Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.

Tale of Three Candidates (Poll and Update)

by afew Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 11:04:29 PM EST

Le Monde


 
In the end, three candidates
 Of the seven potential candidates for the French Socialist Party's presidential primaries, these three are finally officially running: Ségolène Royal, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Laurent Fabius.
 Jack Lang was the last to desist, in the interests of party unity. François Hollande had done the same beforehand, Lionel Jospin before him. Martine Aubry's candidature did not materialise.
 The lists are now closed.


...from ze diaries ~poemless


And the winner is...

So who's going to win? you ask. As if I'm going to tell you.

The four who gave up were undoubtedly swayed by their bad polls. But now there are only three left, the previous polls don't mean the same thing. Royal is favourite and has some fairly weighty backing, (former PM Pierre Mauroy and both the party leaders in the Assembly and the Senate have recently come out in her favour), but who will Lionel Jospin throw his weight behind? Probably DSK, closer to his political style while Fabius is an old enemy, but if Fabius got his campaign shifting by federating the party left, Jospin might back him -- anything but Ségolène!

Of the five biggest Fédés (Federations at département level), three have already come out in favour of Royal. Paris, however, with 18,000 members, has not made up its mind -- and Paris is Jospin territory.

Update [2006-10-5 6:28:49 by afew]: After a hint below from Jérôme and ten kilometres on my bike, here's a titbit from Ze Chained-Up Duck:

Before pulling out, Jospin took careful note of the names of all those he considered had let him down, like Jean-Marc Ayrault [PS leader in the lower house], with his "undignified attacks". And above all DSK, whose withdrawal Yoyo [Le Canard's name for Jospin] hoped for, in vain. DSK and his people apparently made things worse by "arrogant, violent, disagreeable" attacks. [Note: there was some talk about "the man of the past" in DSK's camp...]Avant de se retirer, Jospin a bien noté les noms de ceux dont il estime qu'ils lui ont manqué, comme Jean-Marc Ayrault, avec ses attaques "indignes". Et surtout Dominique Strauss-Kahn, dont Yoyo espérait le désistement et qui n'a rien fait. DSK et les siens auraient même aggravé leur cas par des offensives "arrogantes, violentes, désagréables".
As a result, Strauss-Kahn can whistle for Jospinist votes in the PS primary. They'd rather vote... Fabius, whose former enemy brother Jospin now describes as the "only statesman left in the race".
(bolding mine)
Résultat, Strauss-Kahn peut se brosser pour obtenir les voix des jospinistes dans la primaire interne au PS. Plutôt voter... Fabius, que son ancien frère ennemi qualifie désormais de "seul homme d'Etat encore en course".

There are too many direct quotes here for the Canard not to be basing their story on an account or accounts from credible witnesses. If Jospin still commands the loyalty of his troops (though how many he has left is a fair question), then DSK will miss out on a lot of votes from the centre of the PS. [End of Update]





Le Monde publishes this map of the departmental federations and their choices.
 
Key:

green: Fabius

blue: DSK

maroon: Royal

pink: no call yet

 





The PS recently gained 73,000 new members thanks to an Internet recruiting drive. The new members are mostly young and constitute an uncharted world for long-serving party staff. How will they vote? It's generally thought they will mostly back Ségolène Royal, but nothing's certain at this stage.

Here are a couple of tips from Pascal Perrineau, of the think-tank Cevipof, in an Internet chat with readers of Le Monde:

