The Congress of Reims itself ended last night, after three (useless) days. Everybody urged unity, but nobody wanted to create it themselves. Royal was even booed by members when taking up the touchy issue of alliances with the MoDem. The Reims Congress made the 1990 Rennes Congress (which was dominated by a similar battle and division) look like an example in party unity. The PS shouldn’t hold a Congress in a city starting with “R” or the “Rein” sound anytime soon.

Of course, this is far from over. Now that everybody wasted three days of their life in Reims, it continues. Members will vote on Thursday (first round) to elect a leader. In past years, like 2005, every motion made peace at the Congress and came back together around one candidate. This time, nobody made peace (or almost) and there are three candidates. Martine Aubry, third place in the motions faces her enemy Ségolène Royal, first place in the motions, in this close election. Benoit Hamon, fourth place with 19% in the motions has made peace with nobody (except with the kooky “Utopia” motion, 2%) and is running again. Delanoë, by far the biggest loser in this whole thing, will not run and endorsed Martine Aubry this morning, confirming that he too wants Royal to go away. A majority of his 25% will probably go for Aubry, now the establishment candidate, but the more moderate Delanoë voters might prefer Royal. Anyways, it is hard to predict this thing as the motions vote showed us very well. Members might say “screw the two women” and elected Hamon, the dark horse. Or they might prefer the rebel and fresher-face Royal and elect her. Whichever way they vote, the party is divided and the next leader will face a divided party. There is, however, one winner in all this. Nicolas Sarkozy and the UMP.

If no candidate wins 50% of votes on Thursday, the voters will vote again in a runoff. I’m predicting a runoff will be held. But, who knows?

The Figaro leaked the full results with 99% or so counted last night, and LeMonde.fr released an interactive map this morning, so it appears to be official now. With further adu, the map.

A map of party rivalries, local party bosses and barons, and not at all sociological.

And, don’t trust the leaks that had Hamon ahead in Ardeche. Not as bad as the “SNP will win Glenrothes” rumours and leaks, but still rumours. Yeah, don’t trust them.

Firstly, Royal:

Royal is herself (Poitou-Charentes), the Mayor of Dijon Francois Rebsamen (Côte d’Or), former NPS Vincent Peillon (Somme), Bouches-du-Rhône General Council president and very influental PS boss Guérini (from the Bouches-du-Rhône to the Alpes Maritimes), the Mayor of Lyon and actual leader of her motion Gerard Collomb (Rhône), Bianco (Alpes de Haute Provence), and even the new Mayor of Laval (Mayenne), Guillaume Garot, who probably influenced the small Orne fed. The Hérault fed has some problems of its own with the whole Frèche fiasco thingee, but voted for Royal. The Aude is a bit weird. They too seem to be in a bit of problems right now and it lacks leadership.

Delanoë is the establishment. His major strenghts come from Hollande (Corrèze, Haute-Vienne, Cantal), Jospin (Ariège, though he underperformed in Jospin’s home turn of Haute-Garonne), what remains of DSK (Vaucluse, Val-de-Marne, Val-d’Oise), and Rocard strongholds (Bretagne, Bas-Rhin, Franche-Comté). He got only 38% in Paris, and massively underperformed in the Paris suburbia. Delanoë has little real support all in all, apart from Hollande’s base in the Limousin and Cantal and other areas influenced by old party bosses. His support outside of those area is low. But then, so is Aubry’s.

This map shows how much Fabius contributed to Aubry’s 24ish percent. She got, on her own, only her home turn of Nord-Pas de Calais. Fabiusist control of the feds or Fabius influence made her win the Seine-Maritime, Eure, Calvados, Oise, Indre, Cher, Vosges, Haute-Corse, Pyrénées Orientales, and Seine-Saint-Denis. Saône et Loire? Arnaud Montebourg. However, I am surprised at the “evaporation” of Fabiusist support in the Eure. Fabius’ motion got over 50% in 2005 and Fabius managed to get over 40% in the humiliating 2006 primary. Aubry only won that with a bit over 30%.

