• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

|OT| French Presidential election - 2012 edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mistouze

user-friendly man-cashews
Why yes I do, but I won't be satisfied either if Sarkozy wins.
Your problems with Hollande seem to go beyond dissatisfaction which I can undestand if you're more in line with gaulists/traditional republican right. Which in that case you can already thank Sarkozy for fucking french's right wing for a few years.

Seeing Fillon or Jupé on tv is sooooo awkward, you can feel the shame. Actually feel bad for them.
 
Not dipping in the FN shitbowl kinda right.
That's a very loose definition but it's a definition I can agree with. The thing is, I don't identify with the republican right's tradition of a strong government which intervenes a lot in the economy and social issues.
 

Jubern

Member
Watching the Zapping right now, some pretty nice pieces...

- According to a poll, immigration is the n°1 priority for... only 3% of the population;
- The whole thing about Sarko saying he went to Fukushima (motherfucker...) and NKM saying it's a forbidden zone (what the fuck girl? Your Minister of Industry went there);
- Sarko attacking Hollande on its physique (classy).

Good stuff that puts things in perspective, if anything. Not saying it holds any importance, but I always find this kind of stuff interesting.
 

Alx

Member
I think I'll vote blank, like 5 years ago and for the same reason : I definitely dislike and mistrust both candidates, and it's getting worse with every passing day.
 

Kurtofan

Member
I think I'll vote blank, like 5 years ago and for the same reason : I definitely dislike and mistrust both candidates, and it's getting worse with every passing day.

Sarkozy seems infinitely worse than Hollande, in my opinion.Why not punish him instead of voting blank?
Not trying to make you change your mind, just wondering.
 

Mael

Member
So what's the etiquette when the person you're answering to is banned ?

You usually wait and see if the conversation can be undertaken later....

Kurtofan said:
Sarkozy seems infinitely worse than Hollande, in my opinion.Why not punish him instead of voting blank?
Not trying to make you change your mind, just wondering.

That was said 5 years ago and before that even the world didn't fall apart when Sarkozy was elected last time we didn't get in Iraq like it was expected since he actually wanted to get there in the 1rst place.

I can't actually believe someone here voted for the fair haired illusionist and is literate enough to know how to operate a computer.

What does the right believe?
Where I live I can tell you that Sarkozy had a sizable lead and it's one of the fortress of the right, I can tell you they're as far from the image you get from shitty comedians like les Guignols as the left is from being depicted as Bolshevik warriors.

I think I'll vote blank, like 5 years ago and for the same reason : I definitely dislike and mistrust both candidates, and it's getting worse with every passing day.

In the end this election is way less important than the one just after which will decide the National Assembly.
This one is actually over, the only thing one can hope if they want the country to get away from its numerous problems is if we get in a situation like in 1997.
Which can actually happen if Hollande is stupid enough to follow through on his promises.
 

Mael

Member
Oh dear.

Edit:
hehehe lol! So true.. except the feeling bad part :I

The whole thing is embarrassing but so much less than the glee that is perceptible in this whole mess.
Heck look at where EELV are now, they've sent the worst possible candidate to do the job, actually even worse than the moron they wanted to send in 2007 and changed at the last minute because the idiot was such a bumbling fool. And on top of that the only thing they talked about was how Sarkozy wasn't to be elected.
The worst part being that the shitty propositions are obscured behind a veil they call "the right mustn't pass again".
Thank you French political left, you actually changed this election into a plebiscite.

Oh and look what they again forgot to talk about during this sham of an election?
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/preside...3/numerique-rendez-manque-candidats-a-lelysee
http://www.latribune.fr/technos-med...ts-parlent-culture-mais-peu-du-numerique.html
http://www.latribune.fr/technos-med...06/y-aura-t-il-un-ministre-du-numerique-.html

And just because it's actually funny, it looks like they can't even get anything right on the right....
http://www.latribune.fr/technos-medias/internet/20120427trib000695954/la-france-forte-en-panne.html
 
Not a close follower of French politics (although more so this year than ever), but I thought Australian Bill Mitchell's take on the French candidates was interesting and different from what you are likely to hear elsewhere. For context, this comes at it from a progressive economic position that is critical of the Eurozone system.

It seems from the recent political events in Europe that the people are getting wind of this abrogation of their democratic rights [to control their own currency] and are voting accordingly. But the choices now as so poor.

In France, the real left candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon was outpolled around 2 to 1 by the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen. But even he thinks that the Eurozone should survive.

The main contenders (Hollande and Sarkozy) are in my view neo-liberals despite some social policy differences. While the headlines are suggesting there has been a swing to the left, I don’t believe that for one moment.

François Hollande might be heading for the Presidency in May but in terms of the economic policies that will ensue don’t expect any significant changes. All the talk about taxing the rich etc – even if more than idle talk to win the left over – will be a minor change.