Can we schematize like this: Royal the furthest to the right of the left, DSK the social democrat (the centre of the PS), and Fabius the repentant socialist? Which one has the best positioning?Peut-on schématiser comme suit : Royal la plus à droite de la gauche, DSK le social-démocrate (le centre du PS) et Fabius le socialiste repenti ? Quel est le meilleur positionnement ?
Pascal Perrineau: As always with the PS, which is a party of tendencies and ideological confrontation, there are differing sensitivities: Laurent Fabius is attempting to take over the niche of the left of the party and make use of the dynamics of the "non" to the European constitutional treaty. DSK takes up a clear position in the social-democrat niche and with a PS that would fully take on the "culture of government". Ségolène Royal's position is more ambiguous, and, in a certain way, reminds one of the position François Mitterand liked to occupy: a "halfway house" position borrowing a certain leftwing "style" (references to participative democracy, a benevolent attitude towards some of the themes of the altermondialists), and references to the right (military-run training for multiple-offence delinquents, wish to get free of the school zoning map).Pascal Perrineau : Comme toujours dans le PS, parti de courants et d'affrontements idéologiques, il y a différentes sensibilités : Laurent Fabius tente d'occuper le créneau de la gauche du Parti et de profiter de "la dynamique du non" au traité constitutionnel européen. DSK se positionne clairement sur le créneau social-démocrate et sur un PS qui assumerait la "culture de gouvernement". Pour Ségolène Royal, le positionnement est plus ambigu, et d'une certaine manière, rappelle la position qu'aimait occuper François Mitterrand : une position "d'entre-deux" empruntant un certain "style" de gauche (les références à la démocratie participative, la bienveillance montrée vis-à-vis de certaines thèses du mouvement altermondialiste) et des références à la droite (encadrement militaire des délinquants récidivistes, volonté de sortir du carcan de la carte scolaire).
It seems to me each candidate bases their candidature on a reserved zone, values and order for one, the economy for another, "to the left" for the third. Like in marketing. Which of the chosen fields will grab party activists most?Il me semble que chacun des candidats fonde sa candidature sur une zone réservée, les valeurs et l'ordre pour l'une, l'économie pour l'autre, "à gauche" pour le troisième. Comme en marketing. Lequel des terrains choisis sera le plus accrocheur auprès des militants ?
Pascal Perrineau: The use by the candidates of these different systems of reference isn't sufficient. PS cardholders are members of a party that wants to be in power. The capacity of one or another candidate to bring the party to power will be a strong element of choice.Pascal Perrineau : L'exploitation par les différents candidats de ces différents "référentiels" n'est pas suffisante. Les adhérents du PS sont membres d'un parti qui aspire au pouvoir. La capacité de tel ou tel candidat à amener le parti au pouvoir sera un élément fort du choix.
This can already be seen in the rallying of some elected representatives to Ségolène Royal, considered - wrongly or rightly - as the best "electoral locomotive" for the next presidential, but also for the legislative and municipal elections to follow.On le voit déjà dans le ralliement parfois très pragmatique des élus à Ségolène Royal, considérée - à tort ou à raison - comme étant la meilleure "locomotive électorale" pour la prochaine élection présidentielle, mais aussi pour les élections législatives et municipales qui suivront.


The primary

The 210,000 PS members will vote by secret ballot in a two-round election. The first round will take place on 16th November, the second on 23rd November. If a candidate gets an absolute majority in Round One, that candidate is elected. Otherwise the two best-placed meet in Round Two. A series of debates, some televised on parliamentary TV, some in regional meetings of PS members, will pit the candidates against each other, the three before Round One, the remaining two in the interim between Rounds One and Two.

More as events unfold...

Poll
Who do you think will win?
. Ségolène Royal 81%
. Dominique Strauss-Kahn 6%
. Laurent Fabius 0%
. François Mitterand 12%

Votes: 16
Results | Other Polls
Display:
As I like neither Fabius nor DSK, I have to swallow the frong and support Royal, as hazy her politics is. I'd liked Jospin, but I wouldn't like him to play spoiler.

Any chance of a President Royal and a PM Jospin?...

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:31:58 PM EST
BTW, do the French-resident here agree with Fabius le socialiste repenti? He strikes me as a fake/inner-party populist, not a repentant.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:35:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If I have the choice between Fabius and Le Pen, I will abstain.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:38:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Because you're a centrit, or because Fabius is such an idiot?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:40:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Did you vote for Chirac?

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:41:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, and I regret it. Le Pen at 40% (not because he'd have gotten more voices, but because of lots more blank votes) would have forced to tackle the issue.

