|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On August 31 2016 18:33 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Macron has a bit of a problem: right wing people tend to vote for right wing politicians (he is supposedly not one) and left wing people tend not to vote for right wing politicians (he is actually one).
Macron is popular, but it's a popularity from people who will not vote for him. Just like Valls, anyone with an atom of left wing conviction pretty much loathes him.
Why would Juppé chose a First Minister "d'ouverture" when he has plenty of people waiting on line for the job in his own party?
Depends on how strong the FN scores, but Juppé might want to appear as a "trans-party President" (something that's reinforced by his moderateness among right-wingers and his image of "old sage") by getting the center/center-left behind him, and Macron, by virtue of having been minister in a Socialist government yet not being Socialist at all, would be a good candidate. He's also pretty popular among foreign medias because of his image of modernity, much more than anyone else among potential right-wing politicians, I believe.
|
On August 31 2016 21:10 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2016 18:33 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Macron has a bit of a problem: right wing people tend to vote for right wing politicians (he is supposedly not one) and left wing people tend not to vote for right wing politicians (he is actually one).
Macron is popular, but it's a popularity from people who will not vote for him. Just like Valls, anyone with an atom of left wing conviction pretty much loathes him.
Why would Juppé chose a First Minister "d'ouverture" when he has plenty of people waiting on line for the job in his own party? Depends on how strong the FN scores, but Juppé might want to appear as a "trans-party President" (something that's reinforced by his moderateness among right-wingers and his image of "old sage") by getting the center/center-left behind him, and Macron, by virtue of having been minister in a Socialist government yet not being Socialist at all, would be a good candidate. He's also pretty popular among foreign medias because of his image of modernity, much more than anyone else among potential right-wing politicians, I believe.
That's true.
Now considering what happened to the "ministres d'ouvertures" of the Sarkozy first government, I don't think anyone will be tempted by the experiment again. "Eric Besson" has become a synonym of "opportunistic traitor" and the guy is one of the most hated politician in recent french history. Not very tempting.
|
On August 31 2016 22:24 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2016 21:10 OtherWorld wrote:On August 31 2016 18:33 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Macron has a bit of a problem: right wing people tend to vote for right wing politicians (he is supposedly not one) and left wing people tend not to vote for right wing politicians (he is actually one).
Macron is popular, but it's a popularity from people who will not vote for him. Just like Valls, anyone with an atom of left wing conviction pretty much loathes him.
Why would Juppé chose a First Minister "d'ouverture" when he has plenty of people waiting on line for the job in his own party? Depends on how strong the FN scores, but Juppé might want to appear as a "trans-party President" (something that's reinforced by his moderateness among right-wingers and his image of "old sage") by getting the center/center-left behind him, and Macron, by virtue of having been minister in a Socialist government yet not being Socialist at all, would be a good candidate. He's also pretty popular among foreign medias because of his image of modernity, much more than anyone else among potential right-wing politicians, I believe. That's true. Now considering what happened to the "ministres d'ouvertures" of the Sarkozy first government, I don't think anyone will be tempted by the experiment again. "Eric Besson" has become a synonym of "opportunistic traitor" and the guy is one of the most hated politician in recent french history. Not very tempting.
That's true, but I think you underestimate the hunger for power of your average politician. Many would be ready to become an opportunistic traitor if it means spending some years being a minister, and even more so for guys like Macron who can't rely on anyone but themselves (no party support, no local mandate). I mean, he himself accepted to become a minister in the most hated government of recent history.
And, I mean, Besson is still making plenty of money from consulting, that's not so bad
|
On August 31 2016 22:48 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2016 22:24 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 31 2016 21:10 OtherWorld wrote:On August 31 2016 18:33 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Macron has a bit of a problem: right wing people tend to vote for right wing politicians (he is supposedly not one) and left wing people tend not to vote for right wing politicians (he is actually one).
Macron is popular, but it's a popularity from people who will not vote for him. Just like Valls, anyone with an atom of left wing conviction pretty much loathes him.
