Delanoé was the big loser of the congress last week, with his "motion" unable to distance the others, and even beaten by Royal, and he threaw in his support behind Aubry.
Aubry worries me because of the support of the old-school elephants: Fabius (PM in 84-86), Jospin (PM in 97-02) and I'm not sure she'll put an end to the infighting.
Royal is likely to try impose her authority on the party, but many of the elephants absolutely hate her, and the confrontatino is unpredictable. Her personal, charismatic style is also not my favorite.
I don't really mind either, and only hope that they can impose order in the party. Maybe Royal is slightly better in that respect. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
The first secretary is the most visible spokesperson of the party, and has lots of internal procedural powers (including on designation of candidates during various elections) In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Last year, this "tradition" was broken: Francois Hollande didn't seek the role; several candidates ran in a PS primary and Segolène Royal was selected to run opposing Nicolas Sarkozy.
Conventional wisdom is that Royal wants to lead the party to support another run against Sarkozy in 2012. Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
He went in freefall last winter when he had his whirlwind romance with Bruni, and a bump this summer with his whirlwind of diplomatic activity (with the war in Georgia, notably).
This is an average of 9 polls, from here In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
As soon as they started talking politics they lost huge numbers and the popularity of the government surged. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
A european party tends to be one organisation - divided into different suborganisations, but still one organisation. The party leader is the president of the organisation. 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!
The worst of it all, probably, is that I don't see the PS coming up with anything new. Oh no, not as in "New" Labour, but a fresh approach that shows some understanding of what's happening in the world right now.
Thus my note of hope that this election will put an end to this by designating a boss. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Aubry's got it right from a wonk's standpoint, and you're right about it being gutless and pointless to run from the 35-hour workweek. But Royal is simply wrong strategically: Playing to the center on policy simply isn't going to accomplish anything. Good leaders sell their ideas to the center without sacrificing principles. Sell it by addressing them with a pragmatic tone and pragmatic language, not with destructive changes in policy that will simply erode the base and embolden the other side. I think the need, as far as the center goes, is to speak in plain terms that make them think, "Huh, yeah, okay, that makes some sense."
Royal's buying into the Clinton-Blair theory of campaigns, which is understandable when the pendulum is swinging to the other party, but it's not right now. The pendulum is in the beginning stages of swinging leftward. If ever there were a point in time in the Postwar Era when parties of the left should be able to sell their ideas, it's now. The left's policies are about economic security and collective advancement, and people are scared by decades of the opposite crashing down on their heads. It's perhaps less of an issue in France, where those priorities for our side have been stronger in the public's beliefs than they have been in America or Britain, but the general trend should still be there. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
I don't know the demographics of France well enough to go into too much detail there....
...adding: More importantly, I don't know the dynamics -- political and otherwise -- either, but I'd suspect they're similar to other countries. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
What carried the election to Sarko was basically the over-65 demographics. Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
What carried the election to Sarko was basically the over-65 demographics.
Interesting. Can it be drilled down to a couple of basic reasons? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
True, but by any measure she was not nearly as incompetent as Sarko (whose results as minister were invariably appalling, and who was pushing for policies right out of the George W Bush book, probably the modern yardstick of incompetence). Yet somehow the media was never pointing out things like "this man is a clown". Strange. "Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"
So it is quite relevant. The media were incredibly biased in that respect, to the point of presenting Sarko's ministry tenures (which werein fact major failures) as strong points, as proof of competence. Again, despite having most of his own camp feeling he was rubbish.
It's well known that today, should the votes be anonymous, Sarko would not even have a majority within the UMP parliementary group.
Let alone in the Assemblée itself... "Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"
You're a perfect illustration for my ideology diary, if you don't mind: not one sentence without heavy political bias. You seem to breathe contestation - of the media, of elections, of the elected parliament.
In such cases I tend to say: well get ready to spend 9 more years in this dire mood.
But it would be a provocation. What do I care that you're such a leftwing supporter and Royal fan. I don't even care if Sarko gets re-elected (or indeed will be a candidate 4 years from now).
But forget Sarko. Just a question: could you even conceive Mme. Royal might not be that good, do you allow for even a tiny bit of doubt? Or is it more like, we're all little soldiers ready to die for the Chief? Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
Any other questions? In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Like Fox News, except they actually believe they are "fair and balanced".
So take a guess, do you think the Swedish left or right is most interested in the Intertubes? Yeah, that's right. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
(unless Sarko hating is such fundamental value over here that this needs no more proof whatsoever) Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
« Beaucoup d'électeurs FN ont constaté que Nicolas Sarkozy disait les mêmes choses que Le Pen, mais que lui avait une chance de les mettre un jour en application. Ils ont donc voté utile. Parce qu'ils ont cessé de croire à l'accession de Le Pen au pouvoir » ( cité dans Le Canard enchaîné du 25 Avril 2007).
See this about his rally in Toulon in February 2007:
Lors de son meeting de Toulon, mercredi 7 février 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy a choisi des mots et des thèmes adaptés à une partie de la population locale. Il a continué à s'adresser aux électeurs du FN [1], distillant des messages pleins d'ambiguïté sur les immigrés qui « ne sont pas les bienvenus sur le territoire de la République » s'ils n'en respectent pas toutes les règles, avant de marquer son opposition à l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'Union Européenne. A quatorze reprises, il a lancé des anathèmes en commençant ses phrases par ce mot d'ordre : « Ça ne peut plus durer ! » désignant à la vindicte populaire « petit voyou et patron voyou », « multirécidivistes », « l'assisté qui gagne plus que le travailleur » [2].
A quatorze reprises, il a lancé des anathèmes en commençant ses phrases par ce mot d'ordre : « Ça ne peut plus durer ! » désignant à la vindicte populaire « petit voyou et patron voyou », « multirécidivistes », « l'assisté qui gagne plus que le travailleur » [2].
And did you not follow how much the news were focused on security, law and order, kicking the immigrants out and putting the "lazy" back to work? But presumably it is 'ideological' to point out that there are hard-right favorites? In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Secondly, what you don't realize is how many people are indignated against lack of fairness in dealing with unemployment ("unemployed are always right", says the PC Bible, because they are victims, and victims always are), in dealing with immigrants (an immigrant is necessarily a sort of asilum seeker, he doesn't need to obey the law, respect the host country or the locals - I speak about respect, not submission, not abandoning one's identity). And so on. This gets a wide range of people indignated and they vote right. The left should be careful about picking its favourite categories and exclude others, or else they will continue to lose nation wide elections.
As to your quotation from Canard Enchaine, there was a documentary on France2 about their hard left leaning, or the absence of it. The conclusion was that yes. Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
I only reported a uote by Gaudin. Criticizing the messenger is not an adequate argument. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Yes, you could say I hate him. Because he promotes the fear and hatred of the others, because he made a mockery of the rule of law, because his policies are abominably clientelist (to the point where I think we have to call it corruption) and so on. Certainly not because I had anything against him ex ante.
Sometimes, hatred is the sensible reaction. "Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"
This is a symptom of the mind-boggling polarisation of the political life in France.
If Sarkozy calmed things down on his side, the left remains in the same extremist stance. If you claim that someone won by saying "arabs will rape your daughter", this claim is so extremist that blocks all possible dialogue. This attitude can be seen all over the French Left today. Their whole problem is how to gather their forces to FIGHT SARKOZY and to FIGHT THE RIGHT. It's almost like a crusade.
What you don't realize is that people are getting fed up with constant "extremisation", they prefer politicians who deal with issues and speak about France, not about adversaries, not vilifying them. So I repeat: more lost elections are about to come, as long as you guys continue to see the world in Black (the others) and White (Us) and focus on Battles against the Demon. Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
Speaking for more reason and against blind faith could actually appear a bit like trolling, I suppose. What can I say, then... sorry to bother you in your comfort zone, I guess. Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
As for sensing the pendulum swinging early: again, agility points will go to Sarkozy on this one as well. Europeans think a hundred miles is a long way. Americans think a hundred years is a long time.
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). "Few can believe that suffering, especially by others, is in vain. - Galbraith"
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
If ever there were a point in time in the Postwar Era when parties of the left should be able to sell their ideas, it's now.
"Holy Shit! It worked!
Events and the almost unexpected success of a lot of old ideas have refilled the socialist ammo belt. Now--can they find their rusting guns? Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.
But what if another party of the left were to replace the Socialists, or even just give them some competition? Until recently, this would have seemed far-fetched. Not any more. Meet Olivier Besancenot, the 34-year-old mailman and spokesman for the small Trotskyite Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) who has just emerged as the founder and leader of the New Anticapitalist party (le Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste, NPA). According to a recent OpinionWay/Le Figaro/LCI poll, 17 percent of the French are considering supporting him. Bertrand Delanoë gets only 13 percent, Ségolène Royal 9 percent. Among Socialist and other left-wing voters, Besancenot's rise is even more dramatic: Twenty-six percent already see him as the "best opposition leader," whereas Delanoë gets 19 percent, Socialist chairman François Hollande 10 percent, and Royal 9 percent. Moreover, 65 percent of all respondents say they have a "very positive" opinion of him. September 27 2008 http://michelgurfinkiel.com/articles/183-France-Beware-of-the-Red-Mailman.html
Meet Olivier Besancenot, the 34-year-old mailman and spokesman for the small Trotskyite Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) who has just emerged as the founder and leader of the New Anticapitalist party (le Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste, NPA).
According to a recent OpinionWay/Le Figaro/LCI poll, 17 percent of the French are considering supporting him. Bertrand Delanoë gets only 13 percent, Ségolène Royal 9 percent. Among Socialist and other left-wing voters, Besancenot's rise is even more dramatic: Twenty-six percent already see him as the "best opposition leader," whereas Delanoë gets 19 percent, Socialist chairman François Hollande 10 percent, and Royal 9 percent. Moreover, 65 percent of all respondents say they have a "very positive" opinion of him.
September 27 2008
http://michelgurfinkiel.com/articles/183-France-Beware-of-the-Red-Mailman.html
The chief reason for Besancenot's popularity is that, like Barack Obama (to quote Michelle Obama), "he's cute." With his boyish face, broad smile, and big eyes, Besancenot appeals to his generational peers, women, and even older people, who tend to see him as their virtual son. This has not escaped the talk show hosts, who are eager to have him on the air as often as possible, as if he were a rock star or supermodel. (Incidentally, the same holds true on the right: Rama Yade, a lovely young woman of Senegalese descent, is one of the most popular and media-friendly ministers in the Sarkozy government.)
Once again, the meme of homo politicus- the voter- as idiot. Le Figaro is often caught up in this vision--they see themselves as speaking to the governing class, perhaps. Capitalism searches out the darkest corners of human potential, and mainlines them.
