French politics: houlala!

[The Anti-Targ]

16 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Not at all. Mélenchon at least talks a lot about geopolitics. Or do you mean something else?

Not sure what you mean by transformation of the economy either.

Changing the fundamental social principles upon which the economy is based. Mandating a UBI, for instance, does not change those, it just tries to mitigate the downside of the principles that currently drive economics.

 

[Rippounet]

44 minutes ago, Altherion said:

This isn't a bad gambit -- claiming that the election is rigged worked for Trump -- but I don't think it will help Fillon.

It will help him keep most of his electoral base I guess, but other voters are likely to remain unimpressed. His main problem is that unlike Republicans in the US, French conservatives have two other options: Macron for the neo-liberal approach and Le Pen for the conservatism.
Accusing Hollande isn't a bad move because many people will think there is a grain of truth to it, but it's nevertheless unlikely to wash off the stain of the charges, and Hollande isn't running so it won't help him get more votes. In the end, Fillon is going to be stuck around 20% as many previously undecided voters prefer betting on Macron.

1 minute ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Changing the fundamental social principles upon which the economy is based. Mandating a UBI, for instance, does not change those, it just tries to mitigate the downside of the principles that currently drive economics.

I think I see what you mean. But quite honestly the French president doesn't have the power to change the fundamental social principles of the economy. Nor is the people really ready for this kind of radical proposition. As it is the UBI is an interesting proposal because it has the power to eventually do more than simply mitigate the downsides of the current system if done right.
But originally you were talking about politics. And on this point I agree that unless a radical transformation occurs, populism will remain a dire threat for the foreseeable future. And such a political transformation will in turn have the potential to change the economic rules.

[HexMachina]

Thanks for this thread. I've been trying to follow the elections as best I can but don't have a very good grasp of French politics.

Has the attack in London had (or do you think it will have rather) any effect on the candidates? I'm thinking LePen in particular may have tried to use it to her advantage

[Rippounet]

9 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Has the attack in London had (or do you think it will have rather) any effect on the candidates? I'm thinking LePen in particular may have tried to use it to her advantage

At this point, contrary to one might think, Le Pen is being rather mild with the islamophobia... Or let's say she's trying to show she can talk of other things. The reason is that everyone knows what she stands for, so she doesn't need to insist too much, a few remarks here or there are enough. Similarly, any terrorist attack helps her case without her needing to make a special declaration.Other officials from her party will do it if they think it helps.
Generally speaking, I'm tempted to say that unless there is a major attack on European soil Le Pen is going to focus on trying to convince undecided voters who are afraid of the economic aspects of her program. Islamophobia has gotten her this far, but by itself it shouldn't be enough to giver her the presidency, she needs to show she's more than that.

And this just in: Le Pen just had a meeting with Putin today. Not sure what to make of this, Putin is a controversial subject in France.

[Ser Reptitious]

Thanks for starting this thread. I'm thinking after this election is over, it might perhaps not be a bad idea to start a general "European Politics" thread, similar to the U.S. Politics one? That way, happenings throughout Europe can be discussed without the need to necessarily start an individual thread every time (something which many smaller things on their own may not merit, anyway). Just a thought. 

[The Anti-Targ]

On 26/03/2017 at 0:08 AM, Ser Reptitious said:

Thanks for starting this thread. I'm thinking after this election is over, it might perhaps not be a bad idea to start a general "European Politics" thread, similar to the U.S. Politics one? That way, happenings throughout Europe can be discussed without the need to necessarily start an individual thread every time (something which many smaller things on their own may not merit, anyway). Just a thought. 

Will the UK be part of the Euro politics thread, or should we have UK members vote on whether to be in or out?

[Ser Reptitious]

4 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Will the UK be part of the Euro politics thread, or should we have UK members vote on whether to be in or out?

Brexit means Brexit. There can be no half-way measures! 

[williamjm]

22 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Will the UK be part of the Euro politics thread, or should we have UK members vote on whether to be in or out?

We'd also need to have the Scottish boarders vote on whether they want to be part of the Euro politics thread or the UK politics thread.

[James Arryn]

I've read that if you choose the UK thread over the Europe one, your monthly internet charges are free and the money you'd normally use on it is instead directed towards a daily fish & chips allowance (provided you don't do anything morally wrong like add curry sauce). Everyone who matters wins!

