France 2012: "Could France Go Even Further Right?"

[Keystone Phil]

On a scale of one to ten, how ridiculous is this article? - http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=40808


Seriously, though, how much of an impact is the new Le Pen expected to make in 2012? Is a spot in the second round a real possibility as of now? What about the Prime Minister running for President if Sarkozy's poll numbers continue to dip? Is that at all likely?

[Californian Tony]

I know polls conducted 2 years before an election are worth almost nothing, but a recent one gave Le Pen 17% of the vote. If you consider that polling has systematically underestimated the FN vote (they gave Le Pen around 12% in 2002), there are reasons to be worried. However, Le Pen getting to the second round is still somewhat unlikely considering that candidates seem far more solid than they were in 2002. At the time, no candidate broke 20%, and Le Pen was qualified merely because of Jospin's pathetic performance (and he still beat him by less than 1 point). In 2012, the left won't be split as it was in 2002 and Sarkozy has enough personal charisma to secure a strong percentage. Of course things can still change in 2 years, but for now I don't see it coming.

As for the second question, no. Fillon won't run and Sarkozy will run again whatever his approvals are.

[Sibboleth]

Back in 2007 we were told that polling always underestimated the FN vote. Guess what?

[Hashemite]

I've rarely read such a biased, inaccurate and stupid article. I especially like how they invented a 35-27 matchup between Sarko and Marine. It takes guts for journalists to actually make up stuff.

Also, at any rate, no poll has shown Marine above 14%, and though polls in 2010 all underestimated the FN, it is doubtful that the division of the vote will be as massive in 2012 as it was in 2012. While Sarkozy will likely face internal competition from Villepin and potentially Borloo, both are poor candidates who will do poorly. Plus, Sarkozy has solidified the UMP's base to guarantee the UMP a base of 23-26% of the first round vote even in a bad year. He is also a good campaigner and it would be stupid to count him out. At the same time, the left will be divided but not as badly as in 2002. The Greens could poll 6-9% with Eva Joly, and Melenchon could still pull 5-7%. Yet, no poll has shown any third candidate within striking distance of the second candidate although it's stupid to trust polling this far out. Unless Royal is candidate, in which case it certainly is possible that the PS will have to fight for a spot in the runoff. Bayrou will do poorly, and the far-left will perform in the 5-7% range and not in the 10-12% range. To say that I wouldn't count a FN upset out, but it's unlikely at this time.

And I also think it's dire time for me to open a 2012 thread given how quickly this will be raking up.

[Old Europe]

Some of the user comments on this page are hilarious.

Very good article Rachel Marsden from Paris ! I am a European and I know you have a perceptive look on European affairs. There was a conference against islam in Europe in Paris and that’s precisely what the Europeans, French, Germans, Dutch are focusing on ! Islam will be on the agenda of the caesaro-papal monster of the Euro zone for the next 10 years ! Europe relives the Gates of Vienna, the battle at Poitier. The muslim army got so far into the Rhineland with their own oil. So peak oil will stop em. But will it be in time for Europe ?
Muslims are fast breeders. In Holland they get paid for it. They import muslim breeder bitches and dump them in a few years and import new muslim breeder bitches. Euro Parliamentarians like German social-democrat Martin Schultz, or Frenchman Daniel Cohn Bendith, EU Greens invite the muslim army with resolutions from early 2000 like the resolution of Straatsburg: resolution 1605 of the council of Europe. This 1605 resolution dates from the time of the first oil crisis, early seventies and is simple understood as: Oil for Immigration, but of course was meant : Oil for Islamization

[redcommander]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

[Californian Tony]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

Left-wing division was really not an issue in 2007, quite exceptionally. Everybody in the left was in an "anybody but Sarkozy" mood, plus remembrances from 2002 were strong and the left feared to be ridiculed once again. Basically everyone except the few far-left loons endorsed Royal.