Why would Juppé chose a First Minister "d'ouverture" when he has plenty of people waiting on line for the job in his own party? Depends on how strong the FN scores, but Juppé might want to appear as a "trans-party President" (something that's reinforced by his moderateness among right-wingers and his image of "old sage") by getting the center/center-left behind him, and Macron, by virtue of having been minister in a Socialist government yet not being Socialist at all, would be a good candidate. He's also pretty popular among foreign medias because of his image of modernity, much more than anyone else among potential right-wing politicians, I believe. That's true. Now considering what happened to the "ministres d'ouvertures" of the Sarkozy first government, I don't think anyone will be tempted by the experiment again. "Eric Besson" has become a synonym of "opportunistic traitor" and the guy is one of the most hated politician in recent french history. Not very tempting. That's true, but I think you underestimate the hunger for power of your average politician. Many would be ready to become an opportunistic traitor if it means spending some years being a minister, and even more so for guys like Macron who can't rely on anyone but themselves (no party support, no local mandate). I mean, he himself accepted to become a minister in the most hated government of recent history. And, I mean, Besson is still making plenty of money from consulting, that's not so bad
Ok, but the other side of the argument is that what those people want is to be president of the united states of the world, for ever. Having a chair as minister knowing you won't be respected, that it will be very short and totally ruin your political career is not what any of those guys run behind.
I don't think Besson trajectory is considered success for any serious politician. Get your seat as a minister and burn your career in two years, that kind of sucks.
|
On September 01 2016 01:48 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 31 2016 22:48 OtherWorld wrote:On August 31 2016 22:24 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 31 2016 21:10 OtherWorld wrote:On August 31 2016 18:33 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Macron has a bit of a problem: right wing people tend to vote for right wing politicians (he is supposedly not one) and left wing people tend not to vote for right wing politicians (he is actually one).
Macron is popular, but it's a popularity from people who will not vote for him. Just like Valls, anyone with an atom of left wing conviction pretty much loathes him.
Why would Juppé chose a First Minister "d'ouverture" when he has plenty of people waiting on line for the job in his own party? Depends on how strong the FN scores, but Juppé might want to appear as a "trans-party President" (something that's reinforced by his moderateness among right-wingers and his image of "old sage") by getting the center/center-left behind him, and Macron, by virtue of having been minister in a Socialist government yet not being Socialist at all, would be a good candidate. He's also pretty popular among foreign medias because of his image of modernity, much more than anyone else among potential right-wing politicians, I believe. That's true. Now considering what happened to the "ministres d'ouvertures" of the Sarkozy first government, I don't think anyone will be tempted by the experiment again. "Eric Besson" has become a synonym of "opportunistic traitor" and the guy is one of the most hated politician in recent french history. Not very tempting. That's true, but I think you underestimate the hunger for power of your average politician. Many would be ready to become an opportunistic traitor if it means spending some years being a minister, and even more so for guys like Macron who can't rely on anyone but themselves (no party support, no local mandate). I mean, he himself accepted to become a minister in the most hated government of recent history. And, I mean, Besson is still making plenty of money from consulting, that's not so bad Ok, but the other side of the argument is that what those people want is to be president of the united states of the world, for ever. Having a chair as minister knowing you won't be respected, that it will be very short and totally ruin your political career is not what any of those guys run behind. I don't think Besson trajectory is considered success for any serious politician. Get your seat as a minister and burn your career in two years, that kind of sucks.
I honestly don't know enough of politicians to say what they want exactly. I'd think, though, that most of them are realistic about their chances of doing stuff, and that they know being a minister for two or three years is the best most of them can hope for.
Besson's trajectory is not a success, but not a failure, imo, as he managed to get back more or less on his feet : he's mayor and making money. A true political failure would be Cahuzac, whose political career is deader than dead.
|
(Reuters) - A third of French voters want Emmanuel Macron, who resigned from government on Tuesday, to run in next year's presidential election, more than twice as many as those who would like President Francois Hollande to seek re-election, a poll showed.
