-
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 Elect 2017 - La France est toujours insoumise; Le Pen loses
- Thread starter Holden
- Start date
- Status
And you'll excuse me if that doesn't strike me as "left wing"
http://www.huffingtonpost.fr/2017/0...-un-cauchemar-depuis-que-son-salaire-a-ete-r/
http://www.liberation.fr/societe/2013/05/13/gerard-collomb-douze-ans-de-maniere-forte_902657
https://www.marianne.net/debattons/tribunes/lyon-l-humanisme-prend-l-eau-avec-gerard-collomb
As for what constitutes left and right politics, that's for each of us to judge, but rest assured I wasn't brainwashed by "far left propaganda".
Philippe's cabinet isn't "beyond left and right", it's right wing, period. (That's my take, at least.)
He's been quite independant from the PS (as the party) for a few years now and his local policies weren't the typical leftist municipalism to say the least - even in a conservative region.
You can read that a little news roundup of what he did locally especially on matters that he will have to face at the Ministry of Interior
it's from an antifascist website don't be surprised
"Le centre n'est ni de gauche ni de gauche" as a great man once said, and Macron just gave another proof of that axiom
We had a Vert senator complain about how his child couldn't get a logement social.
Colomb's ire to being punished for going to the Senate doesn't seem particularly right wing here. Every politician likes money, the ones who don't are just lying.
I even had an argument on twitter with a PS deputés who disagreed with Annecy's deputés that deputés income should be taxed for some reason. I don't doubt that this guy was a leftist either.
Being from the Left doesn't mean that they're not corrupt or that they somehow hate money or something. It doesn't even mean that they're humanists in a way. Fucking PC defended Staline and other dictatorship forever before quietly recognizing that maybe not everything from the Left is worth defending.
EP's government is firmly in the center with people from the left and the right and outside politics too.
Heck the Left ain't about defending the little guy either or you can make that stupid argument that LePen is from the Left or some shit.
DiipuSurotu
Banned
You didn't give your source but I found it on the twitter account of En Marche. So it's PR (I don't know if it's them that wrote it, but the fact that they share it turns it into PR)
I find it very naive and simple-minded.
Running a minister and the administration behind is not like running a corporation : you don't represent them and their interests but the greater good and a political force with a platform approved by elected people or their representatives. Therefore it's a political task, it isn't ideologically neutral and these people aren't ready for the task because they have some form of field experience there. You have to check what they did, what they believe in, what did they fight for, who did they work with, where are they on the ideological spectrum of their corporations, what do they really know of the issues of their areas of authority (what do you know about hospistals if you've been working the past 30 years in a little town as a doctor?) etc.
For instance from what I've quickly read
Blanquer isn't a teacher anymore, he has been a senior civil servant and he runs a big business school now, not your usual teacher
The Health minister has been in health-related institutions the past few years, not your regular doctor too
The Labour minister worked for the CAC40 mainly, not really a neutral position
Also where is farmer for the Agriculture? The diplomat for Foreign Affairs ? The soldier for Defense ? The magistrate for Justice ? A policeman at Interior? etc. Not very coherent as a whole because "old politics" is still here : the politicians named don't have all the expertise or the field experience (because yes you need one of those, or both, but that doesn't always mean it is "smart" - you also need someone that is up to the task)
And I didn't know that "libéral" was a job lol?
all right, I'll say it
I really don't care whether the government should be labeled left, right, both, upside down or whatever and I think the whole discussion is completely irrelevant
most of my friends are leftists and still seem hell bent on unmasking Macron as a right-wing man like it was an argument for people other than them and their close relatives
I really don't care whether the government should be labeled left, right, both, upside down or whatever and I think the whole discussion is completely irrelevant
most of my friends are leftists and still seem hell bent on unmasking Macron as a right-wing man like it was an argument for people other than them and their close relatives
The left and the right are useful concepts. Which, like all concepts, can be abused and are subjected to subjective perspectives. But like all concepts they are useful shortcuts that summarize big, important ideas Strong welfare vs Weak welfare, More tax cuts vs Less tax cuts for the rich/companies/poor people/etc. The left and the right symbolise a healthy clash of ideas. It would be absurd and dare I say dangerous to discard them completely. Philosophers and political scientists far more articulate than me have explained why. Once you erase the "left" and the "right" you've only got unbridled capitalism in one corner and the FN-like nationalists in the other. You've got more tension, and less political reflexion ; the rule of emotion over thought.