Hamon is the left of the party. The eternal party leftist Henri Emmanuelli (Landes, Pyrénées Atlantiques) in addition to the Manche Aube, Creuse and Essonne (Mélenchon, the one who is pissed off).

Full results by fed are available online on LeFigaro here. A is Delanoe, B is the ecologist motion, C is Hamon, D is Aubry, E is Royal and E is Utopia.

A few stats:

• Total registered militants 232,912
• Voting 131,930 (56.64%, of which 98.99% were valid)
• Biggest feds: Paris (19,801), Pas-de-Calais (15,040), Nord (11,632), Bouches-du-Rhône (10,995)
• Smallest fed: Wallis-et-Futuna (2, none of which voted), Lozere (258)

Before anything else, here is a brief overview of how the Socialist Party works. It’s intricate and complex.

Hierarchy

• 161,404 militants (members)
• about 4,000 sections (uniting militants in cities, factory, neighborhood. Atleast 5 members with an elected leader).
• 102 Federations (One for each department and one for French citizens abroad. Led by an elected first secretary). A lot of the sections are led by influential party bosses (Guerini comes to mind in the very powerful Bouches-du-Rhone federation).
• 306 councillors in the National Council (the party’s Parliament that meets 4 times a year. Composed of 102 federal first secretaries and 204 members designated during party congresses)
• Bureau etc. (57 members in the bureau, between 20-30 in the secretariat) are designated by the Nat. Council on the advice of the first secretary
• First Secretary elected by militants in the sections.

Dates

• September 23, 2008: Limit date for deposing motions to the National Council.
• November 6, 2008: Sections vote on motions. The federal congresses then designate delegates to go to the Congress, based proportionally on the motions results.
• November 14-16, 2008: Congress in Reims. In 2005, there were 614 delegates plus 849 members by right (council and bureau members, MNAs, Senators).That figure is slightly higher based on PS gains in the Nat Assembly and Senate.
• November 20-21, 2008: Leadership election by militants in sections.
• November 22, 2008: Bureau and Secretariat designated by the National Council on the advice of the leader.

So, the 102 federations voted on Thursday for motions, there were six motions in the running:

• Royal’s motion (led by Gerard Collomb, Mayor of Lyon). Basically a personality cult with no ideology.
• Delanoe’s motion. Reformist, moderate, and social liberal (the L-word which is like the F-word in the PS). Also, the establishment’s motion (Hollande, Rocard, Ayrault, Jospin).
• Aubry’s motion. Unholy alliance of Fabiusists and Aubry lefties.
• Hamon’s motion. Quasi-Trot, eurosceptic, and left-wing motion. Comparable to the NPS motion in 2005.
• Utopia motion (which got 1.02% in 2005). Trots, alterglobalization and other kooks.
• a miscellaneous “ecologist pole”. Eco-socialists.

The results were very surprising: Royal 29.1%, Aubry 24.41%, Delanoë 24.91%, Hamon 18.66%. Greenies and Utopia below 2%. Firstly, polls indicated that Delanoë had a strong lead and Royal and Aubry were in battle for second position. They had Hamon between 1% and 6%. Firstly, Royal obviously still holds sway over the party base, perhaps due to her status as the rebel and anti-establishment rebel. Hamon was obviously helped by the financial crisis, during which he opposed the government’s bailout. Shows that the NPS left of the PS is still a strong force, even though his result is below the 23.5% polled by the NPS motion in Le Mans. The PS has not yet published results, and will likely wait until Monday to do so. There appears to be a 700 vote margin separating Aubry and Delanoë. And around 1000 votes from the DOM Guadeloupe fed have not yet reported. Leaks have said that Delanoë won Paris with around 38-37 over 25-26 for Royal. Aubry won Lille with around 75. Not sure if that is Lille or the Nord as a whole. Strenghtened by the Guérini endorsement, Royal won the Bouches-du-Rhône with 71 and won the large Hérault fed by 54 (a smaller margin than originally expected). Ouest-France reported results for the west, and would have Royal leading in the Orne, Mayenne, and Vendée. Delanoë would be leading in all 5 Breton departments + the Maine-et-Loire and the Sarthe. Hamon would be ahead in the Calvados and Manche. Leaks suggest he would also be leading in Ardèche.