Neither has yet said they would be candidate but both the deeply unpopular Socialist president and his former protege are widely expected to throw their hats in the ring.
Macron, a 38-year old former investment banker, quit his economy minister post on Tuesday to devote himself to the political party he recently set up, saying he needed to be free "to transform France" next year.
Some 34 percent of voters want the outspoken politician who has criticised left-wing totems such as the 35 hour-workweek to make a presidential bid, an Elabe poll for BFM TV showed.
That may not seem much, but that compares with a mere 15 percent supporting an Hollande candidacy in a poll carried out by the same pollster last month, and is also higher than polls testing conservative ex-president Nicolas Sarkozy's appeal to voters.
"Even if a majority don't support a Macron candidacy, he is in a better place than Hollande," Elabe's director of political studies Yves-Marie Cann said.
A poll by Ifop pollsters, also carried out after Macron's resignation, showed 47 percent of voters would like him to run in the election, also more than twice as many as in previous polls testing Hollande's candidacy.
The problem for Macron, who says his new party leans neither left nor right but has been a minister in a Socialist government for two years, is that both polls show that support for his candidacy is much higher among right-wing voters than left-wing ones.
"Would they (right-wing supporters) vote for him? Nothing is less sure," Ifop's Frederic Dabi said.
uk.reuters.com
|
Ireland's cabinet agreed on Friday to join Apple in appealing against a multi-billion-euro back tax demand that the European Commission has imposed on the iPhone maker, despite misgivings among independents who back the fragile coalition.
The Commission's ruling this week that the U.S. tech giant must pay up to 13 billion euros ($14.5 billion) to Dublin has angered Washington, which accuses the EU of trying to grab tax revenue that should go to the U.S. government.
www.reuters.com
I think engaging a race to who can provide the lowest tax rate for societies is already dumb and harmful for the average citizen. I hope the EU stays strong and forces Apple to pay. I'm also surprised Obama intervenes on the matter.
|
No salt about the elections in Germany? Is this real life?
|
AfD didn't win, no reason to be salty
|
On September 05 2016 02:04 Sent. wrote:
AfD didn't win, no reason to be salty
it was a win considering the circumstances.. and it will be a disruption of the political climate although they will not be part of the ruling coalition
i do not like that some germans think it is time again to trust into xenophobic nationalism scapegoating away the problems.. we should know better.
|
On September 05 2016 03:23 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2016 02:04 Sent. wrote:
AfD didn't win, no reason to be salty it was a win considering the circumstances.. and it will be a disruption of the political climate although they will not be part of the ruling coalition i do not like that some germans think it is time again to trust into xenophobic nationalism scapegoating away the problems.. we should know better.
there's at least some silver lining to it
The SPD, which has ruled the rural state on the Baltic coast with the CDU as junior coalition partners since 2006, won 30.2 percent of the vote, down from 35.6 percent in the last election in 2011. The CDU won 19.8 percent, down from 23 percent in 2011, and its worst result ever in the state, the broadcaster said.
The far-left Left Party won 12.5 percent, down from 18.4 percent five years ago, while the pro-environment Greens won 5 percent, down from 8.7 percent. The far-right NPD was knocked out of the state assembly, falling below the 5 percent threshold for the first time since 2006 with 3.2 percent, down from 6 percent in 2011.
|
Zurich15365 Posts
I mean everyone expected pretty much about this turnout, so no surprises really?
Brutal for the CDU though. "Nothing to the right of us" and all ...
|
Looks like they just changed one extremist party for another. Its probably even the same people but rallying behind a different banner now.
|
On September 05 2016 04:30 RoomOfMush wrote:
Looks like they just changed one extremist party for another. Its probably even the same people but rallying behind a different banner now.
It is not that simple. Yes there are some former NPD-people in the AfD, but apparently the AfD attracts people from everywhere in the political spectrum (except from the greens it seems).
|
On September 05 2016 20:28 Mafe wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2016 04:30 RoomOfMush wrote:
Looks like they just changed one extremist party for another. Its probably even the same people but rallying behind a different banner now. It is not that simple. Yes there are some former NPD-people in the AfD, but apparently the AfD attracts people from everywhere in the political spectrum (except from the greens it seems).
