Display:
  • ego, sure (how many electoral candidates have you seen who weren't on an ego trip?) ;) but more seriously:

  • exposure, particularly radio/TV time these parties would never otherwise get;

  • money: public financing is available even to small candidates - each candidate receiving confirmation yesterday from the Conseil Constitutionnel gets an advance of about €150,000. After the first round, if you come in with less than 5%, you can still get up to approx €800,000 in campaign expenses (the initial €150,000 included). This is set out here but it's a long legal document and you have to scroll down a bunch to get to the nitty gritty.

The second part: I'd hesitate (do I hear the tinkling glass of broken Overton Windows?) to compare Clinton or Blair to French politics. (Though Blair is often called in - almost always abusively - to disqualify either Royal, or Bayrou, or Sarkozy.) What would a Royal government be like? Well, she'd be President, and would call on a member of the PS to be Prime Minister. The government, I suspect, would be rather like Jospin's between 1997 and 2002 - which could fairly be called centre-left or social-democrat. Differences with Jospin (because Jospin, whatever he might have wished to do, was hamstrung by the forced power-sharing with Chirac who held the presidency), would be a greater emphasis on institutional change in favour of a more open democracy, and more openness to green issues like renewable energy and sustainable agriculture.

It's not insignificant that Royal represents a major party of government, while Bayrou runs a rump party that he held on to in order to mount this presidential attempt. The question one can fairly ask is, what would a Bayrou government look like? Currently, he can barely get a deputy elected to the National Assembly without UMP assistance. He floats the idea that he would gather people to him from right and left. But apart from possibly a few individuals breaking off to join him, the PS won't back him. His natural, historical family, in which he has always operated, is the right. To form a government, I'd expect him to build a new coalition with the UMP. Just how truly "centre" that would be... Well, it wouldn't... It would be the right with the UDF in the driving seat instead of the UMP, like back in Giscard's presidency.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Mar 20th, 2007 at 12:36:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If Bayrou wins, the main question is: would a defeated Sarkozy remain president of UMP?

If (as likely) so, he would be the most powerful man of the majority, whoever is prime minister. And thirsting for revenge...


"Dieu se rit des hommes qui se plaignent des conséquences alors qu'ils en chérissent les causes" Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet

by Melanchthon on Tue Mar 20th, 2007 at 06:20:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A Bayrou victory would destroy the UMP. Its a pretty fragile coalition now and what holds it together is fear of Sarkozy and a shared desire to keep power. If Bayrou wins, lots of right wing deputies would give up the UMP label to run under BAyrou's label. And if the PS keeps its promise not to participate in his govt, Bayrou would make up his government of right-wing figures, who would bring factions of deputies with him.

There are those who argue the best thing for the PS (not for the country or the people who support the PS) would be a Bayrou victory -- it would force a real clarification of the PS, probably to the left, and explode the UMP.

by desmoulins (gsb6@lycos.com) on Wed Mar 21st, 2007 at 02:24:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
who Bayrou is against in the second round.

Against Royal: I fully agree with you.

Against Sarkozy: he will need to woo the left, and effectively move there to some extent to get a majority in Parliament. Quite unpredictable, I'd say...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Mar 21st, 2007 at 04:27:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If Bayrou is in the second round, the problem seems to me to be: what mandate can he claim to have to govern with the movement represented by his opponent?

This means he must base his government on his own small movement plus the movement that is absent from Round Two; the PS if he's against Sarko, the UMP if he's against Ségo.

I don't think either of these parties is ready to shatter, even if their absence from the second round would put them in serious difficulties. One of the main reasons for saying that is their electoral power in the first-past-the-post parliamentary elections which will follow the presidential, and which would be their main bargaining chip. These are parties with solid constituency organisations and a hold on most of the seats in the country. Why should they just fold and do Bayrou's bidding?

This, in any event, is why Bayrou's current talk, of taking some of the left and some of the right, is empty.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Wed Mar 21st, 2007 at 07:56:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Jerome, I was thinking about the effect on the legislatives of a Bayrou victory. I think that effect will be the same whomever he would have beaten since I would expect that only a few centrists -- Strauss-Kahniens or 'decus du fabusienisme' -- from the PS would agree to serve in B's government or run for the Assembly on his ticket. I think many more UMP would do so. So I think the effect would be the same either way.

That is to say, I think a Bayrou victory is necessarily a victory for the center-right even if he wins with left votes -- just like Chirac in 02.

by desmoulins (gsb6@lycos.com) on Thu Mar 22nd, 2007 at 01:57:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series