|
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 December 07 2016 21:26 Furikawari wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 21:17 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 20:20 Furikawari wrote:On December 07 2016 20:15 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 19:12 Furikawari wrote:On December 07 2016 17:58 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 17:03 xM(Z wrote:
kwizach and TheDwf are funny. from where i'm sitting kwizach is trying to americanize the options.
for TheDwf, voting is about the issues but kwizach is trying to make it about the sides. humans don't care about sides dude, they care about issues.
you don't vote for a side, you vote for an issue. I'm not sure what "Americanizing the options" is supposed to mean, but you're missing the point: as I explicitly stated, Mélenchon and Valls have more in common on the issues than Mélenchon and Fillon. If you're a left-wing voter who cares about the kind of policy that will be enacted by the next government, you should largely prefer Mélenchon, Valls, Montebourg, Hamon and even Macron to Fillon. You should open your eyes... And btw, history speaks: PS did worst for workers than did the previous government. Oh, and guess who was prime minister? Speaking loudly never made laws. They're wide open, thanks, and while I'm more than critical of Hollande's presidency, Fillon is still going to push way more deleterious reforms of the welfare state and of the social acquis than Valls and Macron. On December 07 2016 20:08 xM(Z wrote:On December 07 2016 17:58 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 17:03 xM(Z wrote:
kwizach and TheDwf are funny. from where i'm sitting kwizach is trying to americanize the options.
for TheDwf, voting is about the issues but kwizach is trying to make it about the sides. humans don't care about sides dude, they care about issues.
you don't vote for a side, you vote for an issue. I'm not sure what "Americanizing the options" is supposed to mean, but you're missing the point: as I explicitly stated, Mélenchon and Valls have more in common on the issues than Mélenchon and Fillon. If you're a left-wing voter who cares about the kind of policy that will be enacted by the next government, you should largely prefer Mélenchon, Valls, Montebourg, Hamon and even Macron to Fillon. a left-wing voter does not exist. people listen to words, (try to)understand issues then make a choice based on what issues are real to them(it immediately affects them) vs the degree of trust put in the politician ushering in said words. you could then later(after the vote) split the voters into categories/sides and add definitions as you see fit, but that is inconsequential to them. they will, time and time again, vote on issues and not on sides. You're not addressing what I'm writing. These are assumptions based on nothing. He has been prime minister for 5 years and did almost nothing. Yeah, maybe he has "change" like all people that claim they have changed... On the other hand, Valls and Macron did a lot. "Etat d'urgence" (emergency state), "loi travail" (working rules right wing only dreamt about). And that's only for the concrete part. How is my comment based on "nothing" when it's based on Fillon's record as prime minister for five years and on his current policy platform, which he defends himself as Thatcherite? Start by reading what I wrote... His record is close to empty, and yeah, speaking loudly made records, for sure.
I read what you wrote, and his record is certainly not "close to empty" (whether on the retirement age, health insurance & access to care, taxation (for example regarding overtime hours), access to public services, welfare support, family support, etc. -- let's not pretend the left didn't have plenty to be angry about by 2012), and dismissing what he clearly states he wants to enact is nonsensical.