To expand on this you can see on http://wahl.tagesschau.de/wahlen/2016-09-04-LT-DE-MV/analyse-wanderung.shtml#14_Wanderung_AFD what people had voted before they voted AfD.
According to this graphic AfD got the most votes from people who didn't vote in the last election followed by CDU.
|
East Germany (not counting Berlin) has a lot of xenophobes and neo-nazis, so they always vote for parties like that. The whole immigration and refugee fear mongering encouraged people to voting for them, too, especially where less educated and poor people that follow anyone who promises them a better life are concerned. East Germany has a lot of those, too.
|
Sure it's a superficially bad thing for the CDU to end up on a third place behind the AfD but it's simply the consequence of them not serving this demographic any more. It's been pretty clear that the party aims to establish itself as a centrist party that attracts urban voters rather than a party that can gobble up everybody on the whole right spectrum.
The 'people's party' idea of making everybody happy isn't really going to work any more when decisions are coming up that clearly force a the party to position itself and I guess it's smart to pivot towards the young voters rather than the old ones. After all 80% of the voters didn't vote for the AfD, and MeckPomm is as bad as it's going to get.
|
On September 07 2016 02:38 Nyxisto wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Sure it's a superficially bad thing for the CDU to end up on a third place behind the AfD but it's simply the consequence of them not serving this demographic any more. It's been pretty clear that the party aims to establish itself as a centrist party that attracts urban voters rather than a party that can gobble up everybody on the whole right spectrum. The 'people's party' idea of making everybody happy isn't really going to work any more when decisions are coming up that clearly force a the party to position itself and I guess it's smart to pivot towards the young voters rather than the old ones. After all 80% of the voters didn't vote for the AfD, and MeckPomm is as bad as it's going to get.
Well imho according to the common definition of "young" and "old", there are way more old people than young ones in germany, and the CDU has had much higher success among the old ones.
And all this "well actually the XX%-majority of voters didnt vote for AfD" thing that is many people are saying right now it starting to annoy me. With our policital system (which I still apporve of very much), 20% for a party that will not get into a government can be enough to essentially drown any politics as we know and start a vicious cycle. Here's what I am fearing:
High share of AfD votes -> established parties are forced to form unlikely alliances in order to create a government -> different parties who could present legitimately different non-radical solutions for pressing problems will not really disagree as they are working together now -> lack of public discussion/different opinions between the non-populist parties (at least publicly perceived) -> more radical parties are the only ones to really present different ideas -> voters who want change feell that they have to turn to such parties to if they really want something to change -> even higher share of AfD voters.
In fact this has probably been going on for several years now. Today (well techinically yesterday) I had a small discussion with a colleague about why people vote AfD, and we both struggled to come up with points what the CDU (and SPD) actually stand for, except "more of the same, whatever it is", and I would say we both are relatively interested in polictics. Even I feel that it doesnt really matter if I would vote CDU, SPD or greens (which are still my preferred party of the big ones, but this is mostly because I think they are the least likely to sell out the country for some personal glory). The last few elections I voted for some fringe party who I really think to be most exact representation of my political views, and I probably will do the same as long as the major parties remain in this Merkel-induced vegetative state.
|
But at the same time these established parties must do >something< right. Germany is doing pretty good in comparison to any other country on earth. Why would anybody want a different government when germany is already on top of its game?
|
On September 07 2016 08:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
But at the same time these established parties must do >something< right. Germany is doing pretty good in comparison to any other country on earth. Why would anybody want a different government when germany is already on top of its game?
Because people are myopic and short-sighted?
I dunno. People like to believe the worst and not look at context. Asked whether global poverty has, in the last 20 years, fallen by half, doubled, or remained the same, only 5% of Americans know that it has halved. People like to be discontented and ignore massive quality of life improvements. Gas is super cheap right now and has been for a while. Who's talking about that? That's how it goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