The labels are irrelevant but the ideas they symbolize are not. Whether Macron is right-leaning or left-leaning matters in the real world. It's ok to agree or to disagree with his stance but it's dangerous to assume he's the incarnation of consensus.
The Left in France is barely better than the Left in the US, they'll demonize anything that is not "true" left without a care in the world like it means anything.
Being a leftist means jack shit these days anyway.
Same for the Right btw, they're equally bad at that but at least they know and recognize when there's an opportunity.
If people wanted the Left to rule they would have elected someone who claimed to be from the Left you would think.
They mean nothing in this political climate.
The dichotomy between globalist/europeist and nationalist is actually closer to the way politics currently function.
Most of the decisions taken in France stem or have an impact on its place in the EU and the world rather than just workers/renters or something.
There was never any political discussion worth having in the last 20 years anyway, just downright BS rammed down our throats while racism and sexism continued spreading.
That doesn't mean "nothing" when the PS gets obliterated and Mélenchon gets the majority of the left elecorate. It means lines are shifting, and though the globalist/nationalist dichotomy is gaining ground (as I pointed out myself), I don't think we can reduce the political scene to these two poles (though you clearly wish to).
It effectively means nothing when the one candidate going for a more open France to the EU and the world is the one winning in the end.
No one actually gives a shit about that Left/Right thing, most people aren't low wages workers like the Left purport to defend anyway.
At least with the globalist/nationalist one the lines are clear instead of this shitty discussion with terms from another century.
Jaurès is dead and no one is going to bring him and his outdated ideas back.
I feel the same way. If he can knock the lunatics in LR into the political wilderness by gobbling up their more reasonable voters (those who aren't permanently butt hurt over mariage pour tous and won't flirt with the FN) with this political maneauvering then so much the better.
Adam Smith is dead too bro. Just saying. Anyway - I'm sorry but I'm not going to lay over and let the "free market, fuck you got mine" vs "neo-nazis in disguise" fight take center stage when I actually believe both are detrimental to my country's general health (though one is clearly worse).
The fact that you appear to think Macron's and Le Pen's inspirations and ideas are actually fresher than the left's and oh-so-original is kind of hilarious.
If you really think globalist are "fuck you got mine" you haven't been paying attention.
Adam Smith is fucking dead and aside from looney tunes GOP no one is really trying to bring him back.
The Left stopped glorifying Lenin and Marx for a reason, it's time they do the same with Jaurès.
No one cares about that and now the only thing I see the Left doing is defending privileges like we're on the eve of the 4th of August while hiding behind fucking Front Populaire or the Resistance.
They spend so much time trying to defend some class system that is so outdated Nintendo couldn't even use the parts to make a new console that they don't even see or care about the people actually hurting because of their fucking selling out to various interest groups.
I'm all for defending unions and help public services but not at the expense of the middle class who pay their tax either and literally see nothing in return.
The Left is so goddamn happy with great ideas but they certainly won't try to shut down anyone who will exploit it because that wouldn't be fair somehow.
I'm not even saying that people should be fireable more easily or something, I'm saying that this global world couldn't give less of a shit about worker rights if they can get what they want for cheaper and you won't protect workers like it's 1890 with big strikes and shit.
I'm not saying they're more fresh, I'm saying that they're relevant.
And as history have shown both Left and Right are really as sexist and racist in their own way as the other. At least the Right is upfront about it.
The Left can go fuck itself with the Right when they try to pass off their useless ideas as anything in any way relevant or useful.
The whole "globalist v. nationalist" split is very limited too. You can't understand the complexity of how everything is moving within the political spectrum with simplistic conceptions (often biased by a clumsy opinion)
Every researcher I've read on the topic this past few weeks is always very cautious, trying to put things into (historical) perspective with an approach from several social sciences (the sociology of the electorates isn't always at the same stage as the history of political ideas) - and not a single one says that the "left v. right" split is irrelevant even now but that it needs to be added with other kind of divides.