The real issues – the Euro, the SGP, the fiscal compact which make up France’s membership of the EMU will remain virtually untouched.

Both Sarkozy and Hollande support the EU elites in Brussels and the maintenance of the Euro and the use of the bailout funds. In other words, neither of the main candidates understands what the basis of the problem in Europe is. For Hollande, he needs to understand that it isn’t a matter of taxing the rich more to get the funds to reduce the deficit.

The problem is that the deficit is too small per se, It might be sensible to redistribute the personal income distribution away from the high income earners, although in inequality rankings France is more equal than many nations, but the macroeconomic urgency at present is to escape the austerity mindset and get growth going.

I see that the press are forecasting that Merkozy will become Mellande after the next round of the Frence Presidential elections in May.

The only serious anti-Euro contender, Marine Le Pen got around 20 per cent of the vote in the first-round. She clearly appeals to the areas where unemployment is intrenched (the industrial north) and espouses some sensible economic policies when appraised from the perspective of a sovereign, currency-issuing government.

The problem is that she clearly doesn’t understand the full implications of abandonding the Euro and restoring one’s own currency. So she considers full employment to be one of the main responsibilities of government and that the state should use its fiscal authority to achieve that goal. Further, she wants to make it legal for the government to borrow at zero interest from the central bank (Banque de France).

She is opposed to privatisation of the large French public utilities and favours substantial re-regulation of the banking sector including the separation of commercial and investment banks.

All of those policy positions would be consistent with Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). But then you read that she favours an international currency and fixed exchange rates, which is the anathema of MMT. ...

More worrying, the rest of the right’s agenda is unsupportable in an advanced society. Her social policies – reducing immigration, autocratic schooling policies, and the rest of it – are draconian and unnecessary. They might at present appeal to those oppressed by the neo-liberal austerity onslaught but they are not the basis of a sophisticated society.​
 

Alx

Member
Sarkozy seems infinitely worse than Hollande, in my opinion.Why not punish him instead of voting blank?
Not trying to make you change your mind, just wondering.

Because I don't vote to "punish" people, I vote for the candidate I think would be the better president. And if both are bad, I vote for neither. That's how elections are supposed to work.
 

Kurtofan

Member
Because I don't vote to "punish" people, I vote for the candidate I think would be the better president. And if both are bad, I vote for neither. That's how elections are supposed to work.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.


Breaking news:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/27/dsk-sex-scandal-political-opponents

DSK: "New York sex scandal orchestrated by political opponents"

"Perhaps I was politically naive, but I simply did not believe that they would go that far … I didn't think they could find anything that could stop me," Strauss-Kahn told investigative journalist Edward Jay Epstein.
 
Because I don't vote to "punish" people, I vote for the candidate I think would be the better president. And if both are bad, I vote for neither. That's how elections are supposed to work.

Election mean "choice" and elections are about choosing between actual candidates. You said it yourself: you vote for the better candidate. I.e. not your ideal one.

Do you think the country could function without a President ? Or do you think they are both exactly as bad without any discernable difference that would make you favour one over the other? If you answered yes to either of these questions then ok you can afford not to vote.

The second question was purely rethorical of course. I mean isn't there one issue that you'd prefer to be handled by one of the two candidates ? I disagree with both on a lot of things but there are quite a few instances where I have a clear preference. That's all I need to not discard my say in this election.
 

Kurtofan

Member
Sarkozy denounces "a Stalinist trial, like in the good old times" against him after Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Eva Joly accused him of using the words of Laval and Pétain, leading figures of collaboration during WW2.

He wants François Hollande to apologize for "the remarks of his allies".
 
Sarkozy denounces "a Stalinist trial, like in the good old times" against him after Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Eva Joly accused him using the words of Laval and Pétain, leading figures of collaboration during WW2.

He wants François Hollande to apologize for "the remarks of his allies".

When Sarkozy loses (fingers crossed) I hope he gets a lot of flak for his stupid and useless hunt of extreme right votes. More than a few members of the UMP (and of his own government) are quite itchy already.
 

Alx

Member
Voting blank doesn't mean that I don't want a president at all, it means I don't support either of the candidate, even in a "vote for the less bad one" reasoning. Of course we need a president and we will get one in the end. But I'd rather vote for neither than flip a coin ; and by doing this I'm still voting, by the way.
 
Voting blank doesn't mean that I don't want a president at all, it means I don't support either of the candidate, even in a "vote for the less bad one" reasoning. Of course we need a president and we will get one in the end. But I'd rather vote for neither than flip a coin ; and by doing this I'm still voting, by the way.

I respect your determination, it's your right. But refusing to choose is not voting. It's exactly the opposite, whether you go fishing or put nothing in the envelope.
 

