EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 718
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
pmh
1366 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 18 2017 04:27 OtherWorld wrote: Given the current context of the recent Fillon scandal and the general opinion towards politicians, I'd analyze the figure of 40% not being certain of their vote as people being careful of potential unexpected events/hidden things about their chosen candidate, not as people being completely undecided. I mean, if we take Ifop, the question asked to assess certainty is : "Would you say that you are sure of your choice, or that you could still change it ?". Thus, basically saying "I will vote for X and won't change my opinion, whatever happens" more than one month away from the election is to me something that a good chunk of progressive voters simply won't do. Thus, I believe that most people who say they'll vote for Macron but aren't sure of their choice are just people with a 70/80% chance of voting Macron and not people with a 100% of voting Macron. Suddenly, seeing things that way makes substantial changes much less likely. About Fillon's chances : honestly, his undecided voters rate is at 40% at the moment, not far from Macron's 50%, and very far from Le Pen's 20%. Thus, I see no reason to believe that Fillon might magically come back from a 5+% disadvantage, while Macron would somehow lose a 5+% advantage, unless you decide that Fillon's "undecideds" are less undecided than Macron's. And I wouldn't call Macron "hardly safe" : when you "ride high on a wave of positive depictions" for 6+ months, you won't easily be smacked down. ??? + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://www.acrimed.org/IMG/png/capture_d_e_cran_2016-11-27_a_22.42.11.png) ![[image loading]](http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/983451FillonvsJupp.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://www.tekiano.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/saltbae.jpg) I know the fact that Le Pen is Le Pen and Macron is playing the narrative of "the progressive candidate" makes it tempting to make a Trump - Clinton analogy, but Le Pen has not much in common with Trump, and Macron has close to nothing in common with Clinton as a candidate. Her main flaws - lack of charisma, embodiment of the establishment, age, support of an rich and huge but ineffective party, open contempt towards her adversary's voter base, etc - are not Macron's. ??? bis Macron is the embodiment of the establishment. You probably refer to the fact that he was never elected, but he's the archetypal member of the French political elite. ENA, high official (before being investment banker for a few years), member of the Attali commission to liberalize the economy, Assistant Secretary General for l'Élysée (and as such, one of the direct inspirers of Hollande's disatrous economic policy), then minister of the economy... pure product of the establishment. His class contempt was all too obvious in some of his interactions with ordinary people. And most importantly he'll be seen as the continuity/statu quo candidate, just like Clinton, at a time where being the incumbent guy does you no good. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Mafe
Germany5966 Posts
Today our former foreign ministery from the green party called the left party "nationalists" and it doesnt look wrong to me. The SPD were one of the major supporters of TTIP. The most notable political stances/decisions of each german party over the last years are basically the complete opposite of what they should have done based on the general principles the respective parties claim to exist for. Social democrats cutting social security systems. Conservatives abolishing compulsory military service and finalizing the exit from nuclear energy. Ok, maybe these contradictions are exactly the reason why they are notable, but anyway. What weird times. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
Also the Green/CDU overlap is not accidental. German Conservatism often has an ecological bent. People love their Waldorf schools, 'natural' and provincial style of living, that kind of stuff. Also many Green people coming from fairly wealthy and educated background have turned more and more Conservative as they've grown out of their rebel phase. So with the Conservatives ditching the traditionalism and the Greens ditching the more radical stuff they're actually a very logical match. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 18 2017 07:44 Nyxisto wrote: You don't have to agree with him politically but I don't know why you can't at least recognise that people see Macron as a welcome breath of fresh air in a very stale political environment. Just because he is not a left or right-wing radical does not mean that he is not a genuine alternative. Just like Schulz he represents voters that believe that he can deliver genuine pro-European policies and don't care if he's a banker or a janitor or comes from a prestigious university or not. Not everybody draws the establishment line in purely economic terms. A breath of fresh air?! Macron is the TINA staleness, he's literally the condensed version of everything that failed for decades (hence why no president got reelected ever while governing in France!); but grotesque, obscene hype combined with the simultaneous collapse of the two main governmental forces created a large space for him. And there he is, shouting platitudes in front of mesmerized crowds... Lecanuet 1965, VGE 1974, Bayrou 2007... It won't be the first time nor the last that people try to build something around the centre. Did you know that in 2007, a group of neoliberal technocrats coming from the ““left”” had pleaded for a Royal/Bayrou centrist alliance? They were named the Gracques. Macron/Bayrou in 2017 is exactly their dream. Complete depoliticisation in favor of a technocratic management of the current order. 2017 Le Pen might get +10 points from Hollande's mandate, I don't even want to imagine her score in 2022 after 5 years of Macron in power... @LegalLord: found numbers, participation rate in polls was 74% in 2012, 81% in 2007 (late March). This year, mid-March, the last poll had 66%. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