Every researcher I've read on the topic this past few weeks is always very cautious, trying to put things into (historical) perspective with an approach from several social sciences (the sociology of the electorates isn't always at the same stage as the history of political ideas) - and not a single one says that the "left v. right" split is irrelevant even now but that it needs to be added with other kind of divides.
I think they are really abused nowadays. Plus they lack something I think is essential, which is distance from the national scene. Advocating for a smaller government in France isn't the same as in Germany, and it's still possible to want that but also consider our welfare system to be quite good (with room for improvement).
I also hate how hard it is to advocate for policies that one would consider to be right-wing without being labeled as someone who just has different priorities, a.k.a money before people or stuff like that. Our labour market is too rigid and that keeps some people from being employed ? Nah, you're just on the MEDEF's side and don't care about workers.
On another note, Jean Quatremer wrote a portrait of Sylvie Goulard => http://www.liberation.fr/elections-...-de-l-europe-prend-la-tete-des-armees_1570156
If Macron makes good on his pledges regarding job training, his reforms get unemployment down and la moralisation de la vie publique doesn't get watered down and some trust is restored in politicians as a result then the average person isn't going to care about these pointless Facebook arguments about where he is on the political spectrum. What matters is results.
I mean everyone knows that he's a globalist capitalist right wing stooge if you're insoumis. If you're on the right then please ignore that last sentence, he's actually Hollande 2.0 and the inheritor of the PS.
I mean everyone knows that he's a globalist capitalist right wing stooge if you're insoumis. If you're on the right then please ignore that last sentence, he's actually Hollande 2.0 and the inheritor of the PS.
Let me be clearer :
the way the left/right divide works in France is blatantly pointless.
When you have an election where the Mayor on the Left runs against his employee who is on the Right you know these fucking labels are useless.
And that without talking about stuffs like the blatant racist use of the DOM-TOM by the French political class since the end of slavery (really I mean during that whole timeframe, it's pretty fucked up).
I doubt the right wants to lower taxes these days and the left is certainly happy ignoring the weakest of us so yeah... Politicians and people, in general, stopped caring so maybe we should too.
Politicians still care
Macron and Le Pen pushed all they could to put the "globalist v. nationalist" split at the center of the agenda anticipating the second round, and denying the left v right split
Mélenchon pushed a strategy similar to what Podemos did : saying he's a man from the left but trying to put another divide that doesn't say "I'm the real left" but rather "I represent the interests of the people especially the poorest and I want to build an alternative to neoliberalism" (see what Pablo Iglesias summarized in this video 1 and video 2)
Fillon and Hamon won the primaries with two typical leftist and rightist programs, identifying themselves as left and right, not center-left or center-right
As an leftist activist I believe that the best strategy is to do what Podemos or FI did. It worked in an unexpected way with Mélenchon and that's the future because there is a future for an alternative to neoliberalism (ou le petit réformisme-gestionnaire si tu préfères)
But as someone who studies social sciences I still believe you need to think with divides and you can identify them precisely with the right tools
Nah they don't care.
They will tell you that they do but they really absolutely don't.
It's a career to them, there's actually more differences between 2 politicians who are from the same party and did different schools than there is between 2 politicians who did the same school in opposing parties.
Mélenchon's strategy still only is a strategy for himself 1st and foremost.
Unlike Podemos, Mélenchon actually ran for presidency BEFORE the movement behind him coalesced. Like most things in France, it's a top down movement rather than the ground up one where the candidate would have been chosen AFTER the movement actually got steam.
As for the laughable claim that he's in for defending the poorest and all that crap, his program on DOM-TOM should be enough to lay that claim to rest as they're actually the poorest and weakest part of the population and the best thing he had for them was "let's remove the special status they have".
Néoliberalism or the Right isn't responsible for the situation of the weakest of the population even in France (they ARE a part of the problem certainly).
For all the talk about how the people cannot allow mass unemployment and how that fuel the extremes or whatever, the metropole would be burned to the ground if it suffered like some other more forgotten part of the Republic.
I agree with you on 1 thing, Podémos strategy is the winning one if you want to make that kind of party. It's also highly different from the one of the FI on some key aspects.