Shahadan

Member
I respect your determination, it's your right. But refusing to choose is not voting. It's exactly the opposite, whether you go fishing or put nothing in the envelope.

Voting blank is still voting. It exists for a reason, even if the purpose is subject to interpretation (even more in this country). But it indicates that you recognize the purpose, usefulness and legitimity of said election, as opposed to abstentionism.
If blank votes were in sufficient numbers it could influence many things in the years that follow.

But in the end in France blank votes are not counted and are assimiled to abstentionism, which is sad. Even if this year some people tried to change that.

On a personal note, I might add that a vote is representing your voice, so if you estimate that neither candidate is suited to rule or don't represent what you want, you should manifest it and vote blank. If you give your voice to someone reluctantly or under the pression, you're tampering with the nature of voting.
 

G.O.O.

Member
Because I don't vote to "punish" people, I vote for the candidate I think would be the better president. And if both are bad, I vote for neither. That's how elections are supposed to work.
There isn't just one way...

I kept saying here that Sarkozy has been a bad president and shouldn't be re-elected for the good of the country. But that's not the main reason that makes me vote against him. Even if I think Hollande is better, none of them will save the country from the crisis and none of them will turn it into a second Greece.

But I just hate Sarkozy. The fictional character he reminds me of isn't Iznogoud, it's Joffrey from Game of Thrones. A child who has been given too much power and not even mature enough to act like a respectable human being, let alone a leader. And I'm not even mentioning his values, aka conservative bullshit that has been proven wrong again and again throughout history but still brought out by self-righteous people with simplistic views like him.

His defeat will kill the UMP and that'll be better for everyone, especially those who had to shut up during the whole FN-blowing thing. I also hope we'll improve our image to foreign countries, and that all those shitty things we had during 5 years - regressing liberties, national identity debate, state xenophobia, triumph of the ego - will take some rest and leave place to more progressive ideas.

So yes, I vote against, but that works by my standards...
 
I respectfully disagree on both counts:

1. Blank votes are counted. Along with null votes from which they are indistinguishable.

2. Voting blank or not voting at all share a common quality which is to dismiss the choice. By definition, an election (electio) means to choose. However one spins it it boils down to this: if you don't put a valid bulletin in the envelope you're forfeiting your right to choose. I think it's a mistake and denotes a lack of sense of responsibility but it's anyone' right. I haven't voted for a candidate I fully supported since the first round of 2002.
 
Why French politicians avoid Tariq Ramadan's 'vote'
By Julien PEYRON / Leela JACINTO the 27/04/2012 - 19:07

Despite repeated denials, French incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy insists that controversial scholar Tariq Ramadan supports his Socialist rival, François Hollande, in the 2012 presidential poll. So why are French candidates keen to avoid Ramadan’s support?

Approaching the final round of France’s presidential vote, and heading into a week that will feature a much-anticipated televised debate between incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy and Socialist challenger François Hollande, it would be fair to assume the rival candidates are desperately seeking every winnable vote.

But over the past few days, French audiences have been treated to the spectacle of the two candidates doing their best to avoid one man’s endorsement.

In a way, it doesn't matter, since the man in question is not even a French citizen and has no right to vote in the May 6 presidential runoff.

But a flurry of controversy nonetheless began when Sarkozy told a French TV station this week that Tariq Ramadan, a controversial Muslim intellectual and Swiss national, supported Hollande.

“This is a man who solicits votes for Hollande,” Sarkozy told the TF1 TV station, before adding, “And I have never heard Hollande say it bothers him".

Not so, replied Hollande. “That is completely false,” said the Socialist frontrunner in an interview with the France Info radio station. “Tariq Ramadan, who does not even vote in France, has never mentioned my name.”

An activist, scholar, author and eloquent public speaker, Ramadan has at times been called a “reformist” and “bridge-builder”, and at others “a dangerous, slippery” radical.

The 49-year-old scholar is no stranger to controversy, and this time, he was not mincing his words.

In a phone interview with FRANCE 24 Thursday, Ramadan denounced Sarkozy’s latest allegation, calling it “a mean and unacceptable lie”.

“The presidential candidate has been caught flagrantly lying,” he said. “I only said that if I was a French citizen...I would take a look at Sarkozy’s track record over the past five years, and I would be very dissatisfied about it. The outgoing president is trying to poach supporters from the National Front. He’s beginning to smell defeat and so he’s pushing it even further.”

Ramadan’s comment came as Sarkozy, who has been lagging in the polls, is desperately trying to woo the 18 percent of the French electorate who voted for the far-right National Front candidate Marine Le Pen in the April 22 first round of the presidential poll.

The French president’s pandering to the far-right vote has also earned him a barb or two from Le Pen herself, who noted in an interview with a French radio station Thursday that, according to Sarkozy, “we were xenophobes, anti-Semites, racists…and now suddenly, there is no more of that."