Juppé was candidate in a primary, and was more popular among the people who voted in the primary than among the typical right-wing voters. Look at the images you showed : note how a good chunk of them are from outlets that are not classified as right-wing. Juppé was very popular among center/right-of-the-left people, but not much more popular than Sarkozy or Fillon among the core LR electorate. Look at these Figaro headlines, much more balanced than the ones you showed : + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cxcaud5WQAAnphU.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cq-qKE6WEAA8v0I.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CtawbD0WIAAhGlP.jpg:medium) People from all over the political spectrum, except the traditional right (the very people who voted in the primary) were very supportive of Juppé precisely because he was the most moderate candidate of the right. People who actually voted in the primary were not supportive of Juppé precisely because he was the most moderate candidate. ??? bis Macron is the embodiment of the establishment. You probably refer to the fact that he was never elected, but he's the archetypal member of the French political elite. ENA, high official (before being investment banker for a few years), member of the Attali commission to liberalize the economy, Assistant Secretary General for l'Élysée (and as such, one of the direct inspirers of Hollande's disatrous economic policy), then minister of the economy... pure product of the establishment. His class contempt was all too obvious in some of his interactions with ordinary people. And most importantly he'll be seen as the continuity/statu quo candidate, just like Clinton, at a time where being the incumbent guy does you no good. As a candidate, what he is doesn't matter. The image he vehiculates is what matters. And being perceived as young, modern, risk-taking, self-made candidate [in the sense that he doesn't have the support of an established party], international (hey, finally a French politician with decent English), dynamic, etc, makes him not so much an embodiment of the (French) establishment, compared to people who've been whoring for votes for 10, 20, 30 or even 40 years, have plenty of scandals of their back, are repeating the same old ideological tenets of their party over and over, constantly blame their own incompetency on the EU, etc. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 18 2017 17:47 OtherWorld wrote: Juppé was candidate in a primary, and was more popular among the people who voted in the primary than among the typical right-wing voters. Look at the images you showed : note how a good chunk of them are from outlets that are not classified as right-wing. Juppé was very popular among center/right-of-the-left people, but not much more popular than Sarkozy or Fillon among the core LR electorate. Look at these Figaro headlines, much more balanced than the ones you showed : + Show Spoiler + People from all over the political spectrum, except the traditional right (the very people who voted in the primary) were very supportive of Juppé precisely because he was the most moderate candidate of the right. People who actually voted in the primary were not supportive of Juppé precisely because he was the most moderate candidate. As a candidate, what he is doesn't matter. The image he vehiculates is what matters. And being perceived as young, modern, risk-taking, self-made candidate [in the sense that he doesn't have the support of an established party], international (hey, finally a French politician with decent English), dynamic, etc, makes him not so much an embodiment of the (French) establishment, compared to people who've been whoring for votes for 10, 20, 30 or even 40 years, have plenty of scandals of their back, are repeating the same old ideological tenets of their party over and over, constantly blame their own incompetency on the EU, etc. For Juppé, it was an answer to this sentence from you: “when you "ride high on a wave of positive depictions" for 6+ months, you won't easily be smacked down.” But it's true that the polarizing mechanic of the primary won't be there in the first round. “As a candidate, what he is doesn't matter. The image he vehiculates is what matters.” Yeah sadly, storytelling is killing everything. But we'll now enter the debate phase, so other candidates will remind him his results and will portray him as Hollande's true heir... Oh by the way Nyxisto, behold Macronomics: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/%C3%89valuationCh%C3%B4mageFranceAo%C3%BBt2015.png) (Unemployment, all categories, from August 2011 to August 2015.) A true success for the wonder boy, eh? (Friendly reminder that he was the direct inspirer of Hollande's economic policies.) And his CICE, 41 billions of public funds to “help companies”. What a marvel: according to some report + Show Spoiler + under the leadership of some economist who now campaigns for Macron! so can't accuse him of anti-Macron bias lol | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
| ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