|
On December 07 2016 15:48 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 08:58 TheDwf wrote:Secondly, the fact that Mélenchon was already there in the first round of the 2012 election to split the left-wing vote doesn't change the fact that having only one left-wing candidate would increase that candidate's share of the vote. It's obvious that many Mélenchon voters would vote for the winner of the left wing primary if Mélenchon supported him or her, just like it's obvious that many Valls voter would do the same if Mélenchon won the primary. What do you think happened to many of the people who voted for Mélenchon in the first round of the 2012 election? Did they all abstain from voting in the second round, or did many of them vote for Hollande? Why are you comparing a second round scenario, in which you're de facto in a “lesser of two evils” logic (with null or abstention as the third choice) if your candidate didn't make it to the second round, with the refusal to be part of the PS primary? Plus the difference between 2012 and now is, well, that Hollande's term happened in between? Sorry, but you're simply deluded if you think that more than a marginal proportion of Valls' voters would vote for Mélenchon if he won the primary. They would massively fly to any center-left to center-right candidate. Vote transfers can happen from the antiliberal left to the liberal left (80+% from Mélenchon to Hollande in the second round in 2012), but not vice versa in the first round. Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 08:58 TheDwf wrote:"Not the same ideas, not the same electorate" is meaningless: idea-wise and policy-wise, Mélenchon has a lot more in common with the PS than with Fillon, and Mélenchon voters prefer the PS to Fillon as well, just like they preferred Hollande to Sarkozy. And vice-versa: most PS voters would likely prefer Mélenchon to Fillon. Nope, most of them would vote for a centrist instead. Mélenchon can find some common ground with the left wing of the PS, but not with the right wing (which was hegemonic in this mandate). If the left wing of the PS actually wins this primary, talks can happen. If Valls does, nope. We'll see the actual power balances in January. I'm comparing the two because the second round is what happens when there are no alternatives to vote for -- most people who vote tend to vote for the candidate closest to their views, even if he or she is not their ideal candidate. The same would be true if the left had a comprehensive primary which would lead it to only have one main candidate in the first round instead of many. If both Macron and Mélenchon participated in the primary against the current PS candidates, and if every primary candidate accepted to strongly support the eventual winner ( with the winner also accepting to defend a compromise platform to include policy ideas from the other camps), that candidate would without a doubt receive the support of a far from insignificant share of the currently fragmented voters.
What possible compromise? You didn't answer the questions I asked you in the first part of this post.
And even if you were right that it would be only a "marginal proportion" of the voters currently supporting other candidates, that is still better than zero.
Nope, the return expectancy would actually be negative for Mélenchon. The moment he enters this primary, he loses the whole political capital he accumulated since 2008 and more particularly 2012, and half of his electorate instantly flees from him. Of course Valls and overall the PS don't have this problem, they could simply take the free voices and still apply their own ideological line afterwards. It's been decades that the PS is a giant machine to add the voices of the antiliberal left to the liberal left, in such a way that the latter wins and then silences the former.
Seriously, how can you not acknowledge that Mélenchon would do better in the first round if Valls/Montebourg/Hamon, Macron, possibly Jadot and others were not running and instead supporting his candidacy? And the same is true of Valls alone, of Macron alone, etc. I'm not saying that every supporter of the other candidates would automatically support the winner of the primary, but simply that the winner of the primary would be in a better situation than if he or she was facing other prominent left wing/center-left candidates in the first round.
Yep, Macron or Valls would gain a lot if the other one would withdraw, because they're actually on the same segment. But it's their problem. As I already said, the vast majority of their voters would rather choose a centrist than Mélenchon. They are much closer to the centre than to the left that Mélenchon represents. I don't know why you don't want to admit or understand that, but such is the reality. As a consequence, the antiliberal left has no interest in micromanaging the inheritance quarell over the field of ruins that Hollande left in its wake.
|
On December 07 2016 22:09 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +And even if you were right that it would be only a "marginal proportion" of the voters currently supporting other candidates, that is still better than zero. Nope, the return expectancy would actually be negative for Mélenchon. The moment he enters this primary, he loses the whole political capital he accumulated since 2008 and more particularly 2012, and half of his electorate instantly flees from him. Of course Valls and overall the PS don't have this problem, they could simply take the free voices and still apply their own ideological line afterwards. It's been decades that the PS is a giant machine to add the voices of the antiliberal left to the liberal left, in such a way that the latter wins and then silences the former.
This is a completely baseless claim. There is nothing that indicates that Mélenchon would lose half of his electorate if he participated in the primary and perhaps even won it. He'd be perfectly free to keep the same line he's kept for years, and I have a feeling his supporters would be eager to help him beat the PS candidates.