Sarkozy refuses to back down

Despite the denials by both Hollande and Ramadan, Sarkozy has not backed down on his allegation that the Swiss-born Islamic scholar supports the French Socialist candidate.

“When someone says we must defeat one candidate, it’s the same as supporting the other candidate, no?” quipped Sarkozy in a TV interview Thursday night.

In another interview earlier Thursday, the embattled French president insisted Ramadan had called on French Muslims to vote for Hollande "or a party that serves Islam" at a March 11 public meeting in the southern French city of Lyon.

But in his interview with FRANCE 24, Ramadan categorically denied the allegation.

"I remember that meeting well. I never made any such comment, because I never address the community vote," he said. “When I attack Nicolas Sarkozy, I’m taking on the government, the establishment. As for the Socialist Party, I also regret that it has abandoned its ideals. I hold both the mainstream French political parties responsible for the rise of the National Front.”

Round one of Sarkozy vs. Ramadan

In a campaign dominated by domestic issues, the discourse surrounding a non-French citizen may seem surprising. But Ramadan is a particularly contentious figure in France.

The grandson of Hassan al Banna, the founder of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Ramadan was born in Switzerland after his father fled there following the Brotherhood's ban in 1954.

The Swiss-educated academic, who is also a professor of contemporary Islam at Oxford University, became a well-known figure in US academic circles after the Bush administration refused to grant him a US visa in 2004. Ramadan was forced to resign his faculty appointment at the Chicago-based University of Notre Dame.

Some of Ramadan’s most notorious encounters have been in France, making him a household name as derided in some parts as he is respected in others.

Earlier this month, the Swiss scholar made headlines in France when invited to address an annual convention of Muslim organisations on the outskirts of Paris. French Interior Minister Claude Guéant publicly expressed his disapproval over the invitation, saying he “regretted” the fact that a person with such “ambiguous” views was on the speakers’ list. But the event’s organisers, the Union of Muslim Organisations of France (UOIF), went ahead with Ramadan’s scheduled address regardless.

Ramadan’s run-ins with Sarkozy date back to a nasty exchange on French television in 2003, when the current president was France's interior minister.

Sarkozy accused Ramadan of supporting the stoning of adulterers, and the Islamic scholar replied that he favoured “a moratorium” on such practices, refusing to condemn it outright. Sarkozy, like many French commentators, expressed outrage over Ramadan’s response.

For his part, Ramadan has maintained that he has never supported the stoning of women. “I have always opposed [stoning] by calling for a moratorium to stop this practice. My position is consistent with Amnesty International, which goes through a moratorium to prohibit certain practices, such as the death penalty,” he said.

Over the past five years, Ramadan has criticised of a number of Sarkozy’s policies regarding French Muslims, such as the banning of the burqa, a national identity debate that was widely criticized as being anti-Muslim and a controversy during the current campaign on halal food that was widely perceived as both anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant.

At the UOIF convention earlier this month, Ramadan did not specifically refer to the French president, but his message was clearly directed at him. “Instead of talking about halal meat, the burqa, national identity and dividing France, you should unite it,” he told a packed hall at the conference.

Almost a decade later, as Sarkozy prepares to face an electorate, Ramadan is dismissive about the incumbent candidate. “I have no lessons to learn from Nicolas Sarkozy, who sang the praises of a 'moderate and progressive' Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia, when he visited the country in 2008,” he said.

But he insists his criticism does not constitute support for Hollande, a claim Sarkozy finds difficult to swallow.
http://www.france24.com/en/20120427...void-tariq-ramadan-vote-presidential-election
 

nib95

Banned
When politicians and news outlets resort to dirty and petty attacks or tactics like the above, you know they're not worthy of a vote or one's time. Right wing Fox News esque malarkey should only work on the intellectually challenged.

Who gives a shit who Ramadan supports. It is honestly a worthless topic and a very weak and desperate point of attack.



On a side note, Computer, wasn't it you who kept posting articles and links of the rants of that racist French women during the whole shoot out thread? Articles which in the actual NeoGAF quotes she was using racist terms such as Paki, which you left in and all. It's interesting that you always seem to find these colourful Islamic related news pieces which you drop by with a link and quote (but barely a comment) every now and again. Links from Debbie Schlussel, The Daily Mail etc. All the favourites.
 

CHEEZMO™

Obsidian fan
On a side note, Computer, wasn't it you who kept posting articles and links of the rants of that racist French women during the whole shoot out thread? Articles which in the actual NeoGAF quotes she was using racist terms such as Paki, which you left in and all. It's interesting that you always seem to find these colourful Islamic related news pieces which you drop by with a link and quote (but barely a comment) every now and again. Links from Debbie Schlussel, The Daily Mail etc. All the favourites.

