France 2012: the official thread

[Vasall des Midas]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Or she hates Hollande more than Aubry, and is cleverer than you think.

[Math]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Or she hates Hollande more than Aubry, and is cleverer than you think.

Occam's razor applies perfectly here, IMO.

[Hashemite]

Debate is on: http://www.francetv.fr/2012/suivez-le-debat-aubryhollande-en-direct-sur-france-2-des-20h35-7279

Pujadas is such a pathetic idiot. Asking Aubry "do you hate Hollande?"... what's the point? You expect her to say "oh yeah, I hate his guts". French journalists are such wastes of sperm.

[You kip if you want to...]

Montebourg has overplayed his result, I think (now, some of his supporters speak about creating a "movement": my God, this will not be well received by socialists !)

Pulling a Palin.

[Hashemite]

I don't know how legit this is, but Libe apparently has dropped an early bombshell: http://www.liberation.fr/politiques/01012365372-montebourg-a-fait-son-choix

[Californian Tony]

Aubry was clearly stronger in the debate. I don't know if Fab will agree with me, but as he already foresaw some days ago, she was more able to attack Hollande and to express clearly her divergences. Holland didn't manage to answer with skill, so I have the feeling Aubry won it. I don't know, of course, if it's enough to make a difference in the end, but that looks reasonably encouraging.

[Hashemite]

I admit I feel a bit sorry for Segogo:

Melle (79)
Hollande 43%
Royal 32%
Montebourg 13%
Aubry 11%

Haha.

[Math]

I admit I feel a bit sorry for Segogo:

Melle (79)
Hollande 43%
Royal 32%
Montebourg 13%
Aubry 11%

Haha.

The comparison between Royal's and Baylet's strongholds is indeed cruel for the first one...

Baylet 59%
Hollande 17%
Aubry 10%
Montebourg 7%
Royal 4%
Valls 2%

[big bad fab]

Aubry was clearly stronger in the debate. I don't know if Fab will agree with me, but as he already foresaw some days ago, she was more able to attack Hollande and to express clearly her divergences. Holland didn't manage to answer with skill, so I have the feeling Aubry won it. I don't know, of course, if it's enough to make a difference in the end, but that looks reasonably encouraging.

Well..... I don't agree with you

Let me explain, before damning me !

She is better on the details, on questions: she is better when she speaks with acronyms, names of socialist leaders in Europe, on measures for employment or else. But she doesn't try to convince Sciences-Po or ENA students !!!! ("les exos de charges" was a pathetic moment... "mon père" too...)

She missed something. She was on the attack and was good on pupils who double a class (because his money saving on this isn't one) and on the proposals that Hollande has taken or not from Royal. But, otherwise, she was repeating herself far too much: she was here only to attack Hollande, but she didn't explain her ideas very well and very precisely.

For once, Hollande managed to explain himself more in details. And he was more solid against her attacks, in the 15 first minutes, really.
She wasn't smiling at all and was in a very tense mood.

I really think (see my blog again) that Royal's announcement was a psychological advantage for him just before the debate: "my ex-wife supports me and doesn't put the mess, great!"

Hollande was able to answer on attacks AND to add something more: more "green", surprisingly, than her; more on the "newness", more on the rallying of all the left.
He was more like Sarkozy in 2007 and Aubry more like Royal, too much aggressive.

And I think many leftist voters first want to be united
1) not to have another 21 April,
2) to beat the "dictator" Sarkozy.

TBH, I think Hollande is a Mitterrand with his body and a Raffarin with his words (amazing), while Aubry has the words of a teacher in Sciences-Po and gestures from a seller...
But I also think he has regained a small momentum with Royal and the debate of tonight which is, at worst for him, a draw.

And I've seen the faces of Assouline, Huchon, Hazan, Hidalgo tonight at Aubry's HQ: well, it seemed as though it was already game over... Hidalgo was almost crying...

[big bad fab]

Comments from medias are mostly describing a draw.
Only Rue89 gives a slight advantage for Aubry among leftist medias.

It will be difficult for Montebourg not to say the same thing and so, not to be very careful even if he picks someone (which I still doubt, except if it's to choose Hollande, for tactical reasons, being the latter's left arm).

Without any momentum now prevailing, Hollande remains slightly ahead.
And Aubry can't even use the old trick of the anti-establishment positioning, considering what she said yesterday, when she was the perfect ENA student (herself spoke of a "grand oral" before the debate...).

This morning, she keeps saying he wasn't clear (while he was far more clearer than the first 3 debates, during which he said absolutely nothing) and uses a phrase of her grandmother... It reminds me of the radio interventions of Royal the last Friday before the 2007 second round: done, but keeping repeating the tricks defined just after the first round.