On December 07 2016 22:09 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +Seriously, how can you not acknowledge that Mélenchon would do better in the first round if Valls/Montebourg/Hamon, Macron, possibly Jadot and others were not running and instead supporting his candidacy? And the same is true of Valls alone, of Macron alone, etc. I'm not saying that every supporter of the other candidates would automatically support the winner of the primary, but simply that the winner of the primary would be in a better situation than if he or she was facing other prominent left wing/center-left candidates in the first round. Yep, Macron or Valls would gain a lot if the other one would withdraw, because they're actually on the same segment. But it's their problem. As I already said, the vast majority of their voters would rather choose a centrist than Mélenchon. They are much closer to the centre than to the left that Mélenchon represents. I don't know why you don't want to admit or understand that, but such is the reality. As a consequence, the antiliberal left has no interest in micromanaging the inheritance quarell over the field of ruins that Hollande left in its wake.
This poll doesn't say what you want it to say. It tracks down how 2012 voters have seen their preferences evolve since then, precisely taking into account the current fragmentation of the left. It says absolutely nothing of what current supporters of Valls, Montebourg, Hamon, Macron etc. would do if their candidates all supported Mélenchon after he won the primary.
With regards to your next comments, you're the one who's unwilling to acknowledge that Mélenchon would benefit from the withdrawal and explicit support of Valls, Macron, Montebourg, etc. Even if all of their supporters don't go to him, his numbers would still improve compared to the situation where he directly has to compete against Macron and the winner of the left's primary. How you can possibly argue against this is beyond me.
|
Netherlands6273 Posts
The problem is that it's the PS primary not the lefts primary. You're stuck with the party and all it's baggage. Melenchon entering the PS primary does exactly what the PS wants. It makes sure that the PS will always be the main party for the left making it impossible for other left parties to challenge them. By voting Melenchon instead of PS you can pull the PS to the left (like the FN does with the UMP) or maybe overtake them as the biggest party on the left.
|
Ok, for those still in love with the PS twitter.com.
Just wow. Worth to note, the actual date of the document is 5th of december, so it's Valls that did this (the day he resigned, so cute...), not Cazeneuve.
|
Netherlands6273 Posts
What does it say? Not everyone speaks French here.
|
It's really hard for me to translate as I dont have law field vocabulary... Let's say that now judges are no longer independent from the government (well they never really were, but now it's officialized).
|
Well, one of the main problems of a PS primary that is "inclusive" to the left is that it tries to preempt the actual elections. If Melenchon, Macron and others truly have no traction, PS should have an easy time duking it out with the UMP and FN for who gets to go to the runoff. But clearly PS is losing their base to a variety of other parties, showing that there is something wrong in their messaging (and with Hollande, lol). Trying to coerce those people back into the PS with such a faux PS primary is pretty desperate, imho, and it's no wonder that the people who fractured off (Melenchon mainly) don't want to play ball.
|
On December 07 2016 23:06 Acrofales wrote:
Well, one of the main problems of a PS primary that is "inclusive" to the left is that it tries to preempt the actual elections. If Melenchon, Macron and others truly have no traction, PS should have an easy time duking it out with the UMP and FN for who gets to go to the runoff. But clearly PS is losing their base to a variety of other parties, showing that there is something wrong in their messaging (and with Hollande, lol). Trying to coerce those people back into the PS with such a faux PS primary is pretty desperate, imho, and it's no wonder that the people who fractured off (Melenchon mainly) don't want to play ball.
Nobody is claiming that Mélenchon and Macron have no traction -- they clearly do, as many polls place them above any PS candidate in the first round. The point, however, is that finishing above the PS candidate doesn't magically qualify them for the second round, and that it is in fact at this point unlikely that they'll do so. The biggest help to do that would be for Macron, Mélenchon, the PS candidates and others to compete against each other during the left's primary instead of during the first round, and have the winner of the primary be supported by everyone else during the first round of the actual election. And if the winner doesn't come from the PS, he or she certainly will not have to join the PS or follow any guidance from the PS. It will simply allow him or her to receive the backing of the PS instead of having to compete against its candidate in the first round.
|
I note that you're still not answering to the question of the compatibility between the different programs. By the way, are you French? If yes, could you please roughly precise where do you stand politically?