I've noticed this too. Was thinking about it the other day, actually.
 
On a side note, Computer, wasn't it you who kept posting articles and links of the rants of that racist French women during the whole shoot out thread? Articles which in the actual NeoGAF quotes she was using racist terms such as Paki, which you left in and all. It's interesting that you always seem to find these colourful Islamic related news pieces which you drop by with a link and quote (but barely a comment) every now and again. Links from Debbie Schlussel, The Daily Mail etc. All the favourites.
Yes, it was me, and she's not French.
 

Mael

Member
There isn't just one way...

I kept saying here that Sarkozy has been a bad president and shouldn't be re-elected for the good of the country. But that's not the main reason that makes me vote against him. Even if I think Hollande is better, none of them will save the country from the crisis and none of them will turn it into a second Greece.

But I just hate Sarkozy. The fictional character he reminds me of isn't Iznogoud, it's Joffrey from Game of Thrones. A child who has been given too much power and not even mature enough to act like a respectable human being, let alone a leader. And I'm not even mentioning his values, aka conservative bullshit that has been proven wrong again and again throughout history but still brought out by self-righteous people with simplistic views like him.

His defeat will kill the UMP and that'll be better for everyone, especially those who had to shut up during the whole FN-blowing thing. I also hope we'll improve our image to foreign countries, and that all those shitty things we had during 5 years - regressing liberties, national identity debate, state xenophobia, triumph of the ego - will take some rest and leave place to more progressive ideas.

So yes, I vote against, but that works by my standards...
You're absolutely delusional if you think that is actually happening.
The whole DSK affair is a political snitch to kill DSK chances is even worse when you consider that the guy is a known amoral pervert who is now tangled in an even worse affair right now. Look at the timing, in the middle of february he is actually arrested for the Carlton affair where there is more than serious proofs of his dirty doings.
Now guess who would look incredibly stupid for defending and lose the elections if DSK was the front runner?
Whoever is responsible for DSK downfall did a favour to the PS.

And again before blindly voting for whoever is against Sarkozy you should look at the people in question and their propositions.
Hollande is an even worse leader than Sarkozy, he was in charge of PS when Jospin decided to fuck it all up (btw if that didn't kill the PS, Sarkozy going away won't kill the UMP). He was absolutely inept, in his tenurehis party only ever won an election by default (ie people wanted to punish the UMP).
He even managed the whole charade of European constitution where he was unable to make the other people in charge downplay their dissent.
Anyone expecting him to go against Merkel and actually get anything done simply doesn't know who is Flamby and why he's called such.

Same as people got decived by Sarkozy the return to earth with Hollande will be harsh.
And don't expect to get anything but false jobs like 'emploi jeune' either because that's exactly his program.
 

Alx

Member
I haven't voted for a candidate I fully supported since the first round of 2002.

Neither did I (and for much longer). It's not about agreeing with one candidate, but mistrusting both. For different reasons, so I can't say they're "equally bad", but I'm at a point where I can't choose between Charybda and Scylla, because I just don't know what's worse. And at that point I'd rather let the decision lay on people who really have an opinion on that subject than push the decision for wrong or random reasons.

Of course I can only make this decision supposing that none of the candidate could run the country to its demise (or that both have equal chances to do so). Which I'm still not convinced and that's why my decision is not final. But I'm lacking the economical knowledge to have a strong opinion on both programs (since the crisis is the most imminent and dangerous menace). If anything I would have trusted Sarkozy more than Hollande to face the financial crisis, but I'm not really convinced by his lack of focus.

It's not refusing my right to choose, it's admitting my current inability to push the results one way or another in an honest manner.
 

G.O.O.

Member
And again before blindly voting for whoever is against Sarkozy you should look at the people in question and their propositions.
I did, hence the "I think Hollande > Sarkozy"

Hollande is an even worse leader than Sarkozy, he was in charge of PS when Jospin decided to fuck it all up (btw if that didn't kill the PS, Sarkozy going away won't kill the UMP). He was absolutely inept, in his tenurehis party only ever won an election by default (ie people wanted to punish the UMP).
I know this and that's why I didn't vote for him on the primaries. Also, the PS didn't have to face a far-left at 20%. The party got in bad shape but there was no Marine Le Pen to prepare a takeover of the right.

Maybe the party will survive, but there's no comparison. The UMP is younger and some of its sensibilities put together really make a union against nature.

Anyone expecting him to go against Merkel and actually get anything done simply doesn't know who is Flamby and why he's called such.
I don't know how it'll be. As I said, I don't expect it to be really better, but I don't expect it to be much worse aswell.