If divisions might have played some role, it's rather inside the PS, since Royal managed to alienate almost everyone in the party with her "I'm not like them, I'm soo cool !" rhetoric. Yet, the major reason for the 2007 defeat was Royal's utter stupidity.

[Hashemite]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

It would be best if you talked about subjects you knew at least a bit about, coz this way you're making a fool of yourself. Your tone in that post, which indicates haughty certainty, doesn't help either.

[big bad fab]

I'm not so sure the undervaluation of Jean-Marie Le Pen in polls before elections (which was so constant that CSA, believing to be able to correct it, "manipulated" its numbers too much and did a horrible work in 2007...) will be the same for Marine "PanzerGirl".

Her so-called "more classical" stance makes it easier for respondents to acknowledge openly their support for her.

What is more, for 2012, the scene will be very splitted for "outsiders".
Joly is already dead,
Mélenchon is peaking too early,
Besancenot is out,
Villepin, decently, can't be seen as an outsider and will so be only a minor candidate of the mainstream right (see Michel Debré in 1981),
Bayrou's turn came already in 2007.

Only Hulot and Borloo have positionings that may result in real threats.
But Borloo is too messy and drunk to lead a campaign until the end (and even too "weak" to eventually decide to be candidate at all... except if Sarkozy has understood that he SHOULD order Borloo to be candidate ).
Hulot, if he's candidate, will be fragile in a campaign and will have a left-wing Green or a coloured-in-green leftist against him, whoever it is. And Hulot would steal votes from former Bayrou supporters, from abstention and even from centre-right (if Borloo isn't candidate), but not really from the PS or the heart of the Greens.

So, yes, there will be a "surprise", as in every election (maybe Mélenchon if it's DSK; maybe Hulot if he is in and has the massive support of Propaganda - French medias; maybe Borloo if he's candidate and if Karachi affair weakens Sarkozy in a big way). But not enough to prevent a second round UMP-PS.

Sarkozy and the socialist candidate (even if it's a weak or not-so-popular one, i.e. Royal or Hollande) don't have to be afraid by a high level of Marine Le Pen.
And, well, 2002 already occurred, so, now, everybody knows everything must be anticipated .

As for Fillon, he'd be candidate only if Sarkozy dies before the election (which isn't completely excluded, considering his way of life ).
And even in this case, I'm not so sure members of the UMP would pick him so easily over Copé. Remember Fillon is politically alone.
Copé has the old chiraco-gaullist base and would be able to grasp all the young ambitious sarkozysts (I mean the sarkozysts by interest, not the "mad fans" like Estrosi) and the former DL.
Borloo and other ones have the former centrists and the radicals and "ecologists" of the right.
Fillon isn't even able to gather the old grandees (Juppé and Alliot-Marie), nor the disappointed sarkozysts, who are isolated (Devedjian) or who join Borloo (Jégo, Yade, Lepeltier).

It would only depend on the date of Sarkozy's death.
The longer Copé is UMP general secretary, the stronger he will be against Fillon.

[redcommander]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

It would be best if you talked about subjects you knew at least a bit about, coz this way you're making a fool of yourself. Your tone in that post, which indicates haughty certainty, doesn't help either.

Sorry for the tone, but you don't agree that with so many left of center and left wing candidates in the first round, that their losses didn't turn some of their supporters off from voting for Royal in the run off? France will see another PS or other Liberal as President, but they need to really hone in on the change rhetoric in 2012 to win. Not to mention stress unity among various parties.

[Χahar]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

It would be best if you talked about subjects you knew at least a bit about, coz this way you're making a fool of yourself. Your tone in that post, which indicates haughty certainty, doesn't help either.

Sorry for the tone, but you don't agree that with so many left of center and left wing candidates in the first round, that their losses didn't turn some of their supporters off from voting for Royal in the run off? France will see another PS or other Liberal as President, but they need to really hone in on the change rhetoric in 2012 to win. Not to mention stress unity among various parties.

The PS isn't liberal yet, though I'm sure it will be in some decades.

[Californian Tony]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

It would be best if you talked about subjects you knew at least a bit about, coz this way you're making a fool of yourself. Your tone in that post, which indicates haughty certainty, doesn't help either.

Sorry for the tone, but you don't agree that with so many left of center and left wing candidates in the first round, that their losses didn't turn some of their supporters off from voting for Royal in the run off? France will see another PS or other Liberal as President, but they need to really hone in on the change rhetoric in 2012 to win. Not to mention stress unity among various parties.

The PS isn't liberal yet, though I'm sure it will be in some decades.

The PS is mostly liberal (pro democracy, pro market economy, pro personal freedom). On balance, it's maybe more liberal than the UMP.


And for redcommander, almost everybody on the left voted for Royal because Sarkozy was a strawman. The left just didn't have the numbers to win because she sucked and because Sarko was a decent campaigner.

[Hashemite]

Part of the reason Royal lost in 2007 was because of antagonism between various left wing groups. She may have made it to the run-off, but unless the Socialist Party has an open dialogue with the smaller left wing parties to secure their support, Mitterrand will remain the last left wing President of the country.

It would be best if you talked about subjects you knew at least a bit about, coz this way you're making a fool of yourself. Your tone in that post, which indicates haughty certainty, doesn't help either.

Sorry for the tone, but you don't agree that with so many left of center and left wing candidates in the first round, that their losses didn't turn some of their supporters off from voting for Royal in the run off? France will see another PS or other Liberal as President, but they need to really hone in on the change rhetoric in 2012 to win. Not to mention stress unity among various parties.

I will personally shoot the next fool who refers to the PS as "liberal". When will people stop thinking that erroneous American labels can be applied with ease to every country.

And no, Royal didn't lose because of the division on the left. I don't think you understand the dynamics going on in multi-party runoff countries. Small parties nominate in the first round not to win but to offer a choice, because people make a real choice then. In the runoff, people eliminate the worst of the two. The mainstream small left has very good transfers to the PS in almost every election, as does the far-left (although a large chunk of them abstain and there's always a rogue 15-20% of far-left first round voters who apparently vote for the right). Royal lost in large part because of her atrocious debate performance and her general idiocy (Sarkozy also ran a good demagogic campaign).

[Benwah [why on Earth do I post something] Courseyay]

I must say that i would agree with almost anything said by French here, and the most important one being so far:

it's stupid to trust polling this far out.

And as Antonio well pointed out, PS is definitely liberal by both American and European standards, that's the problem of PS they concretely have no substance but 'socially oriented-pragmatism' I'd say, in short they do the most 'socialist policies' the markets allow them to do when they are in power (though, now speaking of PS in power begins to become an old memory), and in the same time they can't find a rhetoric corresponding to what they do in power, which makes a big miss of credibility and which really doesn't help them.

Yes, there is a whole blow nowadays about 'Marine could do the 2 run!!' because people would be less afraid by her than by her father, and because she would well use blatant populism about populist fears, with her it is Islamization, security, and (we're in France, and in a post 2008 era) fight against 'Global Capitalism'. For the fight against 'Global Capitalism', she can't fight the far-left we have on that, we have a large punchy offer, she can't win on that, on the Islamization/Security stuffs, well, she can do some nasty noise that can have some impacts on the society, but I think she can't earn much electorally on that, Sarkozy clearly hunted on the right of the right, and he has the advantage to be able to do things, and well, you might have noticed that this summer...he did some things. And if people want a big mouth to contest the system that Jean-Marie le Pen could have been, people could have someone like Mélenchon this time. Moreover, she is a big mouth, but a mouth without much power, it makes a big noise when it happens, but not much density, really I don't believe to the Marine danger in 2012 so far.

That being said, 'France further on the right'? Sure, Sarkozy will be reelected.

Against who? Dunno, DSK, Aubry, (who knows) Royal or Hollande, or...Mélenchon.