On December 07 2016 22:26 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 22:09 TheDwf wrote:Seriously, how can you not acknowledge that Mélenchon would do better in the first round if Valls/Montebourg/Hamon, Macron, possibly Jadot and others were not running and instead supporting his candidacy? And the same is true of Valls alone, of Macron alone, etc. I'm not saying that every supporter of the other candidates would automatically support the winner of the primary, but simply that the winner of the primary would be in a better situation than if he or she was facing other prominent left wing/center-left candidates in the first round. Yep, Macron or Valls would gain a lot if the other one would withdraw, because they're actually on the same segment. But it's their problem. As I already said, the vast majority of their voters would rather choose a centrist than Mélenchon. They are much closer to the centre than to the left that Mélenchon represents. I don't know why you don't want to admit or understand that, but such is the reality. As a consequence, the antiliberal left has no interest in micromanaging the inheritance quarell over the field of ruins that Hollande left in its wake. This poll doesn't say what you want it to say. It tracks down how 2012 voters have seen their preferences evolve since then, precisely taking into account the current fragmentation of the left. It says absolutely nothing of what current supporters of Valls, Montebourg, Hamon, Macron etc. would do if their candidates all supported Mélenchon after he won the primary.
This poll says that 67% of Hollande's 2012 voters would now vote from ~center-left to center-right, as opposed to 13% who would choose Mélenchon instead. This is a ~5:1 ratio. The porosity is extremely low. So, yep, it does confirm what I say; considering that most Valls' voters come from 2012 Hollande, and that Macron's voters partially come from here too, they are definitely closer to the centre than to Mélenchon.
If you need further proof, then take it from here. When Montebourg is tested instead of Valls, he scores half Valls' vote intentions. Where do those electors go? To Macron (and a bit Bayrou). When neither Macron nor Bayrou are here, Valls and Fillon are boosted (respectively +8 and +5); Mélenchon only gains 3 points. Not the same electorate...
Everyone who knows the French political life would laugh at the idea of Valls or Macron supporting Mélenchon. Next what? Macron singing l'Internationale and Valls waving the red flag in his meetings? LOL. If such a clown show happened, it would still change nothing to the fact that neither Valls nor Macron are the legal owners of people who vote for them. Those people have free will, they are not brainwashed zombies, they don't have to obey to whatever their overlords ask of them. They would massively flee to Bayrou, who would drain most of those voters disappointed with a Mélenchon win.
|
On December 07 2016 22:56 RvB wrote:
What does it say? Not everyone speaks French here.
The executive casually seized control of the highest judicial jurisdiction without warning the concerned members of said Court, who are now protesting and asking for a meeting with the Prime minister to know why this move happened.
|
Best part being that it's explicitly written in the french constitution that it is against the constitution...
|
On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:
I note that you're still not answering to the question of the compatibility between the different programs. By the way, are you French? If yes, could you please roughly precise where do you stand politically?
I'm not answering it because I'm not interested in discussing the issue. I wanted to comment on the electoral opportunity of having center/left-wing candidates compete with each other in a primary rather than in the first round of the general election, and we're already not agreeing on that. I don't have French citizenship, and I stand to the left of the current PS leadership.
On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 22:26 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 22:09 TheDwf wrote:Seriously, how can you not acknowledge that Mélenchon would do better in the first round if Valls/Montebourg/Hamon, Macron, possibly Jadot and others were not running and instead supporting his candidacy? And the same is true of Valls alone, of Macron alone, etc. I'm not saying that every supporter of the other candidates would automatically support the winner of the primary, but simply that the winner of the primary would be in a better situation than if he or she was facing other prominent left wing/center-left candidates in the first round. Yep, Macron or Valls would gain a lot if the other one would withdraw, because they're actually on the same segment. But it's their problem. As I already said, the vast majority of their voters would rather choose a centrist than Mélenchon. They are much closer to the centre than to the left that Mélenchon represents. I don't know why you don't want to admit or understand that, but such is the reality. As a consequence, the antiliberal left has no interest in micromanaging the inheritance quarell over the field of ruins that Hollande left in its wake. This poll doesn't say what you want it to say. It tracks down how 2012 voters have seen their preferences evolve since then, precisely taking into account the current fragmentation of the left. It says absolutely nothing of what current supporters of Valls, Montebourg, Hamon, Macron etc. would do if their candidates all supported Mélenchon after he won the primary. This poll says that 67% of Hollande's 2012 voters would now vote from ~center-left to center-right, as opposed to 13% who would choose Mélenchon instead. This is a ~5:1 ratio. The porosity is extremely low. So, yep, it does confirm what I say; considering that most Valls' voters come from 2012 Hollande, and that Macron's voters partially come from here too, they are definitely closer to the centre than to Mélenchon.