Instead, the issue was ignored, and will come up again at this election (where Le Pen will get 20%), and Chirac decided he could ignore everything and everybody - and keep on doing the debilitating nothing he's always done while actually in power (as opposed to running for power, his only competence, because he's good at destroying others)

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:44:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
We really need to challenge lesser-evilism wherever we encounter it, because it doesn't work.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:50:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I totally agree, but I just cannot imagine the flame war that would occur if this conversation were taking place at a US blog.  I mean, I, who voted for Nader, initially reacted to Jerome's comment by thinking, "And give your vote to Le Pen?!"  Uhg.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire
by p------- on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:59:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I still think voting for Nader was the right thing to do, even in 2004.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:02:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's the Political Ideals vs Political Realities debate.

After two terms of Clinton people were complacent enough to believe that democracy actually might exist for real, and a vote for an alternative candidate might have an effect on policy.

I suppose it was an understandable mistake.

But still - in real world terms - ouch.

As for France - I don't trust Royal. She reminds me of Blair and Hillary. This is likely to be prejudice based on ignorance, but there's something a little too mythical and not quite human enough about her. She comes across as more of a narrative than a candidate, and I don't trust narratives.

I know nothing at all about the other candidates beyond what people have said in their comments.

Assuming Fabius doesn't get the nod, what are the chances of a Left-ish victory in the main election?

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 08:18:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I'd give you an 8 if I could: 4 for the political ideals bit, and 4 for articulating my own feelings/thoughts about Royal.

Truth unfolds in time through a communal process.
by marco on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 12:42:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The chances in the main election: I think either Royal or DSK stand a fair chance of winning. Both have a centrist appeal Sarkozy doesn't. And the left side of the electorate will probably be motivated by

  • negative feelings re Sarkozy
  • memories of the stinging failure of 2002
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 02:13:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What are the odds of Sarkozy-Le Pen in the second round?

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 05:23:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
According to current polling, they appear low.

Royal and Sarkozy poll at around 30% each in Round One. Le Pen at around 15%, though he can be expected to do better because advance polls always underestimate his real final vote.

What happened in 2002 was not that Le Pen got a surprise high score, it was that Chirac and Jospin did badly.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 05:53:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't have any illusions about voting for "realistic candidates" any longer, or about real democracy rather than Democracy™, so I might as well vote for the candidate I think is best. So far I've been lucky in Spain.

My first general election in Spain was in 1996. I abstained. I was not going to vote for Aznar, I wanted Felipe out (not because I thought he was corrupt but because I thought the PSOE should renovate itself) and I couldn't reward the United Left's [Communist] Anguita's years-long "pincer" with Aznar by which he hoped to damage the PSOE so much that he would take over ("il sorpasso", he called it). The outcome was not bad: Aznar won a slim plurality of seats and needed to make alliances with his hated Catalan and Basque nationalists, bite some bullets, and generally make good of his promised "journey to the centre".

In 2000 I was scared shitless of an Aznar absolute majority and so I voted for Almunia, who was an honest, hard-working former minister and not at all a lesser evil. Nevertheless, PSOE sympathisers were generally depressed after the "primary" experiment had blown up, and 3M socialist voters stayed at home, so my vote didn't make a difference and Aznar got a majority of the seats in parliament and ruled Spain like his private ranch [como un cortijo we would say in Spanish].

In 2004 I voted for Zapatero by post as I was abroad, so I was not influenced by the events of March 11-13. Again a minority government resulted, which has been great.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 05:35:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, a blank vote.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:14:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Correct, but there is the idea that unless you are actively voting against someone, you are voting for them. Hey, I don't write these talking points...

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. -Voltaire
by p------- on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:23:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I would not be as definitive as you on this topic, but I know what you mean.

The lesser evil is sometimes what you should do because it's still a step in the right direction.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:14:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If it has enough redeeming qualities to be a step in the right direction, it's not an evil.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:20:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Like about 5% of voters, I voted blank for second turn.
by Laurent GUERBY on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 02:00:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Is he too much of a centrist for you?