At the left: • Nathalie Arthaud (LO): far-left, internationalist revolutionary communism (trotskyism). Got 0.56% at the 2012 election. Currently polls give her around 0.5%. • Philippe Poutou (NPA): far-left, neocommunism (trotskyist filiation). Got 1.15% at the 2012 election. Currently polls give him around 0.5%. + Show Spoiler + If you wonder why there are 2 trotskyist candidates… It's complicated, but let us say that LO considers the NPA as not orthodox enough for an alliance. The usual sectarian business in trotskyist organizations… • Jean-Luc Mélenchon (La France insoumise): radical left (though he doesn't present himself that way), former member of the left wing of the PS which he left in 2008 because of its drift towards the centre. Has the (critical) support of the PCF (“communist” party) and various other forces of the radical left, but runs independently of parties for his own movement, La France insoumise [The Unsubmissive France]. Wants to call a Constituent Assembly for a VIth Republic, leave the European treaties (he thinks the current EU is a disaster), runs on an ecosocialist and economically keynesian platform. Also advocates for protectionnism. Got 11.1% at the 2012 election. Currently polls give him around 12%. • Benoît Hamon (PS): left-wing of social-democracy, former minister of Hollande, left the government in 2014 in disagreement with the austerity. Winner of the primary of the PS and its allies. Has the support of most ecologists, with the EELV candidate withdrawing in its favor after a deal. The right-wing of the PS pretty much does not support him, with some flying to Macron. Seems to move towards eurofederalism (he wants a Parliament of the eurozone), though critical of how the EU currently works. Promoted the universal base income in the primary before changing a bit his project. Promotes various ecologist ideas. Currently polls give him around 13% [Hollande had scored 28% in 2012]. At the centre: • Emmanuel Macron (En Marche !): centre, pro-UE and economically liberal. Former minister of Hollande, and one of his close advisors before that. Left the government in 2016 to start his own political movement. Has support from various people from the center-left to the center-right, was endorsed by Bayrou (center-right candidate who had scored 17% in 2007). Wants to reduce public spending and public officials (120k), further deregulate labour market, etc. Supports free trade treaties. Is seen as the favorite for weeks. Currently polls give him around 25%. At some place: • Jacques Cheminade (Solidarité & Progrès): hard to classify... seems to be the leader of a political sect linked with some far-right conspirationnist US clown. This guy is just weird lol. Got 0.25% at the 2012 election (and 0.28% in 1995 before). Currently polls give him around 0.5%. • François Asselineau (UPR): sovereignist right (though claims to be “above the left-right division”). Comes from the RPR (the ancestor of the UMP/LR, mainstream right). Wants to leave the European Union, the euro and NATO. Presents himself as the “Frexit candidate”. Has legions of very annoying trolls online. Seems to see the hand of the USA a bit everywhere, borderline conspirationnist, thinks the EU rules everything and wants to restore France's sovereignty because “the European Commission decides our policies”. Wasn't tested in polls so far. At the right: • Jean Lassalle: center-right. Former member of Bayrou's center-right party. Don't really know his ideas, seems to be culturally/socially conservative. Defends rurality. Wasn't tested in polls so far. • Nicolas Dupont-Aignan (Debout la France): sovereignist right. Former member of the UMP, left it in 2007. Can be classified as “social gaullist” I guess. Eurosceptic, anti-immigration and critical of austerity. Rejects both the mainstream right and the FN. Got 1.79% at the 2012 election. Currently polls give him around 3%. • François Fillon (LR): mainstream right, economically liberal and culturally/socially conservative (represents the catholic right), winner of the primary of the right and centre, was Sarkozy's Prime minister during 5 years. Currently charged for embezzlement of public funds, misappropriation of corporate assets, etc. but remained candidate despite his own word that he would give up if he was charged. His image suffered a lot from the various scandals around him, but (part of) his electoral basis still seems to be here. He was seen as the favorite before, but is now distanced in polls for weeks. Wants to reduce public spending (100 billions) and public officials (500k), further deregulate labour market, initially wanted to privatize the Social security before the uproar forced him to abandon this. Currently polls give him at 18-20%. [Sarkozy had scored 27% in 2007.] • Marine Le Pen (FN): far-right, nationalist/national-conservatist. Also surrounded by various scandals but her electorate doesn't seem to care. Claims to represent the people against the “globalists”. Wants to constitutionalize the “national preference” and tax companies which hire foreign workers. Wants to leave the euro, though she's fairly discreet on that. Anti-EU, anti-immigration (which she links with unemployment, terrorism, excessive social spending, etc.), anti-globalization, anti-islam, critical of austerity, economically a moving and weird mixture of protectionnism, statism and liberalism. Got 17.9% at the 2012 election. Currently polls give her above 25%. So far, the 5 biggest candidates (Fillon, Hamon, Le Pen, Macron, Mélenchon) score more than 90% of the vote intentions. They have a debate in 2 days. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On March 19 2017 00:23 Artisreal wrote: Huge props for the writeup! On March 19 2017 04:27 Ghostcom wrote: Thanks for the write-up thedwf. Just wondering, but did you mean "contenders" instead of "pretenders"? You're welcome. Doesn't pretenders also works, as in “pretenders to the throne”? Maybe it's a bit medieval. Sorry, my English is just so laborious. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
 | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
 | ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_pretenders | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On March 19 2017 04:35 TheDwf wrote: Doesn't pretenders also works, as in “pretenders to the throne”? Maybe it's a bit medieval. Sorry, my English is just so laborious. It works, it's just not a common usage anymore except in that specific context. | ||
| ||