Welcome back, btw :p
 

Mael

Member
I did, hence the "I think Hollande > Sarkozy"

I tend to view them as fairly equal, Sarkozy just needs to get read of Guéant and that other moron and they'd be fairly similar.
The propositions on both sides are fairly in the realm of fantasy but the program from Hollande has the added value of basically be against business in general which is actually really bad for anyone not in the public sector or really poor.
As such I'll let Robert Bourbon speak for me here :
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/preside...oix-sacrifice-classes-moyennes-plutot-courage

I know this and that's why I didn't vote for him on the primaries. Also, the PS didn't have to face a far-left at 20%. The party got in bad shape but there was no Marine Le Pen to prepare a takeover of the right.

Maybe the party will survive, but there's no comparison. The UMP is younger and some of its sensibilities put together really make a union against nature.

Yeah no, MLP will take over nothing.
Apart from her the party is void of anyone having any chance at anything.
The program is stupid and any time they ever had any power they squandered it by some stupid laws (or is it decrees) and put the city in debt.
They're even more corrupt than the people they denounce, the fact that the father could put her daughter at the head of the party against his more loyal followers should tell people how this whole enterprise is only a familial thing and not in any way a political party.

Bayrou will get nothing since he once again squandered his chances this time around, even worse if he does take over the UMP it'll be the UMP taking him over and not the other way round.
UMP is actually far more diverse than most parties out there but that doesn't mean they feel like everyone going their way is a good idea for them.
If they survive the legislatives they're pretty much good to keep going.

I don't know how it'll be. As I said, I don't expect it to be really better, but I don't expect it to be much worse aswell.

It can actually be much worse.
It's pretty simple really, he just have to do his program.
Which will put the country much more heavily in debt and then put us as the direct target like Spain and Italy were.
Also it's really funny that the PS keep saying how the market hasn't reacted to Hollande's victory.
It quite clearly have, on the morning after the 1rst round Paris was on its lowest level of the year 2012 and it's still digging deeper.
The thing I would expect the PS to say is to actually shut the fuck up instead of propagating falsehoods.
I would also expect the UMP to actually make a campaign based on the economy and all but hey I'm mostly dreaming here.


Welcome back, btw :p

Thanks :)

Neither did I (and for much longer). It's not about agreeing with one candidate, but mistrusting both. For different reasons, so I can't say they're "equally bad", but I'm at a point where I can't choose between Charybda and Scylla, because I just don't know what's worse. And at that point I'd rather let the decision lay on people who really have an opinion on that subject than push the decision for wrong or random reasons.

Of course I can only make this decision supposing that none of the candidate could run the country to its demise (or that both have equal chances to do so). Which I'm still not convinced and that's why my decision is not final. But I'm lacking the economical knowledge to have a strong opinion on both programs (since the crisis is the most imminent and dangerous menace). If anything I would have trusted Sarkozy more than Hollande to face the financial crisis, but I'm not really convinced by his lack of focus.

It's not refusing my right to choose, it's admitting my current inability to push the results one way or another in an honest manner.

Actually it's fairly easy to get an opinion here, we all saw what Sarkozy did and there's no reason to expect him to do better or worse than he's already doing whatever his program may be (and since he's running for a second and final term he really would give that much less of a shit about his promises).
Now the question is whether or not Hollande would do better or not.
Unless Hollande can come up with something (or it really depends on the content of the debate next week), he can only do worse since he's only using the same recipes that were used before and that's what got us in this mess to begin with.
(Make no mistake the country didn't make a budget with anything but deficit since 1973, with a big explosion in 1981 btw, the market wouldn't be a problem if the state wasn't so in debt. Hey people have no problem with their banks when they don't have any debt).
 

G.O.O.

Member
I tend to view them as fairly equal, Sarkozy just needs to get read of Guéant and that other moron and they'd be fairly similar.
You sound really optimistic when you say "just".

The sacrifices have always been paid by the centrists. Not by the right of the right. That makes a huge difference.

The propositions on both sides are fairly in the realm of fantasy but the program from Hollande has the added value of basically be against business in general which is actually really bad for anyone not in the public sector or really poor.
As such I'll let Robert Bourbon speak for me here :
http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/preside...oix-sacrifice-classes-moyennes-plutot-courage
Don't agree with him. I'm on the growth side, and I really don't see how his program is against business.

Also, the guy seems to forget that the French do love having a strong state. Not just about public service, but also about acting, reforming, taking a lot of decisions even if we don't need them - which costs money. So if we can't cut the spendings, we'd better rise the amount of money we can spend. Which won't happen aswell, I know.

People are too obsessed with balancing accounts. A state isn't a family, it can permanently borrow a year to pay the interests of the former.

Yeah no, MLP will take over nothing.
I'm not saying she will, but rather that she wants to and will do everything she can to blow up the UMP.