A big one would be to be independent from the big figures trying to steer the ship, I doubt the movement could survive longer than Front De Gauche if Mélenchon decides that the little experiment isn't to his liking for example.
false edit : In writting this post I actually read what Mélenchon said in 2011 about the situation in Guadeloupe when they were rioting there.
Same old talk by someone who have no interest in understanding the situation as it is or the actual root of the problems.
Let's continue acting like the ill gained possessions and monopolies of a minority is not at all a problem in how the island cannot possibly develop.
Let's have them trade with the continent next door hopefully the people who already profit the most from the old system won't divert most of the profit this time!
If you want to read Mélenchon being off topic on the subject of DOM TOM from 2011
I can't really answer to your first paragraph. It's just your personal psychological evaluation of French politicians.
What you say about Podemos v. FI is not really relevant because my point was about the strategy and the new ideological standpoint they share (which is new and different from Mélenchon did in 2012 or Hamon in 2016 or Corbyn is actually doing). Given our electoral system and even the way our society works*, it wouldn't have been possible to have the copycat of Podemos in France, that's obvious.
But I would highlight the fact that Nuit Debat came less than two months after Mélenchon launched the FI and announced he'd run for President. The link between the two in how the alternative left was reshaped would be very interesting to study and I believe it's a key to the success that Mélenchon (or his movement) got once year after that.
*the "failure" of Nuit Debout to gather a greater social basis and have a grève générale showed that it couldn't have started like that
They did release a 10-pages document on the Outre-mer. And here are the main proposals.
Doesn't seem that light to me, but I'm not an expert on the topic and I don't want to have another endless debate about Mélenchon's platform : that wasn't my point.
Great news, for non French speaking gaffers:
That TF1 documentary mentioned earlier (Les coulisses d'une victoire) has been picked up by Netflix in several regions (including, but not limited to; the Nordics, Germany, Spain, Japan, and of course Russia). They call it Emmanuel Macron: Behind the Rise and it is available right now!
That TF1 documentary mentioned earlier (Les coulisses d'une victoire) has been picked up by Netflix in several regions (including, but not limited to; the Nordics, Germany, Spain, Japan, and of course Russia). They call it Emmanuel Macron: Behind the Rise and it is available right now!
It's common knowledge and explains quite clearly the dynamic between the parties.
Then in France such movements will remain harmstrung to the figureheads.
Unless you have someone like De Gaulle (as far as unifying goes I mean) that strategy is basically going to a brick wall.
"Le grand soir" or general strike is not a good political strategy, especially in this current France.
You don't have a job in one of the blocking companies that could really fuck things up? Who gives a shit then.
You do? Well turns out most companies have ways to go around that and alleviate any nuisance. Also general strike is not popular at all.
If the whole point isn't to rule it's pointless.
the main difference between ND and FI is roughly that one had a clear project while the other did not. It's harder to bring people together over vague goals, see Occupy movement.
Same BS the left always peddle to the islands, no racial dimension taken into account. This would have failed like all the other times someone tried to do something about it for the same reason it always fails.
US too?
It really isn't. It's isn't valid in a serious reasoning and moreover you missed what I was trying to discuss here (how every candidate tried to shape a split between him/her and other candidates on an old or new divide, or several ones)
I didn't get your point (or you maybe didn't get mine because that doesn't seem to answer my point, it was the same for the quote above)
The only vague thing I see here is your vague idea of how the left sees itself. It really seems outdated and cliché, you should really read more on that. You're not doing yourself a favor by staying in the dark on these topics
Alx
Member
I wonder if the "documentary" will make sense for people who didn't follow the elections closely. Since there's no commentary, there's no way of knowing the context of the Fillon scandal, Whirlpool situation, even the second round debate.
Not as far as I can tell, nor the UK. The docu has English subtitles available though, so if you have a VPN you can watch it.
I think it probably will make sense, just by the reactions/way they discuss things you get a sense of the context. Like you may not get the intricacies of the whole Whirlpool thing but you get a sense of what's going on.
(also how likely is someone to watch this documentary if they didn't follow the election with a modicum of interest?)
