I think there was a strong chance to beat Sarkozy in the last election and barring a miracle he will be vulnerable in the next election as well. The factors that led to the PS loss had to do with a complete lack of party unity including out and out mutiny against Royal. She seemed to not have the party infrastructure at her back.
The biggest doubt I have is in the "authoritarian" streak and it leaves me wondering if she doesn't listen to other people, eg those who say things like "you're going to need some actual proposals that people can latch onto."
The family drama aspect of it was also the 800lb gorilla nobody wants to bring up. With some distance from that I think Royal can mount a genuine challenge. Her first duty will be to integrate the Hamon voters, many of whom will need to vote for her today if she is to secure the position (he has endorsed Aubry). This matter is entirely predicated on her policy fuzziness. Hamon represents a left-wing that is not interested in compromising on certain specific principals. Royal absolutely failed to assure this group in the last election.
In the United States Segolene Royal would have no opportunity to run in this next election. Fortunately in France the "familiar faces" tend to do better. Nobody just shows up and wins. Sarkozy was all over the TV for four or five years before his election. Mitterand, Chirac, etc, were well-known national figures for decades before winning the Presidency. In this way the French take their leadership seriously and elect people they know. They know all politicians are flawed and want to know what those flaws are before handing over power. Royal has shown some of those flaws since her run in the last election and with the keys to the PS for the next few years she can work out the policy side in the public eye. If she executes well I see no reason to believe she can't win decisively against a tired act known as the Sarkozy re-election bid.
Sarkozy's was his first run at the presidency, but he's been omnipresent since 1993 (as Balladur's minister of budget and spokesperson), and lead the RPR list in the 1999 European elections to an ignominious defeat (with 12% of the vote, he was behind sovereignist/hard right de Villiers/Pasqua list) - so yes, familiarity, and a sense that the guy desperately wants the job and won't give up until s/he gets it...
As to Royal, the infighting in the PS did handicap he campaign massively - just like division in 2002 brought Jospin's loss as too many candidates vied for votes on the left.
The core goal of the PS should be to have an uncontested leader. I think Royal can play that role better than Aubry, despite her being clearly hated more inside the party. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
You need a majority in the second round and as horrible as some of the triangulating may be - surely another Sarko victory is worse?
Of course, Royal had some deficiencies as a candidate last time around, but disunity was a big part of the failure. Job 1 has to be to get some kind of unity, whoever wins the role.
Also I think the primary last time was too close to the election - not enough time to embed a policy stance in a hostile media environment. This time should be better just because of that.
Then, just after the election, stating that the program she had been defending was an impossible absurdity. That sure must have played well with the party -and particularly with Aubry.
I'm sure most of the infighting is from personal ambition, but I can understand why the other leaders would rather accept any other of their rivals. She is just a losing proposition. If she runs again, she will lose except in the most extraordinary circumstances (such as all other candidates so weak that any PS militant picked randomly would win -mind you a prolonged crisis could bring just that). Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
As long as the amount to win is less then those not voting you have an alternative to triangulating and that is create a platform that gets the non-voters voting for you. Yes, it is harder, and you need people on the ground talking to people because media is not going to sell your message for you. But then you can also win on a platform that means more then just being less bad then the other candidate. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
As to Royal, the infighting in the PS did handicap he campaign massively - just like division in 2002 brought Jospin's loss as too many candidates vied for votes on the left. The core goal of the PS should be to have an uncontested leader. I think Royal can play that role better than Aubry, despite her being clearly hated more inside the party.
The core goal of the PS should be to have an uncontested leader. I think Royal can play that role better than Aubry, despite her being clearly hated more inside the party.
Not having an uncontested leader is suicide. Whether Royal or Aubry emerges as the leader here, it needs to be clear that person is in charge, or they're going to be too undisciplined, regardless of how much Sarko screws up. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