No, it doesn't confirm what you say, because again those other candidates include Valls and Macron (33% and 24% respectively), which would precisely not compete against Mélenchon in the general election if they all participated in the left primary. Nobody is disputing that most Hollande voters are closer to Valls and to Macron than to Mélenchon. My point is about where Hollande voters would go if Hollande, Valls and Macron ended up supporting Mélenchon (or at the very least if they were not in the race).
On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:If you need further proof, then take it from here. When Montebourg is tested instead of Valls, he scores half Valls' vote intentions. Where do those electors go? To Macron (and a bit Bayrou). When neither Macron nor Bayrou are here, Valls and Fillon are boosted (respectively +8 and +5); Mélenchon only gains 3 points. Not the same electorate...
That's not proof either, because again all of these polls include a PS candidate competing against Mélenchon, which is precisely the scenario I am not talking about. I am not aware of any poll indicating how PS and Macron voters would vote if the PS candidates and Macron supported Mélenchon after him winning the left's primary, but it seems clear to me Mélenchon would get a bigger boost than Fillon. Are you disputing this? (actually, see my question below instead)
On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:
Everyone who knows the French political life would laugh at the idea of Valls or Macron supporting Mélenchon. Next what? Macron singing l'Internationale and Valls waving the red flag in his meetings? LOL. If such a clown show happened, it would still change nothing to the fact that neither Valls nor Macron are the legal owners of people who vote for them. Those people have free will, they are not brainwashed zombies, they don't have to obey to whatever their overlords ask of them. They would massively flee to Bayrou, who would drain most of those voters disappointed with a Mélenchon win.
While it may seem laughable, if Mélenchon won the left's primary the PS would have no choice but to support him (I agree that Macron would probably go into hiding, though :p). Bayrou would indeed benefit from an absence of Valls and Macron, but that's again beside the point. The point is that Mélenchon would fare better in a first round in which he only has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right than in a first round in which he has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right PLUS Macron and Valls.
Anyway, we're getting nowhere, so let's end this discussion with this simple question:
In which situation do you think Mélenchon would perform the best in the first round of the 2017 election?
1. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou, Macron, the PS primary candidate (probably Valls) and a few other smaller candidates.
2. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou and a few other smaller candidates.
I believe he'd perform the best in the second scenario, especially since the second scenario would mean that the other candidates of the left's primary (which would here include Valls and Macron) would be supporting him, even if only tepidly. And the same would be true if you replace Mélenchon by Macron or by Valls. If you pick the first scenario instead, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
|
On December 07 2016 23:45 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:
I note that you're still not answering to the question of the compatibility between the different programs. By the way, are you French? If yes, could you please roughly precise where do you stand politically? I'm not answering it because I'm not interested in discussing the issue. I wanted to comment on the electoral opportunity of having center/left-wing candidates compete with each other in a primary rather than in the first round of the general election, and we're already not agreeing on that. I don't have French citizenship, and I stand to the left of the current PS leadership.
Thanks. Well, the colored part is exactly what's wrong with the mindset of this primary: just like the PS apparatchiks, you think purely in tactical terms (“how to win”) instead of addressing the underlying problems (“winning, fine, but to do what?”). You cannot artificially bring together people who no longer share the same vision/ideas simply because they belong to the “left” label. That is empty electoralism and is one of the reasons the PS degenerated: it turned into a monstruous electoral machine aggregating everything and its contrary, succeeded in 2012 (and only because of how god awful Sarkozy was...), then collapsed because there was no real thinking and cohesion behind.