It really is common knowledge, just listen to them, see their career and hear them talk about each other. On top of that the system of Grandes écoles as it is in France foster that kind of behavior, once out of ENA the party they choose is more a career choice than one of conviction.
Looking at the data we have, people didn't really vote for Mélenchon because they thought he was that new or something. From the data we have, LePen and Macron were more representative of change for the French voting population (and Lepen has a really old fucking way of doing politics, like XIXth century or something).
I doubt that the rethoric of anti system candidate is that interesting either for the French population (always stupid to claim you're against the system when you spend your whole time on tv anyway).
It's not because you hastily make an economic plan that you intend to rule, Lepen proved that not even 2 weeks ago and 5 years ago.
FI is still nothing but protest voting. The fact that the 1st thing they did after losing was go into the street to protest is telling.
If I was talking about literally anything else but the political left in France my clichés would be outdated. Alas they haven't changed at all.
I'll update my clichés when they update their rethoric(you'll note the total disregard for any slaves and dripping disdain for the condition).
Too bad, I'll find another way, I can't be arsed to use a vpn for netflix.
Macron and his team seem to have quite an issue with the press, several medias just made a public statement revealing the presidency wants to chose which journalists can cover which trips Macron does.
"L'Elysée entend choisir quel journaliste de chaque rédaction suivra le chef de l'Etat lors de ses déplacements." (Marianne article)
More context in a Le Monde article with this striking example
What are they playing with?
"L'Elysée entend choisir quel journaliste de chaque rédaction suivra le chef de l'Etat lors de ses déplacements." (Marianne article)
More context in a Le Monde article with this striking example
The same happens with the FN : limited access/access blocked + pressure/insults towards the journalists afterwards
What are they playing with?
That didn't take long, they're starting to fuck it up.
I don't think we have any advance warning that shows they would have acted like this, no?
e: actually lemonde article shows that there was but the media badly communicated on this.
It's not that different to how FrontDeGauche worked their communication circa 2011.
I don't think it's really that important that there is an open line of communication with l'Elysée if Matignon does its job properly.
I don't think we have any advance warning that shows they would have acted like this, no?
e: actually lemonde article shows that there was but the media badly communicated on this.
It's not that different to how FrontDeGauche worked their communication circa 2011.
I don't think it's really that important that there is an open line of communication with l'Elysée if Matignon does its job properly.
The "Le Monde" article explains that they did that during the campaign at a smaller smale and that it got worst afterwards (for example at the Louvre every press photographer was 100m behind). They are control freaks who want to replicate what Obama did (great control on the image and expression of the president, opacity) and don't want to replicate what Hollande did (lots of contact between the president and the journalists, transparency) ; but they're kind of inexperienced and don't seem to have the best representation of journalists. That's quite invisible to us because they usually don't talk about the PR of the candidate unless there's some big issue (e.g. the FN banning some journalists from public events).
In the documentary there is a sequence where they are shouting over journalists for a bad title and insulting at least of of them after calling him. Same happened to Quotidien apparently - and I'm wondering why they didn't talk about it in their show because that's really the same methods that the Front National applies with them or with Mediapart.
That also happened with Mélenchon's Front de Gauche and they covered it extensively too.
Usually Quotidien(or Petit Journal at the time) is pretty good at analyzing the com behind the politics and that's also why it was so interesting.
We did get that small moment with Quotidien being black balled by Macron but they didn't really use it.
For LePen (or Mélenchon when he was like that), every time the party was making any kind of com, they were there showing how it worked and testing the limits of what they could do.
On 1 hand, a lil bit more professionalism from Elysée is reeeeeeeeeeally needed because the last 5 years were a fucking catastrophy on that point.
OTOH we don't want a Mittérend presidency where the press was sitting on scandals to please the president.
They're clearly inexperienced or they wouldn't have even tried to pull that shit with Quotidien and they certainly would have avoided having Macron reply directly to Larautourau in the way he did.
They're clearly going too far but hopefully they walk that back.
And again depending on what type of president Macron wants to be, we may not need to have the press follow him either.
You really have an obsession with him, even when we're not talking about him directly or indirectly you're using him as an example in your first sentence lol
To me it just illustrates the fact that Macron has an authoritarian vision of the presidency and he showed it at multiple times (ordonnances, "jupitérienne", "maître des horloge" etc). Sometime he's just full of himself. His PR team is just translating that with too much zeal (that must have been approved by Macron over time anyway).