UMP is actually far more diverse than most parties out there but that doesn't mean they feel like everyone going their way is a good idea for them.
If they survive the legislatives they're pretty much good to keep going.
We'll see about that.

It can actually be much worse.
It's pretty simple really, he just have to do his program.
Which will put the country much more heavily in debt and then put us as the direct target like Spain and Italy were.
Also it's really funny that the PS keep saying how the market hasn't reacted to Hollande's victory.
It quite clearly have, on the morning after the 1rst round Paris was on its lowest level of the year 2012 and it's still digging deeper.
The thing I would expect the PS to say is to actually shut the fuck up instead of propagating falsehoods.
I would also expect the UMP to actually make a campaign based on the economy and all but hey I'm mostly dreaming here.
The market's reaction is normal. They don't like change. Otherwise, they're pretty much prepared. It's not like a victory from Hollande wasn't anticipated weeks ago.

http://www.liberation.fr/politiques...ront-ils-la-france-si-hollande-est-elu_812008

Si vraiment la victoire de Hollande devait provoquer des soubresauts financiers, on devrait dès maintenant assister à une hausse des taux payés par la France, et du prix des credit-default swaps sur la dette française. Mais depuis janvier 2012, on n'observe rien de tel (voir les taux sur la dette publique et le cours des CDS). Les marchés semblent considérer aujourd'hui que la victoire prévisible de Hollande ne changera pas grand-chose. L'histoire semble leur donner raison: depuis 1871, comme l'a constaté l'historien de la finance David Le Bris, la Bourse française a connu de meilleures performances sous des gouvernements de gauche que des gouvernements de droite.
Also, you haven't heard everyone at the UMP screaming that Hollande will bring the country to his knees, that his presidency could have the consequences of a war and that we'll become like Greece ?

Also, this : http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/21/a-note-on-the-french-election/

**********************

Edit : Merkel seems to have accepted growth aswell : http://www.lepoint.fr/economie/merk...et-europeen-de-juin-28-04-2012-1456168_28.php
 

Mael

Member
You sound really optimistic when you say "just".

The sacrifices have always been paid by the centrists. Not by the right of the right. That makes a huge difference.

I'd have to followed the whole circus if I wasn't an optimist ;).
Also the whole thing is a farce, like when Guéant was talking about civilisations and stuffs.
He didn't say it because he believed in it, he said to show how close minded the left was and it actually worked too.
The whole point never was to single out Islam or what not, but to show that the left would prefer to protect foreigners than local people.
That's why they lost in 2002 too and why you see the extreme right rise, because the downtrodden feel like the left will never do anything for them (and I can't really blame them for that).

Don't agree with him. I'm on the growth side, and I really don't see how his program is against business.

He wants to do away with the status of 'auto entrepreneur' which was one of the only things in a sea of bad idea that Sarkozy did apply. He's also viewing the whole numeric side of the economy as culture and not business (which is why you'll never see a company like IBM, MSFT, SAP or Oracle from France).
Heck the guy actually offered 3000 iPad to Correze students without any regard to the fact that a French company like Archos provides similar products and could do with a little help.
In short he offered Apple the biggest command of the country just to sound cool.

Also, the guy seems to forget that the French do love having a strong state. Not just about public service, but also about acting, reforming, taking a lot of decisions even if we don't need them - which costs money. So if we can't cut the spendings, we'd better rise the amount of money we can spend. Which won't happen aswell, I know.

The reforms won't ever happen during a left governed country, that became apparent when Jospin was there.
A strong is not a bad idea, an inefficient strong state however... And actually on this point Sarkozy is on the right idea despite the execution being so shitty.

People are too obsessed with balancing accounts. A state isn't a family, it can permanently borrow a year to pay the interests of the former.

Yeah it can borrow if there's confidence that it will reimburse.
Ask Greece if they can permanently borrow like no tomorrow.
I'm not saying we're going there but that the reasoning is unsound.

I'm not saying she will, but rather that she wants to and will do everything she can to blow up the UMP.

Well her father wanted and did everything he could to become president, that didn't happen either.

We'll see about that.

We'll know, the writing is on the walls.
The whole thing depends on the legislative, I'm not sure what will happen but it's likely that nothing happens.
I can be wrong too, I know I was before.

The market's reaction is normal. They don't like change. Otherwise, they're pretty much prepared. It's not like a victory from Hollande wasn't anticipated weeks ago.

Actually that's wrong, when the majority change from right to left, the market rises, there's an article on latribune but I can't find it right now...

Also apparently Sarkozy wasn't as bad for the country as many claims
http://www.latribune.fr/actualites/...fait-mieuxni-pire-que-ses-predecesseurs..html


It's already happening

Also, you haven't heard everyone at the UMP screaming that Hollande will bring the country to his knees, that his presidency could have the consequences of a war and that we'll become like Greece ?

