Money, Money, Health!

In Clinton's campaign, she unveils an universal health plan.

The article claims Hillary Clinton setted out an ambitious $110bn (£55bn) plan to introduce universal health care in the US more than 10 years after her earlier failed attempt.

Her main Democratic rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards, also propose to introduce universal health care, though there are differences.

Will she actually change this concerned health plan? If Clinton wins, I would like this matter to be true, and have my few American friends with a doctor visit if they required it!

US not enough.

As we read in this article from September 22Th, US candidates follow money trail to London. Specially Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are seeking for funds in UK. The main reason is because expatriates are a big source of campaign dollars.

Two spouses of leading Democratic presidential candidates - Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama - are to visit London next month to try to tap into an increasing source of campaign funds from Americans living abroad.

Apparently UK and Europe are very much seek by Americans, but living in a new European and more cultural perspective the expatriates,or also known as immigrants, still care about their country and they agree donations are significant for the increasement of their favorite candidates.

In the first six months of this year, US expatriates donated $471,000 (£235,000) to presidential candidates, a report by the Centre for Responsive Politics said, nearly as much as was donated in the entire 2000 election season. Most of the money was raised in London, which accounted for $270,000 of the total

By law, only US citizens and permanent residents (green card holders) are allowed to contribute to election campaigns. But the 4 million to 7 million Americans living overseas have emerged as an increasingly important source of funds.

As a result of this impressive donations, the money is to improve campaigns, but, as we observe in the article, with the race for the White House in full swing, candidates need to pay for television advertisements, private jet travel and staff.

Pay tax in England...spend them in US!

Failure or not?

In days of presidentials and competition, time is an essential word.

As we read the newspapers and articles about US candidates and their moves, we read in "The Guardian" that time is running out for the making of a black President Barack Obama's campaign has stubbornly failed to gather momentum, while Hillary Clinton powers ahead.

It seems that time running out is not the only dilemma, but also the rivalry and opposition between Obama and Clinton.

Not only Obama is doing the possible and the impossible to get the many followers as he can in his campaigns, but also his wife, Michelle, is having as well something to say as she is shaping up not just to be Obama's first stand against Clinton.

Will Bill Clinton also say or do something?

Everyone is invited anyway...

Romney and the money.

A good way to check who is running for US president as well as to check how are they moving around to obtain votes and appreciation is having a list of names, and also ensure how much money are they spending.

This article is about campaign funds, and where they are being provided from.

As we read, the campaign teams of US presidential candidates are today expected to begin revealing the extent of their fundraising in the year's third quarter. The last days were accompanied by aggressive bids to build bank accounts ahead of an expensive stretch of media advertising.

Questions such as how much money has Mitt Romney, a multimillionaire, lent his campaign? Are Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton leading the pack in fundraising? Has Republican John McCain turned the corner and stabilised his fundraising? Did Fred Thompson, turn the popular support he enjoyed before becoming a Republican candidate into hard cash?

Can former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani maintain the pace he set in the second quarter as the Republican best able to raise money from individual donors?

Will John Edwards remain on track to meet his goal of raising $40m (£20m) by the end of the year? Will Democratic senators Joe Biden and Christopher Dodd raise enough to keep them in the race? As for the New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, he announced yesterday that he had raised $5.2m.

These are the names, but is really the money from their own pockets or fundraising? Perhaps American Nation should agreed how much are they going to "donate" to these fellows and companions candidates, as we would not like to have the same mistake as George W. Bush... maybe the rest of the world should also vote, yet, no more money is needed! If not, ask Iraq and the oil and money which has been "taken away" all these last years!

New York, New York!

Is from common knowledge that some cities in North America do not seem as Americans in what concerns to habits and population type. This fact occurs especially to San Francisco and New York.

In the article I found in "The Guardian" newspaper from last week, it was exactly this issue media had been talking about.

New York is known as a liberal and different city, but New Yorkers are starting to believe the front running presidential candidates show that the US is no longer polarised between heartland and coast.
As the article claims, New Yorkers like to think of their home town less as a city than as a nation unto itself. They refer to the country in which they reside as little more than a geographical accident of little relevance. "I don't live in America," they'll tell you. "I live in New York."

New York is an impressive and distinctive global city. For us Europeans it has more in common with London, Paris or Rome.

But why is this important?Politically, the last seven years have made New Yorkers feel particularly estranged from their fellow Americans.

Now presidentials are "coming into town", Clinton is one of the presidential candidates, and New yorkers wonder whether they have a senator or not.

In what comes to other candidates for US presidentials, things are tougher for Giuliani. Thrice married with two estranged children, he has a much harder job selling himself to a base dominated by Christian conservatives. But Giuliani's candidacy is entwine with 9/11. His performance in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks is what earned him the title "America's mayor", Time's Person of the Year and 78% approval ratings even a year later.

The candidates are now coast-to-coast to win votes and appreciation. Every city from North America is trying to decide, or maybe will just go with the flow, but New York has a tough decision. Yet, the city is more in tune with the rest of the country than it's ever been! Which one will they prefer?

Fundraising

Clinton camp trumpets as she is leading at the fundraising!

In the beginning of this month, an article at "The Guardian" explains how Hillary Clinton has solidified her status as the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination yesterday, surpassing all her rivals in fundraising to bring in $27m (£13m) for her campaign in the past three months.

Clinton's campaign is about the income of funds provided from performances in TV debates, schools, and by showing that America is ready for change.

This fact is not so pleasant for republican frontrunners, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, which are believed to have raised less than half of what Ms Clinton took in, or about $10m.

Different views for different countries

These days everyone is interested about organic food, organic products, ecological matters, recycling, new energies, and even renowned companies are getting very much into this environment issues. A good example for this is the french company Lóreal, which bought The Body Shop business in order to have an organic view inside their corporation.

I found especially interesting the following public article at "The Guardian" website.

It claims that the German government continues to promote renewable energy with energy and resources. Its policy of increasing the use of alternative supplies had created 235,000 jobs in 2006, twice as many as in 2004.

It also said that the Italian government announced incentives for households and business to boost solar energy, and Australia announced £4.3bn worth of support for small businesses to go green.

This article reflected what countries are intending to do in order to go for more ecological matters, all of them instead US.

Apparently, the 'only' problem concerning US is their dilemma with healthcare.

The plight of the millions not covered by insurance are a central feature. The American Medical Association (...) launched a "voice for the uninsured" advertising campaign in states that will hold early primaries.

And while John Edwards and Barack Obama proffer schemes for reforming insurance and cutting the cost of premiums, Hillary Clinton is concern about having a federal government plan.

At the end of the day, America is not one of the worst countries when it comes to polluting the atmosphere!! (??) Why should they be concern then?