[Rippounet]

lol guys

Ok, so back on topic... Macron is ahead now (25,5%), but barely, since Le Pen is at 25%. Fillon keeps falling with around 17%, and (surprise!) Mélenchon is rising to 14% with Hamon stagnating around 10%.

But polls can be misleading and dangerous. Only about half of the people who choose Macron are "certain" of their choice. For Le Pen or Mélenchon it's usually closer to 80%. Needless to say, this is really dangerous.

It's something I've been saying for some time now, but a scientist is saying the same thing with maths:
https://oeilsurlefront.liberation.fr/les-idees/2017/03/26/marine-le-pen-une-faille-de-taille-dans-le-plafond-de-verre_1558453
I won't translate everything. Bottom line is, if it's Macron-Le Pen for the second round, polls predict 60-40 for Macron. BUT maths tells us that polls are terrible at taking abstention into account. If 90% of Le Pen's voters show up (not an unrealistic estimate), then more than 70% of Macron's need to show up for him to win. Ouch.

And this is why nothing is certain yet.
For the second round: Macron should win against Le Pen, but it's really not a given, it really depends on his ability to mobilize voters. And if it's anyone else then Macron, then Le Pen is likely to win.

For the first round: because of the principles behind the maths above, the polls could be terribly misleading. Many people are ready to vote for Macron because they see him as the best chance to deny Le Pen the presidency. But Mélenchon's rise in the polls could change everything.
Basically, the higher Macron is in the polls, the fewer people might actually vote for him. This is a candidate whose rise is mostly due to the presence of Le Pen in the first place. If a true left-wing candidate like Mélenchon appears to have a shot, he might end up preventing Macron from reaching the second round and lose the election to boot.

So weirdly enough, although the numbers seem to show that everything is for the best, I'm suddenly starting to be pessimistic. Le Pen's odds are actually very good. Given the current polarization of French politics, I'm seriously starting to wonder if she won't win no matter what.
 

[Altherion]

6 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Only about half of the people who choose Macron are "certain" of their choice. For Le Pen or Mélenchon it's usually closer to 80%. Needless to say, this is really dangerous.

I kind of see your point, but isn't it also true that the people who don't like Le Pen really don't like her and will be motivated to vote against her even if they're not fond of her opponent? I realize that the same argument was made to prove that Trump can never win, but again, the margins in the French election are much greater -- the difference in turnouts you're talking about is massive.

[Rippounet]

4 hours ago, Altherion said:

I kind of see your point, but isn't it also true that the people who don't like Le Pen really don't like her and will be motivated to vote against her even if they're not fond of her opponent?

Some will be. Some won't be.
Think of it Altherion, if you had the choice between an openly neo-liberal candidate and a neo-fascist populist candidate, would you find it that easy to actually get out of your house and cast your vote for neo-liberalism?

[denstorebog]

6 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Some will be. Some won't be.
Think of it Altherion, if you had the choice between an openly neo-liberal candidate and a neo-fascist populist candidate, would you find it that easy to actually get out of your house and cast your vote for neo-liberalism?

It's true that this has been considered a factor in Trump's ability to beat Hillary. But perhaps the two-phase nature of the French election system will mitigate this phenomenon somewhat? If Macron (and other non-Le Pen) supporters are less likely to turn out, this should be evident in the first round of election as well, and maybe give opponents of Front Nationale the warning that Hillary never got.

[Ser Reptitious]

30 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

It's true that this has been considered a factor in Trump's ability to beat Hillary. But perhaps the two-phase nature of the French election system will mitigate this phenomenon somewhat? If Macron (and other non-Le Pen) supporters are less likely to turn out, this should be evident in the first round of election as well, and maybe give opponents of Front Nationale the warning that Hillary never got.

On top of that, it is important to remember that if the popular vote was all that mattered in the U.S. election, then Hillary would have scored a convincing win. Thankfully there is no electoral college in France. 

Of course, that is no reason at all to get complacent in terms of voting, but perhaps also a reason to not panic too much when comparing the U.S. election to the French one.

[Altherion]

8 hours ago, Rippounet said:

Some will be. Some won't be.
Think of it Altherion, if you had the choice between an openly neo-liberal candidate and a neo-fascist populist candidate, would you find it that easy to actually get out of your house and cast your vote for neo-liberalism?

No, I would probably stay home. However, my distaste for neoliberalism is probably greater than that of most people on these boards.