It's basically the reverse of the left being up in arms and saying how the right destroyed the country and could lead everyone to poverty.
I don't care when the right say it, I don't when the left say it either...as long as it's not the only thing they're saying.
I'm looking at Eva Joly right now.

I don’t know much about French politics. From here, however, it looks as if Sarkozy has a very clear idea of what he should be doing on economic policy, while Hollande doesn’t.

Well that's a reason right here to dismiss this text.


As well as the president of the BCE, however both are in accordance and disagree totally with Hollande on what growth they're talking about.
I'm pretty sure Hollande is not for a further deregulation of the economy.
Although it will work out in the end, I mean it's not like we have any choice any way.
 
A huit jours du second tour de l'élection présidentielle, le ton monte encore d'un cran entre les deux candidats. François Hollande juge «déplorable» l'attitude du président-candidat Nicolas Sarkozy dans un entretien publié samedi dans Le Parisien.

«Avant le premier tour, déjà, il y avait eu des polémiques, des attaques, du dénigrement», déclare le candidat socialiste. «Mais le résultat de dimanche dernier ajoute encore à l'affolement. Quel festival, quel bouquet ! Je serais ainsi le candidat des mosquées: Tariq Ramadan appellerait à voter pour moi; Takieddine serait un ami; j'aurais tout connu des comportements de Dominique Strauss-Kahn; je voudrais régulariser tous les sans-papiers», énumère-t-il.

«Heureusement que Ben Laden est mort ! Peut-être aurait-il aussi donné des consignes ?», ironise François Hollande.
http://www.20minutes.fr/politique/9...e-denonce-attitude-deplorable-nicolas-sarkozy

The good old François Hollande is back with his humor :lol

Interrogé sur le point de savoir si Nicolas Sarkozy «a franchi la ligne rouge», son adversaire répond: «Jamais un tel niveau n'avait été atteint. Quand j'entends ce député (UMP ndrl), Lionel Luca, comparer ma compagne a un chien...Moi-même, j'ai été comparé à une anguille. Décidément la zoologie fait partie du camp d'en face. C'est déplorable.»
Do you think he knows about the other nickname? :lol
 

Ripclawe

Banned
So what's so awesome about Sarkozy that France won't crash with him?

Also you have to be fucking cynical to find a country crashing "amusing".

No just realistic, Sarkozy screwed up his time in office by not getting reforms in place to help the French economy. No question about that and thats why he is going to lose and I am a Sarkozy "fan"

But putting a socialist like Hollande is just asking for more trouble because scaring away businesses and making it impossible to bring reforms to a state that needs it in terms of hiring practices, encouraging pro business growth policies is just asking for it.

People are looking for a lifestyle that was never sustainable in the first place to keep going and making even more entrenched which will lead to France joining the P.I.G.S economic wise.

But hey, everyone gets a higher min wage and you get to tax everyone higher. Good luck
 

Mael

Member
So what's so awesome about Sarkozy that France won't crash with him?

Also you have to be fucking cynical to find a country crashing "amusing".

Actually no, it just takes a special kind of humour

Flamby said:
j'aurais tout connu des comportements de Dominique Strauss-Kahn
He's funny, he claims to ignore something everyone knew about!
Next he'll tell us he didn't know anything about Mazarine Pingeot.
The next 5 years will be very funny with this guy, nothing will ever be his fault.
 
No just realistic, Sarkozy screwed up his time in office by not getting reforms in place to help the French economy. No question about that and thats why he is going to lose and I am a Sarkozy "fan"

But putting a socialist like Hollande is just asking for more trouble because scaring away businesses and making it impossible to bring reforms to a state that needs it in terms of hiring practices, encouraging pro business growth policies is just asking for it.

People are looking for a lifestyle that was never sustainable in the first place to keep going and making even more entrenched which will lead to France joining the P.I.G.S economic wise.

But hey, everyone gets a higher min wage and you get to tax everyone higher. Good luck

Just stop. You don't have the slightest clue about which you speak. This is all complete nonsense.
 

Mael

Member
Just stop. You don't have the slightest clue about which you speak. This is all complete nonsense.

Good luck proving that
because scaring away businesses and making it impossible to bring reforms to a state that needs it in terms of hiring practices

wrong.

Seriously you'll need all the help you can for that because really that's what will happen with Hollande, you can say goodbye to any reform.
The guy made a proposition of fiscal reform, it was badly accepted and instead of discussing it further he backed down.
He'll get nothing done.
Heck he seems to know François Hollande better than you do that's for sure.
For reminder it's the joker who claim to hate rich people while hiding his fortune from the IRS equivalent by buying art pieces (they're exempt from tax collection).

Hey look a quick search for anyone who think he's really a poor guy that will do anything to fight the rich bastards that get tax cuts everywhere
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom