This was our first French debate; I have no idea how they do things in the UK, Germany, etc.
We thought that this was a terrible debate.
In the US, a journalist asks a specific question, e.g.: what are your plans regarding mining Helium-3 on the Moon. Then Candidate A has something like 3 minutes to tell you what he proposes to do; Candidate B then has 3 minutes to tell you why Candidate A is full of shit; then Candidate A has another 1-1/2 minute to laugh contemptuously at what Candidate B just said.
Then we move on to another question.
What this does is that it tells us, the viewers, where the candidates stand, and how they rebutt each other, on a very specific set of (presumably important) issues.
It is extremely informative, though obviously not enough to prevent a barely articulate chimp with a radio on his back from being elected, but I digress.
What I saw last night was a Cafe du Commerce argument, a show put together at the last minute by Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland in a barn.
The proceedings were chaired by two barely coherent, haggard-looking animatronics that looked like they'd seen better days at Eurodisney circa 1985 -- or maybe the aim was to make the two candidates look sparkier by contrast, like Cleopatra surrounding herself with monkeys to maximize the impact of her beauty?
The two "potiches" (come to think of it, two pots of geraniums would have been better) did not keep the two candidates from talking over each other, drifting into non sequiturs, being all over the place without rhyme or reason. It might have made for an amusing Café confrontation, but it wasn't the kind of serious wonky politics we're used to in the United Fascist States.
Segolene appeared to have a broom up her ass, except when she made us wonder if she had PMS. Sarko was weasely and condescending; he reminded me of the second-banana villain in the Disney movies (not the Big Bad, the one that hunches and saunters about, cackling about what a cunning plan this is). In fact, as I type this, I realize now that he reminded me of Blackadder, but not as funny.
After an hour, I had enough. After two hours, I realized that I was starting to miss George Bush, and I knew that that was bad.
Moving on from the format and style of the show to the actual contents.
I'm 100% in accord with the diarist. Segolene came across as well-meaning but clueless. Sarko came across as competent but dangerous, and deceitful.
Special demerits go to Sarko for pointlessly obsessing about the "35 heures" which, in the end, he has done and will do nothing about; and to Sego for the lunatic idea of having female cops escorted home by male cops.
France ought to be reasonably ashasmed of itself; this is the overall performance I would expect in a comic book, not in real life.
But policy and policy making is about having a vision for society rather than a list of issues checked against the voter's personal opinions. New issue may arise, unknown at the time of the debate : how will the politician react to it ? Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
I think it was quite clear from the US format (which also leave room for personal statements and rebuttals) how GW Bush was going to react -- much to our collective dismay.
The format I saw last night was extremely unsatisfactory and wasteful. And the moderators were nowhere to be seen.
I also think Royal came across not as "clueless" but rather as "passionate." Sarkozy, was cool, manipulative, condescending and more Republican than I thought it was possible for a non-American to be.
Re "the actual contents," I agree 100% that these fell flat. It reminded me of a local debate in the U.S., say for county supervisor, where the big issues are fluoridation and when are they going to put traffic lights up at that dangerous exit by the mall. You really wouldn't know from watching this debate that French presidents have anything to do with foreign policy issues, except whether or not the Turks are European or just dark-skinned "natives."
I know what you mean, but there has to be a middle-of-the-road between CNN's brand-new plastic action figures (Wolf Blitzer's kung-fu grip, anyone?) and these tired, worn-out toys of the 1970s we saw last night.
I also think Royal came across not as "clueless" but rather as "passionate."
"Clueless" in terms of the the solutions or proposals she put forward; the "passionate" angle is what I was referring to as "PMS". Okay, I admit I'm not biased towards emotional fits; maybe in Italy she would have come across as the epitome of coolness and composure. But it didn't work for me.
Sarkozy, was cool, manipulative, condescending and more Republican than I thought it was possible for a non-American to be.
To our jaded eyes, transparently so, I'd say, yes. I like my Blackadder comparison; you could almost see the wheels turning, oozing insincerity... with a thought balloon reading "I have a cunning plan" above his head, he would have been perfect.
It reminded me of a local debate in the U.S., say for county supervisor, where the big issues are fluoridation and when are they going to put traffic lights up at that dangerous exit by the mall.
Bingo! Couldn't have put it better myself!
Honestly, escorts for female cops!!!!
Anyway, back to the debate, it is about personality. The two candidates face off, speak freely within a loose structure and show themselves to the public. After this amount of time one can begin to understand how a person reacts, thinks and feels. Electing a leader, especially in a more Federal system such as the one in France, is more than policy statements.
All that said it's appalling that you'd defend a system that has produced such AWFUL and TERRIBLE results as our own. Perhaps this system that we have is a REASON for the hoodwinking? duuuuhhh.
Hey, Eurodisney only opened way later in 1992! I still remember the shameless promotion in all the Mickey-Mouse magazines when I was a kid :)
But they did look awfully worn and tired-out.
And that guy, PPDA, what's with the haircut? Why not leather and ray-bans then.
He has an annual implant addition, it's something the French watch out for. So what if the result looks like a dog-chewed rug? It's a French institution!
For PPDA fun you should watch the Guignols de l'Info on Canal Plus at around 8 pm. Introduced by a PPDA puppet.
A most apt description. You have a way with words, sir.
We don't subscribe to Canal Plus, and while I know OF Les Guignols, I'm afraid that, with the exception of the occasional clips and a few segments taped by a friend for us a long time ago, we're a bit out of that cultural loop.
When is it?
Les Guignols are at 8pm (or just a copule minutes before). In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
It is a wonderful format and provides insight into their characters over a two hour period. It might not give you answers filled with facts but it sure gives you an idea of how the candidates think and speak.
Excellent debate!!!
(Because presumably, they're too loaded with policies and content.)
To this I say: have you watched the US debates? You'd have to have been deaf and blind to not be aware of the chasm between John Kerry (who still cut a rather forlorn image) and Bush (eeek).
The debate I saw last night was ill-prepared, ill-staged and, all in all, rather amateurish.
Yes, it did give me an idea of who the candidates were -- how could it not do so, for 2 hours? -- but that's not why I criticized it.
I would have much preferred more "answers filled with facts" (as you aptly put it) and less gerrymandering or pandering.
Like French movies it went on and on, très bavard, with not enough story.
You couldn't possibly have had an insight into their characters if the debate was staged as a 'US talking points' with each candidate being given a timed response. I enjoyed the freedom it allowed the candidates in going back to issues and speaking about anything they wished to.
So we couldn't possibly have had any insight into Bush's character in the US?
Have you actually watched the US debates -- there were actually two, wuith variant formats?
You're either joking, or purposefully obtuse, or arguing in bad faith.
Last night's format would have allowed Kerry to have followed up in such a way where Bush would have been proved more iidiotic thanm even he did in the US debates. Yes indeed I watched the US debates; in fact all of the televised debates since JFK/Nixon and your criticizing me for thinking last night's format is better than any of the US debate formats is pettyy and non constructive. I disagree with you so be it.
"Saved by the bell" made by the moderators saved Bush.
We both would disagree with you. Far more spontaneous than the stage-managed US variety which, it should be noted, is carefully crafted to so be by the two major parties in America.
The only thing I learn watching a presidential debate in the US is how well the candidates have learned their lines and which parts of their base do they feel like they need to most fire-up at that given time in the campaign.
That, and the dog-whistle language, which has the redeeming quality of being somewhat entertaining to try to discern.
And I disagree with whoever said Sego looked incompetent. She looked like a righteously angry institutrice who was scolding a poor schoolboy who'd yet again not taken his duty seriously. And he couldn't handle it, he looked almost imploring to ppda to get her to stop, he's had enough 6/20 marks.
And importantly, the debate barely touched on sarko's identité nationale bullshit, so he wasn't able to talk dog-whistle to Le Pen supporters who, we all know, may have needed more than a little of that dog whistle now that their dear leaders have given Sarko the thumb's down. Dominated by economics and social where the PS is more in tune with the will of the electorate, that's the debate I saw.
The debate was interesting for what it wasn't as much as for what it was. Personally, I don't think Royal won tactically last night, but she did win some key strategic ground, which her tone distracted from and which was perhaps by design, and if she wins on Sunday, I bet we'll hear this dissected as such.
She will make a fine President. Not my first choice, but she will be fine. Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant
It is extremely informative, though obviously not enough to prevent a barely articulate chimp with a radio on his back from being elected,
serious wonky politics we're used to in the United Fascist States.
I think the French economic system is doing just fine, as Jerome has so well pointed out in numerous diaries. I'm hoping that Royal wins, continues with the French system and programs such as the 35 hour work week, and add the other programs she promises. This will give the rest of the world a different model, and with proven success over a period of time, more people will move toward such concepts as the 35 hour work week. A Sarko victory will start cutting back on the French model, and we'll never get a pure opportunity to assess its results over a long period of time.
Advice: "different" doesn't (or shouldn't) mean "bad".
Note: I don't watch TV debates. I prefer to read programs, transcripts, search for information on track record of the candidate and most important the team members and influences behind the candidate to decide my vote.