We'll miss Hollande on that, he didn't hide behind some myth of a sacralized President that is some kind of republican king with lots of verticality symbols, touched by grace and our deepest history. It's fairy tales and the worst use of the 5th Republic's institutions (which he totally agrees with in their presidential-centered way).
And no I'm not saying that he is a dictator
edit : I'll answer here so the thread isn't polluted by this guy's obsession with Mélenchon and me trying to stick to facts
Mélenchon didn't do it with Quotidien this year, quite the opposite in fact they had privilege access sometimes, or maybe I missed when they were kicked out and/or insulted?
And they sure don't it with Mediapart or other medias.
.
The only "big" issue with a journalist that Mélenchon had was with "C à vous" back in March, insulting him live and asking his bodyguards to throw him a few meters back after the journalist asked him the same question about Hamon several times (Mélenchon didn't want to answer it).
dunno if that was the case when you posted it but the marianne paper got updated with reaction from the presidency.
"We don't pick the journalists but we'd like to have specialists for each domain rather than just political journalists"
... meh
It's only fair, Quotidien/LPJ had a problem with 2 politicians during their run, it's actually surprising you would namedrop LePen but not the other one.
Almost like you are trying to conflate the 2...
He seems to have a view (because I'm not him so I won't talk for him) that the presidency is on another level compared to the rest of the political life of the country.
Can't say I agree there, the way the Vth was made the president is not supposed to be a regular position.
The presidency could be done in a flat in a more accessible part of Paris but nope it's basically a mansion in the richest part of the country.
He understands the power of communication and I can't say he's wrong about that when it seems to work well for him.
I won't, Hollande's communication was a mess.
His whole presidency was a mess anyway (less so than the one before but still a mess).
He didn't control any message so he was most of the time a liability for the govt to try to correct. The president in the Vth is supposed to be that kind of King people elect, again it was made for DeGaulle after all. Worse yet Jospin/Chirac made that much more prominent with correlating the 2 most important elections.
I'll be the broken record here: it was a huge mistake.
It might be up on Netflix US now? Haven't been able to confirm it, but it shows up as being available in both US & UK as well now.
(if it doesn't show amongst new releases, try a search for Macron)
I'll check tonight, it appeared on the subjection last time but as in subjesting a specific search, the movie couldn't be found.
Meanwhile :
Macron : you mean the chaos emerald?
If you go to le Cercle des echos, you will find some fanfics but political in nature. This is more...lewd.
News : Meet the guy I'm probably not going to vote for.
Lil bro of Pierre Lescure and former boss of a hedge fund.
Good God! Macron chose a sexist for the ministry dedicated to basically feminism.
Lil bro of Pierre Lescure and former boss of a hedge fund.
Good God! Macron chose a sexist for the ministry dedicated to basically feminism.
Alx
Member
You mean Marlène Schiappa ? Or is it about Lescure too, but I didn't find anything about him being a sexist in your linked article.
I didn't have a link about Schiappa on hand but dear god she's basically the most sexist part of the govt. Or at least she has written the most sexist text from everyone in the govt right now.
Yep that includes the homophobic guy too.
Lescure is the guy running for my circo. Can't say I'm that fond of that guy, clearly better than Lefevbre however.
Bayrou is going on trial for defamation in 2019, nothing really bad (unless you're part of the association badmouthed by Bayrou that is)
Alx
Member
Eh, I'm not sure it's worth the outrage. I think her history with her blog and association speaks more than a silly comic book. Also I'd rather read it myself than trust the interpretation of someone on Twitter.
It's pretty much a consensus that it's a very shitty book for plenty of reasons.
I don't really see how that meshes well with her blog.
Also in politics you're as only as good as your worst aspect.
I don't think there's any good context that could explain reducing overweight women to blowjob machine (exaggeration for emphasis).
In my area the 2nd round will probably end up as a shitshow between Poisson and Bergé
Can't wait
Also damn for most circonscription there will be both a FI and a PC candidates, how the hell they couldn't get an agreement is beyond stupid.
