France 2012: the official thread

[You kip if you want to...]

I never read the news, but this headline was hilarious:

Le candidat Sarkozy défendra le gouvernement « du peuple, par le peuple et pour le peuple »

I see he's gonna full-blast populist on us.

Oh Jesus Christ.

[Iannis]

2012 Big Bad Tracker #41 - 13 February 2012   

            
Each opinion poll is weighted with its sample and loses 25% of its weight each week: it will be the case until mid-February.            


      

Hollande   30,51
Sarkozy   24,66
Le Pen   17,82
Bayrou   12,6
Mélenchon   7,84
Joly   2,79
Villepin   1,39
Morin   0,35
Lepage   0,28
Dupont-Aignan   0,58
Boutin   0,18
Nihous   0,15
Arthaud   0,49
Poutou   0,23
Chevènement   0,14
Cheminade   0,00

Hollande   57,53
Sarkozy   42,47

BVA has started to test Cheminade, so I include him in my tracker. He can only go up
But having a LaRouchist in this tracker is enough to make me feel "happy" (I mean "amused": don't make any mistake, I despise Cheminade)... After all, now that I know I've lost "my" candidate and that my second round candidate is doomed with a failed strategy...

So, Boutin is out. Morin is set to drop this week too.
Even Villepin seems to have lost some enthusiasm.
I don't believe Lepage wants really to be a candidate.
And Nihous really seems to have difficulties in gathering signatures from mayors.
After, maybe we'll have only Dupont-Aignan, Arthaud and Poutou as small candidates.


The older I grow, the more Catholic I am.
I'm really disgusted by the leftist paradigm of medias and of teachers. I deeply believe that this modern or post-modern left, having destroyed the old 3rd Republic school, is the best ally of this mass-consumption capitalism which is only looking for stupid consumers.
I deeply believe that we are already in a society of genetic manipulations, of merchandization of the human body, of "good old" euthanasia like the 1930s Sweden, that we'll soon be forbidden to keep our children at home.
I deeply believe that all these so-called social advances are only the other face of our deep moral decline due to mass capitalism. It's only two sides of materialism.

And so, you know, how can I pick a candidate ?!?
I'm completely lost in the current political landscape.
Sarkozy is now a weird mix of rightist populism, of so-called colbertism and of some stupid reaganesque policies.
Boutin, who is a bit mad on a personal level, has dropped her bid.
Bayrou is a loony, who has betrayed his old political tradition and is unable to decide on anything.
Hollande is personally respectable, but is backed by all those leftists (please read "gauchistes", not "hommes et femmes de gauche"), especially the young ones, that are a real moral danger: Hamon, Bruno Julliard, Hammadie, Lienemann, Delanoë, Lebranchu, Aubry, Lang, Dray, Mamère, Joly, Duflot, Contassot, etc. Without any money, the left will only change things on social matters and I can't vote for that.

So, yeah, I'm now a zombie, like in Atlasia
It has no real importance anymore. President Hollande doesn't need me

Hollande is more dangerous for econmic reason. One strenght point of France are the big companies, the multinational, that can internationalise and make research & development, and this guy wants to raise taxes on these!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To do what? To spend more money on teachers!! With the deficit/GDP that France has!
He's a real danger for all Europe!

[Senator MaxQue]

I never read the news, but this headline was hilarious:

Le candidat Sarkozy défendra le gouvernement « du peuple, par le peuple et pour le peuple »

I see he's gonna full-blast populist on us.

Oh, if true, it would be a welcome change of the 5 last years, where it was more exact to say:

« des riches, par les riches et pour les riches », « des banques, par les banques et pour les banques » and more recently « de Merkel, par Merkel et pour Merkel ».

[You kip if you want to...]

How is an idiot like Sarkozy the president of anywhere? Would basically anyone but Sego have won in 2007?

[Senator MaxQue]

How is an idiot like Sarkozy the president of anywhere? Would basically anyone but Sego have won in 2007?

Segolène was a pretty loosy and bad candidate. I wanted Bayrou to win that year (as he could beat Sarkozy, unlike Ségolène.)

[Insula Dei]

I love how just about everything sounds worse when you imagine it coming from Sarkozy's mouth.

[You kip if you want to...]

I love how just about everything sounds worse when you imagine it coming from Sarkozy's mouth.

Yes, it does
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vq_1xt6vuY

[Californian Tony]

The older I grow, the more Catholic I am.
I'm really disgusted by the leftist paradigm of medias and of teachers. I deeply believe that this modern or post-modern left, having destroyed the old 3rd Republic school, is the best ally of this mass-consumption capitalism which is only looking for stupid consumers.
I deeply believe that we are already in a society of genetic manipulations, of merchandization of the human body, of "good old" euthanasia like the 1930s Sweden, that we'll soon be forbidden to keep our children at home.
I deeply believe that all these so-called social advances are only the other face of our deep moral decline due to mass capitalism. It's only two sides of materialism.

