed
I can't resist throwing a stone myself.At the very least the next president will have
proper command of the English language as
opposed to the guy living in the White House
right now!!

Sorry to burst your bubble, but even if the candidates themselves remain above the fray, there will still be plenty of staff and supporters to sling mud. This is still going to be presented as a race between an unpatriotic elite uber-liberal pseudo-Muslim (or is he a radical Christian?) and a crazy old geezer who could snap at any minute and whose policies are as bad as George Bush's if not worse. And that's just what they came up with in the primaries. They save the best stuff for the general election.

Although it's nice to see an attempt to detail their various positions. If only we could see that information on the front page instead of articles about the price of candidates' haircuts and the horrors of them using the word 'sweetie' or 'assassination'.

After reading your very informative column, Mr.Champ, I must say I am very much in agreement with Senator Obama's policies. As for NAFTA, I think it might be a good idea to look more closely at it, especially where Canada's interest is concerned in giving us first say in control of oil if there is a shortage. Apparently this is not the case now. It seems that the US interest comes first
The idea of discussion and debate between the candidates instead of those demeaning attack ads is wonderful. The Harper Government should take serious note of this intelligent approach..

Wow...we might actually learn something from the Americans this time around!

I think, no matter where you land on the political spectrum, this will be one of the most intriguing races in decades. Hank has done a great job outlining the differences between these two candidates. Regardless of who wins, I think these are the two of the highest integrity candidates to stand for the American presidency in a long time. They have their flaws, but they are not playing that silly race to the undefined and amorphous political center. They have staked their ground and hopefully will let the voters decide where their country needs to go.

Dear Mr. Champ,

Thank you for the succinct summary of where the candidates stand up to this point...very helpful.

Regards,

Kevin

Obama‘s strength is the nuanced and image-filled oratory we saw with his race speech. McCain likes to pace the stage and has a pontificating delivery style peppered with his ubiquitous “my friends” prefix to every statement and his “tax and spend liberal” epithets. Will open-minded independent voters think Obama’s earnest lecture style appealing or weak beside McCain’s aggressive fist pounding and his penchant for feeding the audience red meat? Or, will those voters see McCain as a buffoon and out of touch with what might be the new paradigm in campaigning?

All kinds of things are going to be in play here. The Republican strategists now know that Obama has a low irritation threshold for repetitive questions about his judgement in his choice of churches but Democrats know that McCain is a policy light-weight who does not retain the detail. It will be a curious contest.