He's my personal choice, although I could certainly live with Royal.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:41:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I must humbly admit that I can't retrieve from my memory the specific reasons I put him in the negative bin. I know he's not a Bliarite, so it's not simply that he's too much of a centrist.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:50:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Reading through the French Wiki article on him, perhaps entanglement in the Elf affair, the France Telekom row and having read of his misgivings about the 35-hour-week were factors. But am I right to think of him as kind of a notorious self-promoter?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:59:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But am I right to think of him as kind of a notorious self-promoter?

But of course, he's a French Presidential hopeful.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:04:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What I had in mind was starting a string of initiatives that are not stupid but also don't seem necessary, e.g. seem to have no other useful purpose than to get him into focus.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:07:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
He was slandered in the Elf row. He was totally cleared on this. I'm not sure what you mean about the France Telecom row. As to the 35-hour week, he did fight Aubry on it, then representing the more centrist wing of the party, but I would not be able to give you details of what he fought about exactly. The Aubry/Strauss-Kahn dynamic with Jospin in the middle was actually a good way to govern with both wings of the party heard and placated. You also had the communists and the Greens in the game.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:20:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As to self-promotion, friends in the party seem to tell me he's not doing enough. Like Jospin, he was hoping that people would come to him to ask him to run, and he's been outclassed by Royal's fearless dash for it.

But he is well respected - and a lot of centrists could vote for him (people that could otherwise vote for Bayrou)

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:22:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
DSK is not a notorious self-promoter, (or I must have missed something). In any case, of the three here, he's the least self-promoting...

He's a social democrat with strong associations with policy, efficiency, competence, intellectual capacity, responsibility. He's the closest to Jospin of the three candidates. His choices are sometimes centre-right on economic and business issues.

If he became president, he'd stand a good chance of federating centre-right to centre-left support and of governing France in a stable, efficient way (wouldn't that make a change after Chirac!) He would also be a heavyweight in European politics (and wouldn't that make a change etc!)

Of the three, DSK is the most dependable candidate, meaning that we could be fairly sure in advance what his policies and politics would be.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 01:52:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
A 3-way race is going to be interesting, because if Royal does not win in the first round, the runner-up might have a chance in the second round by gathering the votes of the third candidate.

At this point, I'd guess it is
Royal 50%
Strauss-Kahn 30%
Fabius 20%

So it could go anywhere from here.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:41:50 PM EST
That is pretty much what I meant to suggest above.

Royal is probably close to a first-round clear victory, however.

And it is not clear all Fabius first-round votes would go to DSK in the event of a Round Two play-off.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 01:55:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My personal choice would be DSK first, Royal second. Fabius, yuck. Do we get Fabius the neo-liberal? Fabius the neo-populist bullshitter? Or maybe just the same old Fabius the pure cynical opportunist, wannabe left wing version of Chirac? Enarquie at its worst - genuinely intelligent believing in nothing hard working cynical powermongers. (Though I have to say, after almost six years of Bush Chirac isn't looking as bad as he used to)

I disagree with Jerome about Le Pen. He thinks that if Le Pen got forty percent then he problem would have been taken seriously. I think that it would have meant even more pandering to the extreme right on both mainstream right and mainstream left. Accompanied of course by constant pious denunciations of Le Pen himself.  

by MarekNYC on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 05:59:58 PM EST
Whoa, we agree totally on Fabius.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:03:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Any Fabius supporters out there to defend him?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:04:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Nope.

I will vote Le Pen in the first round so that it's Royal - Le Pen in the second (tactical vote). Then Royal in the second.

Kidding, I'll vote Royal all the way, regardless of her shortcomings.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:41:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There is a slim chance that tactical vote would give you Sarkozy-Le Pen, depending on how internecine PS warfare goes between now and the Spring.

Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:44:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And I also would never have the balls to take that risk, even if it was proven to me by Andrew Wiles that it would work.
by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:47:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Then again, let me see. If all the 2002 guilt-ridden voters of the then "alternative left" massively vote for Royal this time, she'll be far ahead of Sarkozy. And if Sarkozy is estimated at 30% and Le Pen +20%, it just might work if I could convince everyone I know, and they could convince everyone they know etc, to do the same.