From what I followed PC feels like FI is only in it for Mélenchon regardless of the results, if that set the Left back for years who cares. Basically "Après moi le déluge"
And FI thinks that PC is a bunch of image stealing contrarian who are only after Mélenchon because he's more popular than them.
I don't like any of them so I'm happy they're fighting themselves.
Kinda like with FN tearing itself apart, I'll watch it because I like trainwreck.
From my circonspriction : David Lawson sent us an email with links to his info
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQHx59UvVGY
http://www.davidlawson2017.fr/category/discours/
http://www.davidlawson2017.fr/
He's more likely to get my vote than the regular parties that are more about whatever happens in Paris.
I'll try to share everything I have about the candidates I know that I feel are interesting.
e: fucking hell David, buy a fucking mic!
Here in the 11th, we had a young guy, Mathias Assante, living in Singapore who was campaigning, initially with the PS but who immediately supported Macron when he launched before his campaign. He was super active, traveling all over Asia meeting people, sending out emails, etc.
Then we learned REM chose someone else, Anne Genetet (also in Singapore), to be their candidate. Assante nobly dropped out of the race ("this isn't about my ego", etc), but so far we haven't received anything from her. The only propaganda emails I get are from the "Patriots" (wannabe-FN) and the PS. Googling her name only shows me results from her life in the private sector, not even a campaign website (she's relying on Facebook/Twitter only apparently).
She seems nice enough, but the comms side of things could have been much better handled.
Then we learned REM chose someone else, Anne Genetet (also in Singapore), to be their candidate. Assante nobly dropped out of the race ("this isn't about my ego", etc), but so far we haven't received anything from her. The only propaganda emails I get are from the "Patriots" (wannabe-FN) and the PS. Googling her name only shows me results from her life in the private sector, not even a campaign website (she's relying on Facebook/Twitter only apparently).
She seems nice enough, but the comms side of things could have been much better handled.
Ma said:
Back to usual politics for En Marche unfortunately
In my circonscription the Twitter account of En Marche Rambouillet (biggest city of the area) is very very mad about Bergé being chosen saying that they weren't even informed beforehand.
It's a very top to bottom way of doing things which is the exact opposite thing that was supposed to be done at first (because you know Macron's programm took time to be published because it was being done directly on the field with thousands of people)
Back to usual politics for En Marche unfortunately
In my circonscription the Twitter account of En Marche Rambouillet (biggest city of the area) is very very mad about Bergé being chosen saying that they weren't even informed beforehand.
It's a very top to bottom way of doing things which is the exact opposite thing that was supposed to be done at first (because you know Macron's programm took time to be published because it was being done directly on the field with thousands of people)
Yeah, I get why Assante was pushed aside (he was campaigning for the PS before EM became a thing).
Turns out, she sent me an email last night, but it ended up in my spam folder (like every other candidate so far, without exception).
Should I make an OT for the legislatives? I went to see Anne Genetet (LREM candidate for the 11th overseas district) on Saturday night, super small group (20-30 people) in a private house, made for a really intimate setting. I liked what she said, confirms my choice for next month.
It's really incredible how many fake LREM candidates there are though. People trying to get elected hoping that voters will not be able to tell the difference.
Out of curiosity, I checked to see where the candidates and suppleants are based (for the five main parties).
FI: Russia / Vietnam
PS: Cambodia / Pakistan
LREM: Singapore / Australia
LR*: France (?) / Hong Kong
FN: Russia / China
Of course FI and FN would be Russian-based
As for the incumbent, Mariani from LR, I don't see anything about him being based abroad? His wife is Russian, but it doesn't look like they live there AFAICT.
It's really incredible how many fake LREM candidates there are though. People trying to get elected hoping that voters will not be able to tell the difference.
Out of curiosity, I checked to see where the candidates and suppleants are based (for the five main parties).
FI: Russia / Vietnam
PS: Cambodia / Pakistan
LREM: Singapore / Australia
LR*: France (?) / Hong Kong
FN: Russia / China
Of course FI and FN would be Russian-based
As for the incumbent, Mariani from LR, I don't see anything about him being based abroad? His wife is Russian, but it doesn't look like they live there AFAICT.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked