2012 French Presidential Election - Page 52

On May 04 2012 05:18 AA.spoon wrote:


Geiko,

-About Napoleon III: yes he was a crappy leader. Internally, he held a repressive regime. On the international scene, he started out well with the Crimean War (getting France out of diplomatic isolation and gaining new allies in Italy). However he badly messed up afterwards: lost all his allies in Italy because he supported the Vatican and sent an army; failed his invasion in Mexico; got completely outsmarted by Bismark in The French-Prussian War with all the consequences... I wouldn't say he was teriible, but he certainly didn't live up to his familyname.

- The so called 'false results' of the first night: I live in Belgium and was listening to the results from 6 o clock onward. The first estimates weren't precise and the numbers fluctuated heavily. The most significant wasn't Sarkozy result (which the first results gave 25-27 %, he finished slightly above 27), it was Marine Lepen results: everyone was claiming a great breakthrough - 20,7 % at a certain moment, then it slowly went down for Marine Lepen- a small 20, 19,5 , 18,1 and ultimately 17,9. Since in the cities you could vote till 8 o clock (vs 6 o clock elsewhere) it seems to me that the big city results got later in and the score was thus readjusted (overestimates of Lepen notably). What I am sure of is that the results from french in other countries (notably Belgium where I live and voted and where 200 000 french live), got only added mondaymorning, further lowering Lepen scores (she got less votes then Eva Jolie here...).

-"Media is biased about the debate." <- I think you are a bit paranaio sir, no offense meant. Le Monde reports a poll after the debate : http://www.lemonde.fr/election-presidentielle-2012/article/2012/05/03/hollande-juge-plus-convaincant-que-sarkozy-selon-un-sondage_1695533_1471069.html
Hollande more convincing, but Sarkozy more credible. Full results of the poll are in the link (Hollande did better one duction, but Sarko did better on international politics etc. all the number are given).
Le figaro (which is right wing biased): http://elections.lefigaro.fr/flash-presidentielle/2012/05/03/97006-20120503FILWWW00623-debat-hollande-fait-meilleure-impression.php
Reports similar news. Hollande more sincere and Sarko more competent.
All reports seemed fairly neutral to be honest (at least in written press, I don't watch TV).
It just seemed after the debate that Hollande did a bit better then Sarkozy and is still leading in the polls (5-6 points - but about 19% hadn't decided whom to vote for <- this can change alot imo).

- "-Mariane comparing Sarkozy to Petain and Laval. Is this democratic ?" Lol they compared Hollande to Stalin too. It is idiotic.

- About Bayrou voting for Hollande: It seems pretty obvious to me he would do that. While he disagrees with Hollande on state budget, Bayrou is a humanist and Sarko is swinging far right (il drague les électeurs de Lepen). Bayrou agrees on a couple of important things with Hollande - moralising politics for example. Even people within Sarkozy party have critized sarko's hardline, while the UMP is more traditional and humanist right (Raffarin to name one).
There is a calculus behind this move too obviously.

- On a personal level I think Sarkozy didn't do as bad last five years as Hollande claims, especially on an international (European) level - which I get to see quite a bit here in Brussels. Some plans of Hollande seem dubious (I don't understand my own people doesn't want to increase the age of retirement - in Belgium it is like 65-67? and they are going to increase it).
Overall what makes me vote Hollande is:
Sarkozy tax breaks for the rich (we got a historically low tax rate for rich people...) whom I find unfair and dumb in these times.
Hollande wants to reform the V republic: I honestly find that the president has too much power and wouldn't mind a dose of proportionnel representatives at the legislative elections.

And Hollande is right when he says Sarkozy divided the french.

Have a good night.

On May 04 2012 05:13 VyingsP wrote:


Oh geiko You can do better than that. Is that all that is left ? The media conspiracy ?

Seriously... Mediapart relased a document 7 days before election day. So what ? They have been releasing something like 2 documents per month for over a year now (in the different affairs). A new document released a week before the election day is just a matter of probability at this point. But don't worry, Hollande will remove that presidential immunity, so that every time some questions arise, the president will have the opportunity to answer (which our dear president sadly had not).

Marianne compared Sarkozy to Pétain and Laval ? Well, that's Marianne, do you want to blame Hollande for that or what ? And maybe, Sarkozy shouldn't say "travail, famille, patrie" (sorry, he says "nation") every day.

France 2 underestimated Sarkozy's result ? We have some serious *%$* here. Moreover they overestimated Marine Le Pen. France 2 is being manipulated by the FN. What is the police doing ? Watching TF1 ?

As for today's headline, I'm sorry but I have no other advise than "deal with it". That's what happened. Except in the eyes of someone who truely believes in Sarkozy. Maybe you should only read the Figaro and Alantico, plus Micheal Vendetta's twitter. The press can write wathever it wants in this country. Just create your own blog, and inform the country about how fantastic Sarkozy was last night, only to be compared to how good he has been for 5 years.

+ Show Spoiler +

On May 04 2012 05:42 Geiko wrote:


It's not a conspiracy, it's a strategic alliance. You'd have to be living under rock to claim today that the media are completely unbiased.

I firmly believe in democracy so I'll accept anyone that is elected. If Hollande is elected, you'll certainly see me giving him more respect as the President of France than Sarkozy was given during his 5 years at the head of the state.

I think generally, political debates wouldn't be as low level as they are right now in France if people behaved and showed some respect to everyone, regardless of their political color.

On May 04 2012 06:17 kwizach wrote:

Please, just stop playing the victim card.

On May 04 2012 05:42 Geiko wrote:


It's not a conspiracy, it's a strategic alliance. You'd have to be living under rock to claim today that the media are completely unbiased.

I firmly believe in democracy so I'll accept anyone that is elected. If Hollande is elected, you'll certainly see me giving him more respect as the President of France than Sarkozy was given during his 5 years at the head of the state.

I think generally, political debates wouldn't be as low level as they are right now in France if people behaved and showed some respect to everyone, regardless of their political color.

On May 04 2012 06:42 VyingsP wrote:


It is hard to respond to posts like that as well. Except to say that there are media that are frendly towards the left (France Inter, l'Humanité, Libé) and media friendly towards the right (Atlantico, Le Figaro, RTL, TF1). Is that something new or am I missing the point ?

If you really want to answer some questions, tell us how Sarkozy managed to forgot about the donation collect and told 20M people with a straight up face : "it is false" when it obviously was not.

I do not think the next president will change much, but considering this, I prefer to get one that is not as good as lying.

On May 04 2012 06:56 Geiko wrote:


This is kind of the problem in France imo, Media and people nitpicking on things (raybans, fouquet's etc...) and forgetting the big picture.
Most people agree that Sarkozy is much more competent than Hollande, but yet Hollande will still be elected.
People nowadays are idolizing Mitterand who was the biggest liar of all times, but this time around, people prefer to forget that part of his personality. Wonder what people would have thought of him if he had been right wing ?

On May 04 2012 06:56 Geiko wrote:


This is kind of the problem in France imo, Media and people nitpicking on things (raybans, fouquet's etc...) and forgetting the big picture.
Most people agree that Sarkozy is much more competent than Hollande, but yet Hollande will still be elected.
People nowadays are idolizing Mitterand who was the biggest liar of all times, but this time around, people prefer to forget that part of his personality. Wonder what people would have thought of him if he had been right wing ?

Nicolas Sarkozy a été jugé plus crédible que son rival socialiste (44 % contre 42 %)

On May 04 2012 07:25 VyingsP wrote:


The big picture, it is the crisis. Something none of the capitalistic governments will ever avoid. And in that regard, Hollande has at least promised that he will separate retail banks from investment banks.
And to come back to the video that was posted above in this thread, about the guy in some bank that told us that Hollande would be bound by the market, it reminded me so much of an old quote from some famous anarchist : "Not only does god not exist, but if he did, we would have to destroy him". Now that god exists, and that he has control over our lives, we have to destroy it.

Most people agree that Sarkozy is much more competent ? What most people ? The one you talk with ? Why is he more competent ? Because he had 5 years to train as sorcerer apprentice ? I am almost sure no one else in France has such an experience with crisis. The incredible thing actually is that so many people who believe that Hollande is matched with Sarkozy in term of presidential stature, when Sarkozy had 5 years to acquire it.

On May 04 2012 07:26 Nouar wrote:


Jean Sarkozy and EPAD, Lybia supposed funding, Bettencourt funding, lying in front of 20M people about retention camps, lying about the donation collect, blatantly insulting people on a regular basis etc etc are just people nitpicking ? No.

On what basis can you say Sarkozy is much more competent than Hollande ? Correze ? Might I remind you the crippled state of the department when he inherited it ? Should we compare with France ? You don't have a basis, we just don't *know*. It could very well be. And trust the frenchmen to bring down Hollande in flames like we did to Sarkozy if he fucks up.

You are, forever, trying to tell us that the state of Sarkozy's hatred in France is totally undeserved. This is not the case. You maybe don't see why, but quite a large chunk of the population feels it.

Sarkozy more credible ? Why did it not make headlines ?

a 2% difference doesn't deserve a headline. Why did they headline Hollande ? Because it was a *surprise* that people felt him more convincing. That's not what was expected. That's why it made headlines. It's as simple as that.

The big picture is important, of course, but having a ruler you can put your trust into, is imo as important. It's no surprise if nobody is clearly saying "vote Sarkozy". He pissed everyone off. Bring people from the diversity in the government, diss them, and call them back 6 months before the elections ? His own party is on the verge of destruction due to the change of lines, blatant appeal to FN, strategies chosen by his advisors, etc... He brought it to himself. His way of doing things alienated so many people that, whatever how competent he might be, he's dividing the people instead of assembling them, and thus, his policies do not have the same effect, and will be resisted so much he won't be able to do anything.
You just cannot work like that. The core of his reforms isn't even in question here, but these are not so petty reasons as you seem to find them.
Working with a team, having the country adhere to what you do... this is the way of each and every ruler at every level you can find, for a reason. Solo work against everyone including his own party only works for so long.

Shitting on "false workers", "immigrants", "teachers", "syndicates", *EVERYONE* is not the fucking way to go to govern a country.



On a sidenote about Lybia : It might very well be a false one, we don't know. But telling people not to trust "Kadhafi's son, and other guys from his party", while trusting the one guy protected by France while under an international arrest warrant, and again not trusting the former prime minister, Baghdadi Al-Mahmoudi, who said it's true today ?
Hell, even CNT first said it's false, and now says they don't know since they didn't check it.

Why trust one, not the other, why not distrust everyone ? Who lies, who tells the truth ? We don't know. It might be a conspiracy, it might be a hoax, but taking us for fools telling us who to trust and to distrust according to your own obvious agenda, it's so annoying, and adds to the global distrust against Sarkozy.

On May 04 2012 07:25 VyingsP wrote:


The big picture, it is the crisis. Something none of the capitalistic governments will ever avoid. And in that regard, Hollande has at least promised that he will separate retail banks from investment banks.
And to come back to the video that was posted above in this thread, about the guy in some bank that told us that Hollande would be bound by the market, it reminded me so much of an old quote from some famous anarchist : "Not only does god not exist, but if he did, we would have to destroy him". Now that god exists, and that he has control over our lives, we have to destroy it.

Most people agree that Sarkozy is much more competent ? What most people ? The one you talk with ? Why is he more competent ? Because he had 5 years to train as sorcerer apprentice ? I am almost sure no one else in France has such an experience with crisis. The incredible thing actually is that so many people who believe that Hollande is matched with Sarkozy in term of presidential stature, when Sarkozy had 5 years to acquire it.

On May 04 2012 08:03 Lebesgue wrote:


Most of the economists think that what Hollande says is really dangerous not only for France itself but for the whole future of the European Union.

On May 04 2012 08:09 kwizach wrote:

First sentence, already a lie. Nice.

On May 04 2012 08:18 Heweree wrote:


Seriously can we stop with the one liners?
I agree with him, so please tell me why it's a lie.

On May 04 2012 07:49 Geiko wrote:


We're not going to redo the debate here. When I said most people thought Sarkozy was more competent, I was just referring to the poll that just came out where he had a clear majority of people thinking he was better on economics, politiques intérieurs, and Europe.
You can have a different opinion and that's fine, I respect that, but I'm saying I don't understand people who value small affairs more than actual political decisions and projets. (and I'm not saying I agree that the affairs are true)

On May 04 2012 08:19 radiatoren wrote:
I saw a piece of the debate... None of those two are even close to electable. Sarcozy childishly called Hollande names and critizised that he did not know about the sex-life of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, before he was caught. Hollande was just too timid and called Sarcozy a liar.

Kindergarten is perfect to describe what I saw.

On May 04 2012 08:18 Heweree wrote:


Seriously can we stop with the one liners?
I agree with him, so please tell me why it's a lie.