No, no, there is just no way in the world.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:49:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Which reminds me of a story. In 1995, this quite anarchist(ic) friend of mine had decided to randomly pick a candidate (shuffling the ballots upside down in his hand), and had told everyone that it had fallen on Le Pen ... and despite his hatred of the man, he had to stick to his anarchist theory/desire, and had voted for him.

But he recently confessed (a decade later) that he had been pulling our leg all this time, and that he had indeed randomly picked Le Pen, then promptly concluded that this was a stupid tactic, and then voted for a candidate of the Left (but he didn't tell us which one).

And to think that for a decade I told this story to countless leftie intellectuals, as it was meant to embody anarchism at its worst. The lies, all the lies ...

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:54:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Perhaps we should establish a law by which any Blank vote prompts a machine to randomly pick a candidate to replace the Blank ballot ... imagine how screwed up that would be. Parties would then have to have really really serious campaigns and candidates, to reassure Blank voters into voting (for fear of not being elected, due to random picks of obscurantist pro-life creationist parties).

The Blank vote would finally mean something.

by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 07:00:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Those whom the Gods wish to destroy They first make mad. -- Euripides
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 07:03:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Excellent!
by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 07:05:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Hmm, it could work the other way around though. ie. encourage Blank voters not to vote Blank.
by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 07:04:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If the blank ballot spaces have the majority, the position should be left unfilled. There should always be a "none of the above" option.
by asdf on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 11:03:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, that will teach you try to draw conclusions from anecdotal evidence. Obviously this had nothing to do with any serious interpretation of anarchism; the guy is merely a stupid liar.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
by Ted Welch (tedwelch-at-mac-dot-com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 06:15:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Try not to insult my friends.
by Alex in Toulouse on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 07:45:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
lol. Back in 1992 I did something like that in the primaries - voting in the Repub one for Buchanan. (IIRC I didn't have to even reregister since the RI primaries were open) But that wasn't a general and I didn't have strong feelings in the Dem primary. That period was also one of the rare times I voted for a repub in a general - I figured that given the choice between a corrupt, mobbed up, torturing (personally) Dem and a generic Repub I'll take the Repub (Mayor Buddy Cianci was out of prison for having a cop hold down his wife's lover while he beat him with a hot poker and put cigs out on his eyelids in his earlier stint as mayor, he won anyways, supposedly helped by a big turnout in the cemeteries up in the Italian neighbourhoods, but is back in prison now on racketeering charges).
by MarekNYC on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:58:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No.

He's a fake lefty.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 01:58:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I hear what you say about Le Pen... My opinion of Chirac isn't really worse now than then and I'd end up voting for him again, I guess

I'm really pissed off with Fabius because for purely opportunistic reasons he gave legitimacy to the "non" campaign and helped it win. As you may have noticed, I'm still violently pissed at that vote, and thus at him for enabling it - in a way that had zero chance anyway of getting him anywhere anyway: he'll get his 15-20% of the party vote at most (even if Jospin supports him, as he's apparently decided to do)

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:27:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The real danger with Fabius is that he decides to be a renegade candidate anyway, outside the party. He'd get a couple per cent at most, but that could be enough to damage the official socialist candidate.

I wouldn't put it past him after the past two years.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 06:58:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I also wouldn't be surprised at all if he did that.
by Alex in Toulouse on Wed Oct 4th, 2006 at 07:06:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What information do you have on Jospin's decision to back Fabius?

Le Chained-Up Duck?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 02:00:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think so. I don't have the copy with me right now, but I think that's where I saw it.

Another disappointment from Jospin.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 04:11:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I have now grabbed a copy and updated the diary.

Petty and extremely disappointing of Jospin.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 06:32:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Seeing Sarkozy play toadie to Bush definitely pushed me over the edge to Royal, though I can't quite see why I should vote for her.
by Lupin on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 11:26:55 AM EST
Specifically, how do they stand on
  • unemployment, particularly among youth and minorities
  • health care costs
  • immigration
  • public sector deficits
by tyronen on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 02:14:49 PM EST
If they had issued detailed policy statements at this stage, I'd have summarized them.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Oct 5th, 2006 at 03:00:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]