It's easy for an outsider like me to say, but for the Presidential election at least, the left needs to start putting compromise at the head of the agenda.

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.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Fri Nov 21st, 2008 at 06:33:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My impression has been that the "elephants" don't like her for more personal, stylistic reasons.  It has nothing to do with policy.  The left has a policy dispute but that is classic coalition/power struggle stuff rather than true dysfunction.  
by paving on Fri Nov 21st, 2008 at 06:57:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, they probably aren't too comfortable with having a show-business star (à la Sarkozy, in fact) as party leader, that's for sure.
But in terms of policy, while you wouldn't pinpoint one that is directly in contradiction with their beliefs, it's also because Royal's were so vague and shallow in the last election. Lots of slogans, but when she was asked to list the five main things she would do (note: do) were she to be elected, the first one she listed was, and I quote: "win-win".
That's a mantra, a goal or principle if you want, it's not something you do. Same thing was merely inserting the word "fair" in every sentence as policy definition.

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

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Sat Nov 22nd, 2008 at 03:06:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Metatone:
You need a majority in the second round and as horrible as some of the triangulating may be - surely another Sarko victory is worse?

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!

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Nov 22nd, 2008 at 06:27:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series