No, it doesn't confirm what you say, because again those other candidates include Valls and Macron (33% and 24% respectively), which would precisely not compete against Mélenchon in the general election if they all participated in the left primary. Nobody is disputing that most Hollande voters are closer to Valls and to Macron than to Mélenchon. My point is about where Hollande voters would go if Hollande, Valls and Macron ended up supporting Mélenchon (or at the very least if they were not in the race).
That's not proof either, because again all of these polls include a PS candidate competing against Mélenchon, which is precisely the scenario I am not talking about. I am not aware of any poll indicating how PS and Macron voters would vote if the PS candidates and Macron supported Mélenchon after him winning the left's primary, but it seems clear to me Mélenchon would get a bigger boost than Fillon. Are you disputing this? (actually, see my question below instead)
Why are you talking about Fillon? I said that most of them would go to the centre, i. e. to Bayrou in that hypothesis (assuming there is nothing between Mélenchon and Bayrou).
Anyway, we're getting nowhere, so let's end this discussion with this simple question:
In which situation do you think Mélenchon would perform the best in the first round of the 2017 election?
1. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou, Macron, the PS primary candidate (probably Valls) and a few other smaller candidates.
2. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou and a few other smaller candidates.
I believe he'd perform the best in the second scenario, especially since the second scenario would mean that the other candidates of the left's primary (which would here include Valls and Macron) would be supporting him, even if only tepidly. And the same would be true if you replace Mélenchon by Macron or by Valls. If you pick the first scenario instead, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I am sure that it is better for Mélenchon to run outside of the primary. What will be the consequences of the potential traffic jam near the centre for him (your first situation), I don't know. Given his strategy and ideas, I honestly think that it's just not his concern. Only a potential win of the left-wing of the PS in the primary could be disruptive for him, because then there would be some duplicate at the left.
|
On December 08 2016 02:23 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 23:45 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:
I note that you're still not answering to the question of the compatibility between the different programs. By the way, are you French? If yes, could you please roughly precise where do you stand politically? I'm not answering it because I'm not interested in discussing the issue. I wanted to comment on the electoral opportunity of having center/left-wing candidates compete with each other in a primary rather than in the first round of the general election, and we're already not agreeing on that. I don't have French citizenship, and I stand to the left of the current PS leadership. Thanks. Well, the colored part is exactly what's wrong with the mindset of this primary: just like the PS apparatchiks, you think purely in tactical terms (“how to win”) instead of addressing the underlying problems (“winning, fine, but to do what?”). You cannot artificially bring together people who no longer share the same vision/ideas simply because they belong to the “left” label. That is empty electoralism and is one of the reasons the PS degenerated: it turned into a monstruous electoral machine aggregating everything and its contrary, succeeded in 2012 (and only because of how god awful Sarkozy was...), then collapsed because there was no real thinking and cohesion behind.
Please stop making nonsensical claims about what I think. I said I did not want to discuss the issue with you here, not that I did not think about policy and how to address "the underlying problems". I discuss and write about policy for a living. I simply wanted to address a specific issue here and not others.
On December 08 2016 02:23 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +No, it doesn't confirm what you say, because again those other candidates include Valls and Macron (33% and 24% respectively), which would precisely not compete against Mélenchon in the general election if they all participated in the left primary. Nobody is disputing that most Hollande voters are closer to Valls and to Macron than to Mélenchon. My point is about where Hollande voters would go if Hollande, Valls and Macron ended up supporting Mélenchon (or at the very least if they were not in the race). Show nested quote +That's not proof either, because again all of these polls include a PS candidate competing against Mélenchon, which is precisely the scenario I am not talking about. I am not aware of any poll indicating how PS and Macron voters would vote if the PS candidates and Macron supported Mélenchon after him winning the left's primary, but it seems clear to me Mélenchon would get a bigger boost than Fillon. Are you disputing this? (actually, see my question below instead) Why are you talking about Fillon? I said that most of them would go to the centre, i. e. to Bayrou in that hypothesis (assuming there is nothing between Mélenchon and Bayrou).