She hasn't grasped her momentum: she should have kept attacking Hollande but should have put herself on a more presidential level.

[Californian Tony]

Well, if you say so. I admit I always have difficulties to imagine the random redneck voter's reactions, but I personally felt Aubry talked about precise issues, numbers, reality, while Hollande still remained on vague catchphrases. But as you said, things a Sciences Po student want to hear aren't the same as what the average voter wants to hear.

[big bad fab]

Well, if you say so. I admit I always have difficulties to imagine the random redneck voter's reactions, but I personally felt Aubry talked about precise issues, numbers, reality, while Hollande still remained on vague catchphrases. But as you said, things a Sciences Po student want to hear aren't the same as what the average voter wants to hear.

Oh he wasn't clear. Just clearer than usual
But I think it's enough.

There is also another thing I've become aware of, yesterday: he was pedagogic. It's probably more important for many people than being precise on your own policies: we, from the "elite of knowledge" (), know that she was right on education or on social treatment of unemployment or on some other things.

I've heard the reaction of some other persons and they say he was actually clear. By that, they don't mean on policies, but on explaining the situation.
After all, since 2008, Sarkozy hasn't explained anything on the crisis.... Yesterday, Hollande was very clear on Greece, financing the economy, banks' governance, etc.

In a way and to be more precise, with Aubry, we were in a conférence de méthode, with Hollande, we were in a cours magistral en amphi

Of course, I may be wrong and, after all, people voting in the primary aren't exactly the average French people. But still.

I'll calculate something, for fun, and I think I'll finish with something like 51.5/48.5.
Let's wait for Montebourg's Big Commandment and maybe it'll be only 51/49.

[Californian Tony]

In a way and to be more precise, with Aubry, we were in a conférence de méthode, with Hollande, we were in a cours magistral en amphi

Ouch, that hurts. I've heard Olivier Duhamel and Bertrand Badie. Hollande is not them.

And anyways, I don't see how exactly he was more pedagogical in his explanations. Yes, I know, he uses simpler words, stuck to generalities and gave us a picture. But overall he just repeated what Aubry had just said, and less well than her.

Also, I had the feeling Aubry didn't attack too much, but she attacked on the right topics (cumul, flip-flopping...). These topics are, AFAIK, important enough for socialists to play some role.

I doubt Montebourg will endorse everybody now, that could only make him lose credibility.

Now, I know Hollande is still the favorite and won't rip my hair if he wins. Your 51/49 prediction is probably about right, but the margin of uncertainty is very high, so both outcomes are fairly possible.


And BTW, will you eventually give us the tracker of the week ?!?

[redcommander]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Well, I see that as a good sign, regardless of what you guys will say :-).

Isn't Hollande Royal's partner btw?

[Californian Tony]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Well, I see that as a good sign, regardless of what you guys will say :-).

Isn't Hollande Royal's partner btw?

Was.

[redcommander]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Well, I see that as a good sign, regardless of what you guys will say :-).

Isn't Hollande Royal's partner btw?

Was.

That must be a somewhat awkward endorsement then...

[Californian Tony]

***BREAKING NEWS***

Ségolène just endorsed Hollande, in order to "amplify his lead" ! So she hates Aubry more than Hollande, no doubt anymore.

Well, I see that as a good sign, regardless of what you guys will say :-).

Isn't Hollande Royal's partner btw?

Was.

That must be a somewhat awkward endorsement then...

Well, yeah, to say least. Basically, Royal probably had to choose between the two people she hates most. I'm actually surprised she eventually took a stance, I thought she wouldn't have ever supported Hollande or Aubry.

[Insula Dei]

Say, Antonio, fab, I gather that both of you have a certain degree of experience with Sciences Po, how tough is it to get in there. Is it as hard as getting in on the action in the ENS of the Rue d'Ulm, or is it more doable? What sort of tests do you have to get trough before they admit you? I'm fascinated by those Grandes Ecoles of yours, mainly because I think the concept is very laudable.

[big bad fab]

OpinionWay poll for LCI and Le Figaro, 12-13 October 2011, sample 4912

1990 leftists (among them 1254 socialists; 501 who have voted last Sunday; 599 who have watched the debate; 102 who didn't vote last Sunday but want to vote next Sunday)

The most convincing during the debate:
among leftists / socialists / those certain to vote next Sunday:
Hollande 37 / 43 / 38
Aubry 40 / 38 / 44
none 22 / 18 / 18
undecided 1 / 1 / 0

among Greens / far-leftists (beware ! tiny sub-samples)
Hollande 23 / 15
Aubry 43 / 46
none 32 / 39
undecided 2 / 0