OK, let me be as short as I can :

I. Don't. Get it.

So you blame the left (and the medias, which are indeed very left-wing ; fortunately we have Le Figaro which is the last bastion of objectivity !) for destroying the republican education system. Are you serious ? I'm not questioning the fact left-wing governments (and - as sad as it makes me to admit it - Jospin in first place) have a fair share of responsibility for the wrecking of our educational system. But, on this matter, I honestly have difficulties to see differences with the action of right-wing government. The new educational policies began with Giscard and have been pursued, in different fashions, by every or almost every government since. An the right's action is just as catastrophic as the left, if not more. Do you think the educational system is better today than it was in 2002 ? Come on, stop fooling yourself.

(And, just a little digression on the topic, it's pretty funny to see a catho-conservative being so attached to the 3rd Republic's school system. I don't need to remind you which social force was the most bitter enemy of 3rd Republic and how the institutions the 3rd Rep established were aimed at freeing people's mind from the influence of said institution.)

Now let's move on. For the second time, you are claiming that the "new left" (whatever this might be) is the main driving force to the merchandization of society. Please let me laugh. And how so exactly ? I'm still trying to understand how legalizing gay marriage will make the society more consumerist... You are bringing back a good old talking point of the pseudo-"social right", which basically blames every bad aspect of modern society on the development of permissivenes, moral relativism bla bla bla... and ends up with nostalgia of the good old time when people were good and not greedy and believed in God and worked at the countryside and everything was simple and good. This is the most irrational, reactionary and dangerous rhetoric that has even existed in the political discourse. What you are doing here is assimilating progress and development with its negative consequences, which, of course, are part of it, but can be corrected if people look for practical solutions instead of praising the good old time.

These solutions are those social-democracy has been implementing since the end of WW2. It's redistribution, aimed at making everybody free from basic needs, allowing people to follow their own way, without being predisposed by their social background and creating ties between individuals which are not based on common beliefs like in traditional societies, or on research of private interest like in deregulated capitalism, but on solidarity and human dignity. It's regulation, when private businesses are allowed to seek profits as long as their research doesn't go against general interest by causing negative externalities. It's public services, which treat everybody equally and perform tasks profitable to everybody regardless of whether they are profitable to themselves. Social democracy works, where it has been correctly implemented. It has taken million of people out of poverty, has shaped middle-class societies and made people happier, freer, smarter and more civilized. In one word : more human.

So, you think modern left caused the boom of unregulated, deshumanized, financial capitalism ? Well, let's see. Which political force has, since the 1980s, constantly worked at dismantling the welfare state ? Which political force has, since the 1980s, imposed the idea that "there is no society, but only individuals" ? Which political force has, since the 1980s, stressed on the fact private, profit-oriented investment does everything better than public services ? Which political force has, since the 1980s, abolished every single rule that could prevent finance from growing excessively to the point when it has become a threat to the world's stability ? Which political force has, since the 1980s, made sure individuals would be alone to face the market, with nothing to sustain them or to keep the market on check ? It is, of course, the neoliberal right. The neoliberal is the most regressive force humanity has seen since the counter-revolution in the XIXth century. The left has its share of responsibility (in particular its third-way fashion), but only for letting neoliberalism do. For withdrawing from the ideological fight.

So that's why I don't get it. From what I gather, your stances are a succession of non-sequiturs and pretexts. They are ludicrous even when taken in detail. "genetic manipulations" ? Yeah, sure, thank neoliberals for deregulating agrobusiness and allow monsters like Monsanto to sell whatever they want without even knowing what their potential effect will be. "merchandization of the human body" ? Wait, wasn't your friend Boutin who wanted to reopen brothels ? "euthanasia like the 1930s Sweden" ? Sure, allowing someone to commit suicide is the same as killing him. "we'll soon be forbidden to keep our children at home" ? Hum, yeah, sure. The examples could be multiplied infinitely.

Well, I gave you the longer version. This is why I don't f-ing get it. So, for God's (yeah, that annoying fellow) sake, I hope you'll have the courage to read though all this and enlighten me if there's something I haven't understood. Since I know you, I know you are an intelligent fellow, yet the way you think, when it comes to ideology, is just... absurd. Utterly absurd. I'd really be thankful if you could give me some more explanations.