I addressed this when I wrote "Bayrou would indeed benefit from an absence of Valls and Macron, but that's again beside the point. The point is that Mélenchon would fare better in a first round in which he only has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right than in a first round in which he has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right PLUS Macron and Valls".
I'm talking about Fillon because him and Le Pen are currently the two favorites to reach the second round, and therefore the two candidates it is most important to surpass in terms of share of the vote. Not Bayrou.
On December 08 2016 02:23 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +Anyway, we're getting nowhere, so let's end this discussion with this simple question:
In which situation do you think Mélenchon would perform the best in the first round of the 2017 election?
1. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou, Macron, the PS primary candidate (probably Valls) and a few other smaller candidates.
2. Competing against Le Pen, Fillon, Bayrou and a few other smaller candidates.
I believe he'd perform the best in the second scenario, especially since the second scenario would mean that the other candidates of the left's primary (which would here include Valls and Macron) would be supporting him, even if only tepidly. And the same would be true if you replace Mélenchon by Macron or by Valls. If you pick the first scenario instead, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I am sure that it is better for Mélenchon to run outside of the primary. What will be the consequences of the potential traffic jam near the centre for him (your first situation), I don't know. Given his strategy and ideas, I honestly think that it's just not his concern. Only a potential win of the left-wing of the PS in the primary could be disruptive for him, because then there would be some duplicate at the left.
Please answer the question. It's two simple scenarios, and you can forget about the primary if you'd like. Which one do you think would favor him the most?
|
On December 08 2016 02:40 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2016 02:23 TheDwf wrote:On December 07 2016 23:45 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 23:19 TheDwf wrote:
I note that you're still not answering to the question of the compatibility between the different programs. By the way, are you French? If yes, could you please roughly precise where do you stand politically? I'm not answering it because I'm not interested in discussing the issue. I wanted to comment on the electoral opportunity of having center/left-wing candidates compete with each other in a primary rather than in the first round of the general election, and we're already not agreeing on that. I don't have French citizenship, and I stand to the left of the current PS leadership. Thanks. Well, the colored part is exactly what's wrong with the mindset of this primary: just like the PS apparatchiks, you think purely in tactical terms (“how to win”) instead of addressing the underlying problems (“winning, fine, but to do what?”). You cannot artificially bring together people who no longer share the same vision/ideas simply because they belong to the “left” label. That is empty electoralism and is one of the reasons the PS degenerated: it turned into a monstruous electoral machine aggregating everything and its contrary, succeeded in 2012 (and only because of how god awful Sarkozy was...), then collapsed because there was no real thinking and cohesion behind. Please stop making nonsensical claims about what I think. I said I did not want to discuss the issue with you here, not that I did not think about policy and how to address "the underlying problems". I discuss and write about policy for a living. Show nested quote +On December 08 2016 02:23 TheDwf wrote:No, it doesn't confirm what you say, because again those other candidates include Valls and Macron (33% and 24% respectively), which would precisely not compete against Mélenchon in the general election if they all participated in the left primary. Nobody is disputing that most Hollande voters are closer to Valls and to Macron than to Mélenchon. My point is about where Hollande voters would go if Hollande, Valls and Macron ended up supporting Mélenchon (or at the very least if they were not in the race). That's not proof either, because again all of these polls include a PS candidate competing against Mélenchon, which is precisely the scenario I am not talking about. I am not aware of any poll indicating how PS and Macron voters would vote if the PS candidates and Macron supported Mélenchon after him winning the left's primary, but it seems clear to me Mélenchon would get a bigger boost than Fillon. Are you disputing this? (actually, see my question below instead) Why are you talking about Fillon? I said that most of them would go to the centre, i. e. to Bayrou in that hypothesis (assuming there is nothing between Mélenchon and Bayrou). I addressed this when I wrote "Bayrou would indeed benefit from an absence of Valls and Macron, but that's again beside the point. The point is that Mélenchon would fare better in a first round in which he only has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right than in a first round in which he has to compete against Bayrou and the right + far-right PLUS Macron and Valls". I'm talking about Fillon because him and Le Pen are currently the two favorites to reach the second round, and therefore the two candidates it is most important to surpass in terms of share of the vote. Not Bayrou.