Aubry has done well, but she basically got the votes of the Fabiusists base (20% of the PS) and little apart from that. Hamon will not let her take the leadership of the left-wing of the party. Hamon’s success is bad for her.

The Reims Congress seems to have the smells of the infamous 1990 Rennes Congress. Royal is celebrated as the winner by the media and pundits and for many, she is now the party leader automatically. It doesn’t work that way. On November 20, the feds will vote again for the leader (and choose between candidates, not motions/lists). Ideally, the party finds one candidate for all motions. However, the race is personal this time.

Here is how it could break down:

• Anti-establishment (Royal-Hamon; 47.76%): No majority, and Royal and Hamon are too ideologically different to work together, unless Royal is desperate.
• Establishment (Delanoë-Aubry; 49.32%): Falls just short of a majority, and Delanoë and Aubry have large egos and a combination between two strong contenders wouldn’t work out well and one ego would be crushed.
• Lefties (Aubry-Hamon; 43.07%): No majority. Hamon wouldn’t let Aubry take over the left-wing of the PS and the PS isn’t that left-wing to elect a leader from the NPS/leftie faction.
• We Hate Royal majority (Delanoë-Aubry-Hamon; 67.98%): The most plausible coalition, but doesn’t solve long-term problems. Firstly, the problem of ego comes back and the gnomes would have a hard time agreeing on a common candidate for the leadership. Secondly, the moderate-reformist establishment (Hollande and Rocard) would likely disapprove of the quasi-Trot Hamon in the majority and could switch to Royal, who would be the more moderate of the two coalitions. Feuds, feuds, feuds.
• Moderate majority (Royal-Delanoë; 54.01%): Would make sense on paper, but Delanoë hates Royal.
• Aubry-Royal would never work, because Aubry would rather join the UMP than work with Royal, whom she absolutely hates. In addition, Fabius and Royal are enemies.

Of course, these coalitions could totally fail on November 20 when the party base votes again. A candidate put forward by a plethora of motions who represent 50% of the votes or more could lose. Also, don’t underestimate the popularity of the anti-establishment and especially Royal with the base.
To make things worse, Jean-Luc Mélenchon (Senator, Essonne) and Marc Dolez (Deputy, Nord-17) have left the PS and want to create a party like the German Die Linke and wish to lead the “true left” in the 2009 EU elections. Good luck with that, guys.

Mélenchon and Dolez had endorsed the Hamon motion, btw.

Continue reading for Breton results. Of course, a map will be made when all the results by fed come out and are official.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Parti Breton (Strollad Breizh) has announced its intentions to contest the 2009 European parliamentary elections in France. The PB is a small centrist-liberal party that wants Breton independence. Irrelevant anyways, but brought me to think about regionalists and EU elections.

• In 2004, despite a million tiny unknown lists running, only one regionalist list ran. A Régionalistes : Occitanie, Catalogne, Euskadi list ran in the South-West constituency and got 0.37 in that constituency.
• In 1999, a Martinican based-list, 97.2: mi ou, mi mwen, which was a small liberal party in the Martinique. It got 6% in Martinique, and 0.03% nationwide.
• 1994 saw the most regionalist lists run: two. The most important was a regionalist/federalist list led by Max Siméoni, a Corsican nat. It won 0.39% nationwide, but broke 10.5% in Corse-du-Sud and 11.3% in Haute-Corse. The other list was a Rassemblement d’Outre-mer (Overseas Rally) led by the Guadeloupean Communist (PPDG) Ernest Moutoussamy. The list won Guadeloupe with 37.25%. In Martinique, it got 20.2%, 17.04% in Guyane, and a mere 4.82% in the Reunion.

