Display:
Indeed it's not. My take on it is:

Le Pen is out, but he has successfully moved the Overton window to the Right, and given Sarkozy a chance to unite centrists and extremists. Sarkozy can capture some of the Pen-ites by throwing them just enough red meat on immigration not to alarm the centrists, who will be happy to delude themselves that he's a not really a thug - especially given his strong media support. So he has a chance to unite the Right behind him. (Even if it's for spurious reasons - but then isn't it always?)

Royal's position is very weak. She's still the underdog and although she's done well, it's not well enough to put her over the top. The Left is always more fractious and disunited than the Right, and there will be far-Left elements who see her as indistinguishable from Sarkozy. Meanwhile, with her talk of change, she looks like an extremist to many of the centrists. She may get some of the Pen-ites, but I can't see her getting enough of them to win.

It's a very bad position for her to be in, because she doesn't have a strong and united base to rely on, and there's very little she can do in two weeks to build one. Sarko's foundations seem more solid at this point. It's his election to lose, rather than her's to win.

It's also a depressing replay of Gore vs Bush, where Bush won by being the good 'ole boy. Sarkozy and Bush are disturbingly similar.

If it were down to me, I would be speechifying and rallying like crazy to get out the left-wing vote on an anyone-but-Sarko basis.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Apr 22nd, 2007 at 04:50:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I hadn't really been following this race until a few days ago. The current New Yorker has an article profiling the top three candidates (with all the obligatory talk about France being in "crisis", of course). It notes that Royal doesn't have the support of her own party, having gotten the nomination by passing by several "elephants" who have long wanted it.

A bomb, H bomb, Minuteman / The names get more attractive / The decisions are made by NATO / The press call it British opinion -- The Three Johns
by Alexander on Sun Apr 22nd, 2007 at 05:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bush lost the popular vote to Gore by a strong margin. Since France is so backward that it does not have the modern Electoral college system, it makes life more difficult for sarko.

Sarko has to disguise his nature - also I think he has a problem for not being ethnically french considering his constitutuency.

by citizen k (sansracine yahoo.fr) on Sun Apr 22nd, 2007 at 05:07:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Bush lost that election. It's admitted by everyone except right-wing nuts that if the Florida recount had been continued in all districts, and not just in those which Gore's people wanted to have a recount, Gore would have won. What Bush won was his case in the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the recount, with a decision that was clearly made on political and not legal grounds.

It really bothers me that the Western press still routinely writes about Bush's "winning" the 2000 election. That's just an instance of the special treatment that the U.S. routinely gets in the Western media. The U.S. is an "advanced" country, so it is a priori impossible for a candidate to be placed in the White House through the theft of an election.

A bomb, H bomb, Minuteman / The names get more attractive / The decisions are made by NATO / The press call it British opinion -- The Three Johns

by Alexander on Sun Apr 22nd, 2007 at 05:16:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
An honest description of 2000 is that we had a judicial Coupe-de-Etat and have been ruled by a criminal junta since then.  Of course such honesties dare not be uttered in polite company or on corporate broadcast "news".
by Geonomist on Sun Apr 22nd, 2007 at 09:29:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

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