Basically, it's a draw and it has reinforced previous lines (see the result among socialists, Greens and far-leftists), but Aubry seems to have gained a small advantage during the debate.

certainty to vote:
leftists 31 (+1 from previous poll of 9-10 October)
socialists 38 (+2)
Greens 10 (+3)
far-leftists 31 (+1)

It's very difficult to say something here: the sample itself contains 102 potential new voters but the certainty to vote is only slightly up....
It seems as if there will be new voters, but not much.

among leftists / socialists / those certain to vote / those who have watched the debate:
Hollande 53 (-1) / 56 (-2) / 52 (=) / 54
Aubry 47 / 44 / 48 / 46

Well, Hollande was slightly less convincing but he has a very good result among those who have watched the debate ?!?
This is a bit confusing...

I've bolded the important numbers: still ahead but not by far.
Hollande hasn't reversed the trend but we can't say he is really dangerously down.

At least, we'll have some suspense

Montebour voters: 37 to Hollande (-8) / 51 to Aubry (+3) / 12 undecided  (+5)
Royal voters: 31 (+8) / 64 (+1) / 4 (-9)
Valls voters: 65 (=) / 34 (+11) / 1 (-11)
potential new voters: 49 (+10) / 51 (+7) / 0 (-17) or is it that the pollster have erased undecideds ? (in this case, that would be 49 (+2) / 51 (-2))

Here, I must say that we must be very careful, not on absolute numbers, which are roughly the same (not so bad for Hollande among Montebourg voters, not so bad for Aubry among Royal and Valls voters), but about the differences since Monday:
we'd be pleased to say that we see the result of Royal's endorsement and of Montebourg's relative closeness to Aubry, but it seems too beautiful to believe.
Again, it's slightly better for Aubry here, if you consider that the Montebourg voters are the biggest troup.

Anyway, it will feed my prognosis of tomorrow evening (or of Saturday )

[Californian Tony]

Say, Antonio, fab, I gather that both of you have a certain degree of experience with Sciences Po, how tough is it to get in there. Is it as hard as getting in on the action in the ENS of the Rue d'Ulm, or is it more doable? What sort of tests do you have to get trough before they admit you? I'm fascinated by those Grandes Ecoles of yours, mainly because I think the concept is very laudable.

You're considering to try Sciences Po ? Well, I can only encourage you to go on !

From what I gather, there is a particular admission procedure for strangers in Sciences Po, which I don't know at all. I can only talk about the standard procedure, which shouldn't be particularly different (I've heard somewhere that it is easier, but I can't say it's true). Anyways, French students have to participate to a concours composed of 4 discipline : "culture générale" (which is mostly philosophical but in a large sense of the term and generally focused on topic in tie with human sciences), history (limited to the 20th century, roughly corresponding to the Terminale program), an optional teaching (either math, literature or social sciences : therefore mostly depending from your section : respectively S, L and ES), and a foreign language (limited to a dozen of languages like English, Italian, Spanish...). The four grades you get are averaged into one, but failing the foreign language one authomatically eliminates you. Basically, if your average is over 12, you are admitted. If it's between 10 and 12 (roughly) you have to take an oral interview (I didn't have it, but according to what I've heard they mostly ask you about your motivations and so on). There is also another way to get admitted : that is getting a "mention bien" at your baccalauréat (the final exam of secondary education), ie over 16. Similarly to the concours, between roughly 16 and 18 you have to have an interview, and over 18 you are directly admitted. The trick is that, the concours is already in late june, that is before you know your bac grades : that means you have to take both the bac and the concours whatever your mention will be. Personally, that's what happened to me, as I got 18.3 for the bac.

I don't really have elements of comparison between other schools, but personally I think the Sciences Po exam is reasonably doable. Of course, there is a big selection as the "success rate" is apparently around 10% - this number scared me a lot when I was told, but in fact it doesn't mean so much. Honesyly, I haven't got the feeling that you need to be an excellent student to pass it, just to know the key elements that you also need for a good bac. I've never considered myself as an excellent student, even less as a "bête à concours", and, honestly, when I attended the exam I expected to fail it. I basically got 11 in culture gé and history, 13 in social sci and 15 in English (I need to thank the forum for that ). I think that, if you are generally interested in the topics, that you work regularly and have a decent memory, you should be able to pass it.


If you're interested in my "liveblogging" of the whole bac-concours period, here is it. http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=119285.0

[Insula Dei]

You're considering to try Sciences Po ? Well, I can only encourage you to go on !

Oh no, I'm not, I'm perfectly content where I'm right now. I just find the whole idea quite fascinating. French higher education is very different from our own, more German model (even if the numerus clausus is almost entirely extinct here), and I like to have an idea of what other systems look like.