Elections for Class A Senators will be held on September 21 (Sunday). This will concern a third of deparments, and the term will be 6 years instead of the hilariously long 9 years. Starting in 2011, Senate elections will concern half of the departments each election.

The composition on June 30, 2008 was:
23 PCF, 95 Soc, 17 Rads, 30 centrists, 159 UMP, 6 NI.
and those up for election
3 PCF, 29 Soc, 8 Rads, 4 centrists, 56 UMP, 1 NI.

New seats: 12 new seats: 1 each for the Ain, Alpes-Maritimes, Bouches-du-Rhône, Drôme, Eure-et-Loir, Haute-Garonne, Gironde, Hérault, Guyane, Polynesia. 2 new seats each for the new DOMs of Saint-Barth and Saint-Martin. In 2011, there will be 5 new seats (in Class B seats).

Electors:

Electoral college of 50,720 elected officials (49,602 in metro France). 48,453 are local councillors, 178 are MPs, 765 are regional councillors, and 1,504 are general councillors.

Elector rules:

(Commune size : Delegates)

• 1 to 499 people: 1 delegate
• 500 to 1499 people: 3 delegates
• 1500 to 2499 people: 5 delegates
• 2500 to 3499 people: 7 delegates
• 3500 to 8999 people: 15 delegates
• 9000 to 30000 people: All councillors (either 29, 33, 35, or 39 delegates depending on pop.)
• 30000 and over: All councillors + one other delegate for each 1000 inhabitants.
• Overseas seats: Elected by the Assembly of French Abroad (AFE). So, elected by a bunch of nobodies that nobody knows or bothers to vote for. Mostly a bunch of old French ladies that are bored at home.

Elections:

• Departments with 1 to 3 senators: two-round voting. Same system as legislative elections. Vendee 2004 election
• Departments with more than 4 senators: Proportional representation with highest average, no Panachage or preferential voting. See explanation below.

1. determination of the number of candidates elected in each list:
ex: 5 seats
1532 votes expressing a view
1532/5= 306.4 (quotient)
a. seat attribution using the quotient
List A: 1023 votes/306.4 (quotient)= 3.34 or 3 seats
List B: 258/306.4=0.84 or 0 seats
List C: 251/306.4=0.82 or 0 seats
b. attribution of remaining seats using highest averages
4th seat
List A: 1023 votes/(3 seats + 1 simulated seat)= 255.75
List B: 258/(0+1)=258
List C: 251/(0+1)=251
List B gets the 4th seat
5th seat
List A: 1023 votes/(3 seats + 1 simulated seat)= 255.75
List B: 258/(1+1)=129
List C: 251/(0+1)=251
List A gets the last seat
Real-life example (Jesus, I’m sounding like a math textbook): Seine-Saint-Denis 2004 election
Overseas seats use this method too.

2008 election:
Department (number of electors): Composition by group.

Ain (1563)
2 UMP
1 new seat

Aisne (1778)
2 UMP
1 vacant (RDSE)

Allier (970)
2 UMP

Alpes de Haute-Provences (459)
1 PS

Hautes-Alpes (400)
1 UMP

Alpes-Maritimes (1814)
3 UMP
1 RDSE
1 new seat

Ardèche (979)
1 PS
1 UMP

Ardennes (957)
2 UMP

Ariège (611)
1 PS

Aube (958)
1 UMP
1 NI (liberal one-man party, DVD)

Aude (1063)
2 PS

Aveyron (859)
1 UMP
1 idiot (a MPF member in the RDSE group, the most pro-European group there is)

Bouches-du-Rhône (3262)
3 PS
2 UMP
1 UC-UDF
1 PCF

Calvados (1978)
2 UMP
1 UC-UDF

Cantal (524)
2 UMP

Charente (1093)
1 UMP
1 UC-UDF

Charente-Maritime (1626)
3 UMP

Cher (871)
2 UMP

Corrèze (748)
1 UMP
1 RDSE

Corse-du-Sud (366)
1 RDSE

Haute-Corse (536)
1 RDSE

Côte-d’Or (1566)
3 UMP

Côtes-d’Armor (1628)
2 PS
1 PCF

Creuse (500)
2 PS

Dordogne (1301)
1 PS
1 UMP

Doubs (1514)
3 UMP

Drôme (1280)
2 PS
1 new seat

Eure (1721)
3 UMP

Eure-et-Loir (1229)
2 UMP
1 new seat

Finistère (2096)
3 PS
1 UMP

Gard (1688)
3 PS

Haute-Garonne (2452)
4 PS
1 new seat

Gers (755)
1 RDSE
1 UMP

Gironde (3006)
3 UMP
2 PS
1 new seat

Hérault (2094)
1 UMP
1 RDSE
1 PS
1 new seat

Ille-et-Vilaine (2317)
3 UMP
1 UC-UDF

Indre (684)
2 UMP

Belfort (356)
1 PS

Guyane (358)
1 RDSE
1 new seat

Polynesia (697)
1 UMP
1 new seat

Saint-Martin (23)
1 new seat

Saint-Barthélemy (19)
1 new seat

Wallis-et-Futuna (21)
1 UMP

French Citizens Abroad (?) This concerns only 5 of the 12 seats
4 UMP
1 PCF

The electoral system prevents a large-scale pink wave in this election and there is little chance that the PS will gain control of the Senate. In addition, some seats are decided by a small amount of votes, so division on the left or right doesn’t help.

See:

http://www.senat.fr/senateurs/elections/2008/
http://www.senat.fr/senateurs/elections//2008/brochure.pdf
http://www.senat.fr/senateurs/elections/2008/senatoriales2008/ar/liste_composition_par_groupe_politique_serie.pdf

I didn’t follow the race as I should’ve, and was caught by surprise this Monday morning with a snippet on Le Monde about the by-election. The first round was held on Sunday the 7th, and the runoff is this Sunday. I didn’t keep tabs on the candidate, so I didn’t spot the MoDem not running a candidate.

Despite what the media said, the results are actually pretty close. On paper and strictly speaking, not really, but when you analyse them, they are. Gorges (UMP) won 47.76% of the vote. Most of that vote is UMP, of course, but a big part of the traditional MoDem vote went with him. The PS candidate won 28.09%, and a dissident took 14.51. The UMP is up 11.5% from the first by-election, so it corresponds to a chunk of the MoDem vote (which represented 18.5% last time). The PS is statistically down nearly 10 points, but the PS+PSd vote is actually up 4.6%. The rest of the MoDem vote went with one of the two PS candidates. The FN won 3.79, which is down from both the 2007 and the first by-election result (-0.39). Jamais deux sans trois. The LCR ran a candidate this time ’round, and he won 3.41%, up from 2.47 in 2007 (probably took most of the 2007 LO vote, which was about 1.2% IIRC). The Commies lost 1.4% of their by-election result and fell to 2.44. The POI (the new name for the Workers’ Party, a tiny joke Trot sect) won only one vote.

All this nice stuff gives up Right 47.76% vs. Mainstream Left and Trots 48.45% vs. FN 4.18%. Which corresponds to a very tight result. Tighter than the Rhone-11 by-election also covered here. I’m predicting a narrow UMP victory for now, and I’m eyeing a replay of the June 2007 results, where Gorges won by a handful of votes (50ish IIRC). A PS win is also a very realistic possibility, though.

A UMP re-gain would certainly be a bit of good news for the party, which of course hasn’t had the best fortunes lately. That could also be some bad news for the PS, although they might not notice it since they seem busy fighting each other this moment.

For anyone interested, the prefecture has detailed cantonal and communal data here. In PDF format.

For those of you who have followed recent French by-elections you’ll probably ask why the 1st Eure-et-Loir constituency comes up a second time. The reason is hilarious. In December 2007, the UMP deputy for the constituency, Jean-Pierre Gorges saw his election invalidated. In January, he was defeated by the Socialist Francoise Vallet. Just now, she has been invalidated for a reason that is a little silly: a supermarket campaigned for her and she accepted the endorsement. In addition to the silly reason, she is ineligible for any elected office for a period of one year. So, for the third (in some cases, fourth) the voters will need to elect another deputy hoping he or she isn’t invalidated in August or September.

The constituency is a bellwether constituency: in 1988 and 1997 it elected PS deputies, in 1993, 2002, and June 2007 it elected a RPR or UMP deputy. However, the June 2007 election was very close, with Gorges (UMP) defeating Vallet (PS) by a handful of votes. By the time of the 1st by-election in January 2008, the government’s popularity had dipped and the PS won with 55.3% in the runoff, probably taking most of the MoDem’s 18.5%. The March 2008 Chartres local election was a replay of the by-election, with the top three candidates in the by-election standing as candidates of their respective parties. Vallet was heavily favoured to win and the MoDem, which polled only 13.5% merged with Vallet’s list. Mathematically, it was quite hard for Gorges to win. But he did. And not by a handful of votes, more like 55-45. MoDem voters probably voted against their party’s line. Based on the 55-45 result in the last election, the race definitely leans to the Socialists, but the defeat of Vallet in Chartres in March makes this more competitive. The PS needs to hold this seat, and the UMP needs to regain this seat. The MoDem, which polled 18.5% in the by-election but only 13.5% in Chartres (the MoDem took over 18% in the city in June and the by-election) must try to keep its result up at 18%. The FN, which polled 12% in 2002 but 5% in June and 4.2% in January will probably try to get back atleast to its 5% result.

The present-day Socialist Party was born in Epinay in 1971 (or, arguably, Issy in 1969), and the PS’s ancestor, the SFIO, a socialist party with a penchant for Marxism, was born in 1905. The SFIO was the biggest party of the socialist left for most of the Third Republic and then the largest left-wing party in the Fourth Republic’s Troisieme Force, but still weaker electorally than the independent PCF. The SFIO actually didn’t form many governments during the Fourth Republic: most governments were MRP, CNIP, or Radical- more moderate parties that could win confidence votes. It did, however, form the government from 1956 to 1957 under Guy Mollet (SFIO), making it the longest Fourth Republic government, just over 400 days in power. That was in the midst of the Algerian conflict.

PSU

Mollet’s hard-line platform in government to the Algerian crisis was far from popular within his own party. In fact, Mollet was elected in 1956 on a platform to end the war, which he called stupid, and give Algeria its independence. That is, until he received tomatoes in his face in Algers from pieds-noir and until the Assembly couldn’t provide him a majority on a liberal line of action. He adopted a hard-line and pro-war platform in government. In 1958, the SFIO under his leadership supported the return to power of Charles de Gaulle and the new Republic. Those to the left of the SFIO formed the Autonomous Socialist Party (PSA) in 1958 and then the Unified Socialist Party (PSU) in 1960. By the early ’60s, the SFIO had lost 80% of its 1945 members, and under the Mollet leadership, the SFIO was reduced to a minor party.

The PSU was neither a social democratic party nor a far-left Trot party. It sought to occupy the middle ground between socialism (SFIO) and communism (PCF). The party, composed mostly of anti-colonialist socialists, was split into two factions: revolutionaries and reformists. The party was joined by Pierre Mendès France, member of the Radical Party who rejected the Fifth Republic. During the 1968 crisis, the PSU supported the student movement, unlike the SFIO and PCF. From there, the PSU turned into an anti-establishment and autogestionary party, and it refused to sign the Common Programme. Ironically, the PSU had always proned the Union of the Left. With Epinay, the PSU became a fringe party next to the united left, and numerous left to join the PS, such as Michel Rocard, who was formerly the leader of the PSU. The Trot faction joined the LCR or ultra-fringe Maoist and Marxist parties (PCMLF). The PSU participated in the Mauroy government with Huguette Bouchardeau. This participation was unpopular in PSU ranks and the reformists became a minority at the 1984 Bourges Congress. The party dissolved in 1989, with members joining various red-green parties (AREV), anti-globalization thingees (CAP), or even the Greenies.

Electorally, the party polled an average of 2 or 3% of the votes. In 1962, it won 2.33% and 2 seats (Finistere, Seine); in 1967 it won 2.26% and 4 seats (Ardennes, Cotes-du-Nord, Finistere, and Isere [with Mendes-France]). In 1968, despite polling its highest vote share ever, 3.94%, it lost all seats. One must note, however, that the PSU ran much more candidates in 1968 than it did in 1967 (321 in 1968 vs. 117 in 1967). In fact, PSU candidates won an average of 4,234 votes in 1967, but only 2,723 votes in 1968. In the 32 constituencies where the party had obtained over 10% in 1967, the PSU lost in 24 of those and gained in only 8 of those. In 1973, it won 3.3% and Yves Le Foll (Cotes-du-Nord) was the only PSU to retrieve his seat. Le Foll also served for numerous years, until 1983, as Mayor of Saint-Brieuc. In 1978 and 1981, the PSU was grouped with the far-left in vote totals.

In the 1965 presidential election, the PSU, like the SFIO and PCF, supported the candidacy of Francois Mitterrand, who was independent of all parties and member of the Convention of Republican Institutions (CIR). Mitterrand won 45% in the runoff against Charles de Gaulle. With the explosion of the FGDS in 1969 (see below), the left ran divided in 1969. Michel Rocard ran for the PSU, and obtained 3.61%, only a few percentage points behind the Gaston Defferre-Mendes “ticket” of the SFIO (in the American President-Veep style). In 1981, the PSU candidate Huguette Bouchardeau won only 1.11% of the vote, a result of the decline of the PSU that started with Epinay in 1973. In 1988, the PSU supported the Communist dissident candidate Pierre Juquin, who won 2.09%. Juquin was also supported by the LCR and SOS Racisme and had the ambition to build a coalition of Trots, red greenies, PCF dissidents, and other revolutionary crazies.

Despite its chaotic history, and marginalization over the years, the PSU was the first party for numerous present-day PS members. From the PSU ranks came Jack Lang, Michel Rocard, Marylise Lebranchu, Jean-Paul Huchon (all PS), Alain Lipietz, Gilles Lemaire (Greenies), and Arlette Laguiller (LO).

UFD

The Union of Democratic Forces, or UFD, was a little known anti-Gaullist left-wing party that had a brief existance at the birth of the Fifth Republic. It was composed of union members, and other non-Communist candidates opposed to de Gaulle. In the 1958, it won only two seats, but its candidate in the 1958 indirect presidential election, Albert Chatelet, won 79,416 electoral “votes”, or 8.46%. Its members later joined the PSU.

FGDS

The Federation of the Democratic and Socialist Left, FGDS, was formed after the sucess of the Mitterrand candidacy in 1965 (45% in the runoff against de Gaulle). Mitterrand, who had been the candidate of the SFIO, PCF, CIR, and PSU, united the SFIO, Radicals, CIR, and UDSR under the FGDS banne. In the 1967 election, the united FGDS, which had signed electoral deals with the PCF, came very close to defeating the Gaullist majority. In fact, the UNR won only 233 seats in metro France, while the PCF+FGDS+PDM (all opposition parties) won 237. The UNR formed a majority government with its success in overseas seats (12 of 15 seats to the UNR). The FGDS group, formed of 116 FGDS MPs and 5 (4 PSU and 1 DVG) caucusing members, numbered 121 in all, making it the second largest party. The SFIO group had only 66 seats in 1962. However, the question of deals with the PCF divided the party. During the May 1968 crisis, Mitterrand was certain that de Gaulle would resign in the wake of the protests, and announced his candidacy to the “presidential election of 1968″. de Gaulle did not resign, and dissolved the National Assembly. The FGDS won only 16.5% and was reduced to 57 seats, lower than 1962. In terms of seats, Giscard’s Independent Republicans formed a numerically larger parliamentary group (61 MPs). The UDR won a majority of seats on its own, and with the CD and RI, it had nearly 400 of the 485 seats. In the wake of the electoral rout, the FGDS blew up, with the SFIO leading its own candidacy in 1969. Gaston Defferre, for the SFIO, won barely 5% of the votes, far behind the third-placed PCF candidate, who won over 20%.

Firstly, the results before anything else

NC-UMP 51.36%
PS 48.64%

So, my prediction of 51-49 was quite spot on, and what I had seen happening happened. Turnout remained horrid (29%) and the PS candidate took almost all of the PCF, Greenies, PRG etc. voters but didn’t get the key to all this, the MoDem, which likely broke narrowly for Durand (NC). This result is very much like Fenech’s 2002 result, where the UMP gained the seat from the PS with 52% of the vote.

The Prefecture of the Rhone still has communal data for the runoff, so…

The PS did extremely well in the Givors area and also in the bellwether canton of Condrieu (which probably broke narrowly for Durand, still). The PS also won a few communes in the north of Mornant canton. Save for the Lyon suburb of Mions, which went PS, Durand won Saint-Symphorien quite heavily, probably a mix of both it being very right-wing and him being the general councillor for the canton.

So, that’s that. Let’s wait eagerly for the next by-election, now.

The first round of the by-election in the 11th constituency of the Rhone was held today after the election of Georges Fenech (UMP) was invalidated by the Constitutional Council. 9 candidates were standing.

Before anything else, the results.

NC-UMP 41.78%
PS 23.29%
PCF 15.32%
Greenies 6.25%
MoDem 5.09%
FN 4.04%
LCR 3.32%
PRG 0.48%
ARC 0.45%

Basically the pattern to be expected for the NC-UMP, they lost 6.31% over June 2007, a result of bad turnout (27.03%) and the UMP’s current unpopularity. The Socialists lost 0.35%, but considering how strong the PCF ran, it’s still a good result for the PS. The PCF obtained an excellent result, better than its 1993 or 1997 results by far and only a bit below its 1988 level (16.1%). Can be explained by two things: the PCF candidate had excellent name recognition- he’s the mayor of Givors, the constituency’s largest city and the PCF always does relatively well in the constituency (provided they run a candidate, they didn’t in 2002 or 2007). The Greenies also got a good result, better than their 2007 result by 1.86%, but below their 12% record in 1993 (obviously). The FN actually lost votes, their voters not turning out well, and they lost 1.1% over their already dreadful June 2007 result. The MoDem, who won 9.6% in June lost 4.55% and is left behind the Greenies with 5.09%. They still hold the key to the runoff (more on that later).

In addition, due the excellent Prefecture of the Rhone, we have data by commune and a map is possible!

The pattern to be expected in a constituency like this one. The NC candidate, who is the general councillor for Saint-Symphorien did well in that area (which is generally the best area for any UMP candidate too) but less so in Mornant and Condrieu. The left won the belt between Condrieu and the north (where Givors is) and the PCF candidate broke 40% in his city of Givors (he’s the mayor) and took over 30% in a suburb. The same urban vs. rural trend seen in 2007 continues.

For the runoff now, you ask? Well, Durand (NC) has a small advantage, but it should be quite narrow (probably the 2002 results, in fact, 51-49 for Durand or something similar). The MoDem will probably be the key in this, assuming the left has a full turnout of all PCF, Green, PRG voters, which gives it around 48% and about 49% if the Trots turn out well (which they don’t, they’re an unreliable lot).

If you’re interested in the data by commune, the source is here. (needs PDF).

Read the rest of this entry »