[JulioMadrid]

Thanks, Antonio, for your opinion here. It makes a young guy believe in youth ^^

[Vasall des Midas]

The older I grow, the more Catholic I am.
I'm really disgusted by the leftist paradigm of medias and of teachers. I deeply believe that this modern or post-modern left, having destroyed the old 3rd Republic school, is the best ally of this mass-consumption capitalism which is only looking for stupid consumers.
I deeply believe that we are already in a society of genetic manipulations, of merchandization of the human body, of "good old" euthanasia like the 1930s Sweden, that we'll soon be forbidden to keep our children at home.
I deeply believe that all these so-called social advances are only the other face of our deep moral decline due to mass capitalism. It's only two sides of materialism.

OK, let me be as short as I can :

I. Don't. Get it.

Not that I agree with all of the rest, but the teachers part is the only part I "don't get".
But I wouldn't have expected you to get much of it...

[Californian Tony]

But I wouldn't have expected you to get much of it...

Why, if I may ask ?

[Vasall des Midas]

Because it's an attack on a specific and rather new subspecies of moderate leftism that you very much help epitomize?

[Californian Tony]

Because it's an attack on a specific and rather new subspecies of moderate leftism that you very much help epitomize?

I think nobody in the political mainstream (outside France and maybe the scandinavians) would call me a moderate. And I also consider myself to be a pretty old-styled leftist.

Now please tell me in which way my political views lead to the demise of the educational system and the trumph of consumerist capitalism. Also, you might address my long answer if you prefer.

[Iannis]

The older I grow, the more Catholic I am.
I'm really disgusted by the leftist paradigm of medias and of teachers. I deeply believe that this modern or post-modern left, having destroyed the old 3rd Republic school, is the best ally of this mass-consumption capitalism which is only looking for stupid consumers.
I deeply believe that we are already in a society of genetic manipulations, of merchandization of the human body, of "good old" euthanasia like the 1930s Sweden, that we'll soon be forbidden to keep our children at home.
I deeply believe that all these so-called social advances are only the other face of our deep moral decline due to mass capitalism. It's only two sides of materialism.

OK, let me be as short as I can :

I. Don't. Get it.

It's very simple in my opinion:

 State-interventionist approach to people needs, basically poor people, is a failure, especially in big not efficient  countries, basicaly everywhere but small scandinavian countries, it's not efficient firstly ideally because it deresponsabilize the family and the individuals, weakening the social connections, the solidarity among individuals or families, or through NGOs etc, and the civil society, which are the structures that are the more naturally fitted to the needs of poor people. I think that a public functionaire will never be more efficient than the family or the neighbour or an association made by volunteer who have a REAL interest on the problem they face and try to resolve. It's simple, we see how in continental Europe the level of voluntary funding of charity isititutions is very low, people don't feel responsible for the poor, they rely totally on the State, they even find a shame to pay more than 5% of their income for personal education or health, giving all the responsibility to the inefficient State sector.
The high level of taxation needed for this system (started to help just the poorest without frinds and family and latere degenerated) is not only unequal (since basically everything is "free", so even rich people don't pay for a surgery operation), and is diseducative ,since people don't understand the real cost of what they use, like education, they are not ready to make donations for reasearch, it's all "up to the State", and private companies and multinational become the "evil" and young people don't invest in their own education enrolling in unuseful faculties, given they pay a only a very small part of this education.
It is also a damage, because it destroys the competitiveness of the economy, and we see it in Italy and France, and that's why Hollande's intention to rais taxes on the only possible source of productivity, the big companies, is really tragic.

[big bad fab]

Bâârfff....
Too lazy (and busy) to answer now. And I shouldn't have let my sadness reach this forum (again): each time, it's a mistake, because I want to write quickly, just let out some angry notations (not especially designed to be coherent...) and my English is bad

Anyway, just one thing: I make a difference between leftist governments and leftist ideas. On education, even Peyrefitte in 1968-69 (yes, this Peyrefitte) and of course VGE in 74-81 had leftist ideas. So, that's not just a question of political parties (on education, I prefer Chevènement than Chatel, without any doubt).

And just another one: I don't compare current plans for euthanasia of old/sick people and Swedish euthanasia in the 1930s, but the latter and the new "choices" offered to future parents and the fact that medical employees of some labs are those who pick which child will be born... For me, it's frightening. And, still, it's something both capitalists (because there is money and because controlling birth is good as "time is money") and leftists (because each human being is now a little God) agree on.


In real news, Hervé Morin will probably announce that he gives up tomorrow.

[Hashemite]

In real news, Hervé Morin will probably announce that he gives up tomorrow.

The only candidate I could support non-ironically? If Nihous doesn't run, I guess I'll be forced to vote Melenchon.

[Sibboleth]

And I also consider myself to be a pretty old-styled leftist.

Really?

[big bad fab]

In real news, Hervé Morin will probably announce that he gives up tomorrow.

The only candidate I could support non-ironically? If Nihous doesn't run, I guess I'll be forced to vote Melenchon.

Mélenchon is only a very pale imitation of Great Georges .

I don't know if Nihous is really serious in his quest of the 500 signatures. We'll see, but it seems harder than expected for him.

[Senator MaxQue]

Well, if France is like Quebec, both the left and the rght destroyed the education system.

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

BREAKING SARKOZY IS CANDIDATE!! BREAKING

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

Now it begins.

Now polls will begin to be relevant and worth watching.

Now the party will begin to be over for Hollande.

Now people who could hide the love fest of polls will have to show who they actually are too.

Actual campaign will begin.

Actual fights will begin.



I would maintain all what I said one year ago, if Sarkozy kept his campaigning skills and if there effectively is a big abstention, he can really do it.

If he doesn't succeed to be as good as he could be, and if anti-Sarkozism is so big that it would make more people voting against him than abstaining, then he can lose.

The only poll that I found worth watching was a few days ago, it was about the reasons why people would vote for Hollande, about 66% of them said the reason of their vote was against Sarkozy. Which shows what's remains pretty obvious since then, Hollande doesn't raise much adhesion, and all his campaigns have been like that, being the nice calm smiling guy doing witty jokes, waiting people to vote for him. With the actual campaign beginning, he will now have to face 2 big adversaries, Mélenchon on his left, Sarkozy on his right. I'd doubt he could continue to be the waiting guy during a long time.

I would also maintain what I said one year ago about Mélenchon and Le Pen. The latter was really a total journalistic excitation, no way she does the 2nd run, to be honnest she managed to pretty well last high, and she could even make a better campaign than what I expected, but still, she's too empty to manage something enormous.

Mélenchon on the other hand is totally fit for such an election, which is a big fight of personalities overall. He has a very constructed and solid discourse. He is, by far, or along with Sarkozy, the most charismatic man, he benefits of the fact that the 2 classical figureheads of the French far-left, Laguillier and Besancenot, are no more here, and their substitutes are almost invisible. Unlike Marine Le Pen, he didn't have all journalists arround him saying 'that could be the huge surprise!!' for months and months, then he could benefited of a freshness effect, to become an actual surprise, and also, in the campaign, he could very well slap Marine Le Pen. This plus the fact that the current context gives more credibility to what he says, with a Hollande that can easily appear as a smiling do nothing mild guy, maybe he wouldn't do the 2nd run, but he could really make a coup, and then breaking this over annoying PS for the future.

Bayrou? GO IN BEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARN. May he opens a choir with Jean de Lassalle, and eventually Douste, they could also open an orange beret factory, so that he could rpoudly do some 'Made in France'. May he does anything but stops politics, he would be more useful writing books, actually. That being said, he does what he always did, anti-Sarkozism, then maybe he could contribute to make Sarkozy lose if it works.

So far anti-Sarkozim is the main thing all the contenders but Mélenchon mainly did. It's a bit short to win...

Also, the 'permanent referendum' that Sarkozy proposes can be a winning strategy, French like referendum, it's always appealing.

He wasn't bad on TV tonight actually. Can't wait to see how he could handle the campaign.

If he wins, it would confirm what I tend to think for a while, all the European periphery may very well change, but the core, the axis, France-Germany, may as well stay stable. I also tend to think that from Greece to France, in all countries in which people have to swallow 'rigor', people would still be ready to accept it nowadays, the big time for our societies would be 2016-2017, when after that people did a lot of sacrifices to please markets, they don't see results.

In short, Mélenchon 2012? No. Mélenchon-Montebourg 2017? Beware!

And in case Hollande wins, that would work too, they would show they are as pointless and inefficient at taking the major challenges we are facing.

Well, yeah, no matter who wins, all those stuffs mainly remain a show, a show that would show that demos will have to find new ways to have kratos on their lives...

[You kip if you want to...]

And here's one Twitter account that I won't be following: https://twitter.com/#!/NicolasSarkozy

Is he really using "A Strong France" as a slogan? Talk about original...

[RogueBeaver]

And here's one Twitter account that I won't be following: https://twitter.com/#!/NicolasSarkozy

Is he really using "A Strong France" as a slogan? Talk about original...

"My opponent has never run anything except his parliamentary office" would be another good slogan...

[You kip if you want to...]

And here's one Twitter account that I won't be following: https://twitter.com/#!/NicolasSarkozy

Is he really using "A Strong France" as a slogan? Talk about original...

"My opponent has never run anything except his parliamentary office" would be another good slogan...

Well, it worked well enough for John McCain.

[Senator MaxQue]

And here's one Twitter account that I won't be following: https://twitter.com/#!/NicolasSarkozy

Is he really using "A Strong France" as a slogan? Talk about original...

"My opponent has never run anything except his parliamentary office" would be another good slogan...

Well, he ran the Socialist Party for more than 10 years...