[big bad fab]

And Aubry can't even use the old trick of the anti-establishment positioning, considering what she said yesterday, when she was the perfect ENA student (herself spoke of a "grand oral" before the debate...).

And here we are... She has just said that "the system has created his candidate" (Hollande), "because he is easier to beat for Sarkozy"....

So speaks Delors' daughter, supported (today in small articles) by Libération and Le Monde....

Maybe Hollande has taken a part in create the fake destruction of Pentagon in 2001
Does she want to do the same stupidities than Royal in 2007, just to win ?
Or maybe she can seek Schivardi's endorsement ?! Come on... is she ready to say anything ?

Yesterday, she said she is a friend of Hollande. Well, may God prevent us to have such a friend.
Sorry, Antonio, to say that like this, but she has croossed some moral borders.
I should rejoice of this huge animosity in the last days, because it will create infightings in the coming months between socialists, but I prefer to have a decent competitor against the right.

[Californian Tony]

Yeah, that's something extremely stupid to say and which I wouldn't have expected from her. That's disappointing, but it would be ridiculous to say this inanity means her entire campaign is based on demagogy and lies. Until now, I have seen a candidate who has kept on a demagogic, vague, Chirac-like campaign based only on personality and has been unable to develop a consistent discourse on issues. And I've seen a candidate which, throughout the campaign, has tried to genuinely expose her program, without constantly trying to please people and media. You seem to think Aubry is one of the pettiest and less honest politicians in France, but one sentence isn't enough to support such a belief.

[big bad fab]

2012 Big Bad Tracker #23 - 10 October 2011               

My aggregated tracker with a generic socialist candidate is unchanged this week: 0.6 Hollande and 0.4 of Aubry, based on their current probability of being the PS candidate.
            
Each opinion poll is ponderated with its sample and loses a ponderation of 15% each week until October at least (it may change after the autumn).            

I haven't given a ponderation based on the quality of pollsters, as big changes have occurred in their teams, without any certainty that the 2007 rating is still OK.      
And this tracker is built more out of fun than out of scientific seriousness...       

      

10 October Aubry sub-tracker:

Arthaud   1,07
Poutou   0,33
Mélenchon   6,94
Chevènement   0,14
Aubry   26,77
Joly   5,84
Bayrou   6,86
Borloo   7,14
Villepin   3,92
Nihous   0,14
Boutin   0,31
Sarkozy   23,25
Dupont-Aignan   0,50
Le Pen   16,79


10 October Hollande sub-tracker:   
   
Arthaud   0,87
Poutou   0,33
Mélenchon   6,51
Chevènement   0,07
Hollande   30,39
Joly   5,66
Bayrou   6,57
Borloo   6,35
Villepin   3,34
Nihous   0,07
Boutin   0,42
Sarkozy   22,66
Dupont-Aignan   0,46
Le Pen   16,31


10 October generic PS candidate sub-tracker:   
   
Arthaud   0,95
Poutou   0,33
Mélenchon   6,68
Chevènement   0,10
PS   28,94
Joly   5,73
Bayrou   6,68
Borloo   6,66
Villepin   3,57
Nihous   0,10
Boutin   0,37
Sarkozy   22,89
Dupont-Aignan   0,48
Le Pen   16,50

No new poll this week, so Sarkozy is just keeping heading down and Mélenchon heading up.
With the primary, I doubt there will be any poll on the presidential election until next Monday .

(Sorry for the delay for this tracker but this week was quite bad for me (no, not especially because of Aubry -though...- but because of one of my boys at school, the future of my job, my workload and my health).

[big bad fab]

Yeah, that's something extremely stupid to say and which I wouldn't have expected from her. That's disappointing, but it would be ridiculous to say this inanity means her entire campaign is based on demagogy and lies. Until now, I have seen a candidate who has kept on a demagogic, vague, Chirac-like campaign based only on personality and has been unable to develop a consistent discourse on issues. And I've seen a candidate which, throughout the campaign, has tried to genuinely expose her program, without constantly trying to please people and media. You seem to think Aubry is one of the pettiest and less honest politicians in France, but one sentence isn't enough to support such a belief.

The problem is that each day (or even each hour now), she has added something: too smooth, not coherent, flip-flopping, lies and, today, this morning "rightist words" in Hollande's mouth and tonight, "the candidate of the system": crescendo !! all of this is planned.
Tommorrow, maybe he'll be a social-traitor or the friend of Jouyet, Sarkozy's minister...

And the former trotskyites Cambadélis, Assouline, Borgel may be behind this but I don't think so: she clearly is managing the campaign herself. Fabius, Delanoë, even Hamon are far more careful in what they say...

The UMP, currently so down, may have found something, eventually...