In this scenario (Mélenchon winning the primary of the PS and thus being alone on the left), Bayrou would become a major force, and thus a potential favorite. We're talking about a political space potentially weighing between 25 and 30%. In this case I don't see why it would be better for Mélenchon, since it might actually raise the qualification threshold for the second round... You assume that there would be good vote transfers from Macron/Valls' voters to Mélenchon, I don't believe it.
Please answer the question. It's two simple scenarios, and you can forget about the primary if you'd like. Which one do you think would favor him the most?
I told you: I don't know.
|
Alright, then we disagree. Thanks for answering. Cheers.
|
Erdogan blames foreign investors for the downfall of the Turkish Lira. That guy's comedian gold whenever he opens his mouth. The only bad thing about that is that he runs a country.
|
On December 07 2016 20:15 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 19:12 Furikawari wrote:On December 07 2016 17:58 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 17:03 xM(Z wrote:
kwizach and TheDwf are funny. from where i'm sitting kwizach is trying to americanize the options.
for TheDwf, voting is about the issues but kwizach is trying to make it about the sides. humans don't care about sides dude, they care about issues.
you don't vote for a side, you vote for an issue. I'm not sure what "Americanizing the options" is supposed to mean, but you're missing the point: as I explicitly stated, Mélenchon and Valls have more in common on the issues than Mélenchon and Fillon. If you're a left-wing voter who cares about the kind of policy that will be enacted by the next government, you should largely prefer Mélenchon, Valls, Montebourg, Hamon and even Macron to Fillon. You should open your eyes... And btw, history speaks: PS did worst for workers than did the previous government. Oh, and guess who was prime minister? Speaking loudly never made laws. They're wide open, thanks, and while I'm more than critical of Hollande's presidency, Fillon is still going to push way more deleterious reforms of the welfare state and of the social acquis than Valls and Macron. Show nested quote +On December 07 2016 20:08 xM(Z wrote:On December 07 2016 17:58 kwizach wrote:On December 07 2016 17:03 xM(Z wrote:
kwizach and TheDwf are funny. from where i'm sitting kwizach is trying to americanize the options.
for TheDwf, voting is about the issues but kwizach is trying to make it about the sides. humans don't care about sides dude, they care about issues.
you don't vote for a side, you vote for an issue. I'm not sure what "Americanizing the options" is supposed to mean, but you're missing the point: as I explicitly stated, Mélenchon and Valls have more in common on the issues than Mélenchon and Fillon. If you're a left-wing voter who cares about the kind of policy that will be enacted by the next government, you should largely prefer Mélenchon, Valls, Montebourg, Hamon and even Macron to Fillon. a left-wing voter does not exist. people listen to words, (try to)understand issues then make a choice based on what issues are real to them(it immediately affects them) vs the degree of trust put in the politician ushering in said words. you could then later(after the vote) split the voters into categories/sides and add definitions as you see fit, but that is inconsequential to them. they will, time and time again, vote on issues and not on sides. You're not addressing what I'm writing, so I'll just refer you to my previous posts. if i'll play your game you'll learn nothing; of course i'm addressing what you're writing, i'm just not in your bubble.
you use statistics to predict human behavior because you were taught they are reliable ... until they are not; and when they're not, when they fail, you don't lose - you blame math, the formula, the adjustments, the stupid people who didn't fit the pattern etc. TheDwf makes a judgement call on people for which he will be directly responsible.
i was trying to tell you that there's a way you can know beforehand when statistics will be wrong, but why would you care since even when wrong, you(as a statistics backer)'ll still be in a gray area, able to weasel out of any responsibility for your claims/numbers(but oh man, you'll be taking credits for when numbers are right).
meh, but screw all that. if your numbers turn out to be wrong, would you make a post similar to < kwizach was wrong here >, just for the sake of it?.
|
I did not use "statistics to predict human behavior". You clearly did not understand my posts at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