2 hours ago, denstorebog said:

It's true that this has been considered a factor in Trump's ability to beat Hillary. But perhaps the two-phase nature of the French election system will mitigate this phenomenon somewhat? If Macron (and other non-Le Pen) supporters are less likely to turn out, this should be evident in the first round of election as well, and maybe give opponents of Front Nationale the warning that Hillary never got.

I'm not sure it works that way. In the first round, there is a wide variety of candidates so the people on the right who don't like Le Pen can vote for Fillon while the people on the left who don't like Macron can vote for Mélenchon or Hamon and the people who don't like any of these five can vote for half a dozen less popular candidates. This doesn't tell you much about the second round because the question there is how many people who voted for candidates that did not advance coalesce around each of the ones who did.

[Altherion]

Russian media is saying that Mélenchon did very well at the last debate. Did anyone watch it? Also, it just occurred to me that since he is anti-EU, there is a tiny possibility that the French public will have a choice between anti-EU candidates (who have almost nothing else in common) in the second round.

[Rippounet]

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

Russian media is saying that Mélenchon did very well at the last debate.

Yes, even the French mainsteam media are having to grudgingly admit that Mélenchon is actually a serious candidate. BFMTV journalists conceded he'd been the most convincing and Le Monde's factcheckers recently wrote that his program is the most developed of all.

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

Did anyone watch it?

Bits and pieces, you know how it is in our day and age. I have to say, minor candidates such as Poutou (Anti-capitalist Party) and Asselineau (stronger anti-EU stance than even Le Pen) also made strong impressions.

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

Also, it just occurred to me that since he is anti-EU, there is a tiny possibility that the French public will have a choice between anti-EU candidates (who have almost nothing else in common) in the second round.

The possibility is small but it's there. Mélenchon's approach to Europe is far more reasonable than Le Pen's though: he has very specific demands, and only if they are not met will he seek to break free from it. Also, unlike Le Pen he's not big on the Franc.

It's crazy but the election remains completely undecided.
- Le Pen hasn't been particularly impressive in the last weeks. Her numbers remain stable, but with other right-wing anti-EU candidates like Dupont-Aignan and Asselineau making a break in the media, I wonder whether she couldn't lose a few crucial percentage points.
- Macron is officially stable, but he's not a strong debater, and Mélenchon's rise could deprive him of his strongest argument (the "useful vote" against Le Pen). I'm even surprised he's still that high to be honest.
- Mélenchon's rise has been impressive, but can he really overcome the terrible image most people have of him? Just how far can a real socialist candidate go these days?
- Fillon, though he took a beating, is still in the race. It's unclear how low his numbers are these days but it seems he still has the support of his electoral base. Or maybe that's where Macron's votes are coming from...

Le Pen and Macron are still predicted to win round 25% of the vote with Mélenchon now being a strong contender for third place. But according to one of the latest surveys, only two thirds of the electors are certain to vote, and only about two thirds of them know for certain who they intend to vote for. Given how close the race has become, it wouldn't take much to change everything.
 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

On 28.3.2017 at 1:44 PM, Rippounet said:

Some will be. Some won't be.
Think of it Altherion, if you had the choice between an openly neo-liberal candidate and a neo-fascist populist candidate, would you find it that easy to actually get out of your house and cast your vote for neo-liberalism?

That'S a bit of a no-brainer, isn't it. You always pick the non-fascist candidate.

I thought/hoped for a Trump effect in Europe. Any by Trump effect I mean, that watching Orange doofus'es horror show in the states has sufficiently turned of enough voters to avoid that.

[James Arryn]

4 minutes ago, Notone said:

That'S a bit of a no-brainer, isn't it. You always pick the non-fascist candidate.

I thought/hoped for a Trump effect in Europe. Any by Trump effect I mean, that watching Orange doofus'es horror show in the states has sufficiently turned of enough voters to avoid that.

What do you mean? Anything that doesn't look good is the result of a liberal media conspiracy. Once you accept that, there is no such thing as bad news, just good news and further proof of conspiracy.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

What do you mean? Anything that doesn't look good is the result of a liberal media conspiracy. Once you accept that, there is no such thing as bad news, just good news and further proof of conspiracy.

That would work, if the trust in the liberal mainstream media (I tried to do that in my best Palin voice (it wasn't good)) was as eroded in Europe as it appears to be in the US. For the moment I keep some degree of optimism and say it's not.