French presidential primaries

[Major-Tom]

Also, PS, why'd you have to go with Hamon.....? I'd have considered Valls as viable.

[Collatis]

Also, PS, why'd you have to go with Hamon.....? I'd have considered Valls as viable.

Valls was far too connected with the unpopular policies of Hollande (and with good reason!). If Valls were the candidate Mélenchon would have much of Hamon's current support. All Valls would achieve in doing would be draining support away from Macron, which is bad for obvious reasons.

[Cymrea]

A Canadian analysis of Macron's chances.

[Major-Tom]

Also, PS, why'd you have to go with Hamon.....? I'd have considered Valls as viable.

Valls was far too connected with the unpopular policies of Hollande (and with good reason!). If Valls were the candidate Mélenchon would have much of Hamon's current support. All Valls would achieve in doing would be draining support away from Macron, which is bad for obvious reasons.

Hamon is also unpopular - 13%. His far left policies don't resonate with a lot of French voters.

[Collatis]

Valls was far too connected with the unpopular policies of Hollande (and with good reason!). If Valls were the candidate Mélenchon would have much of Hamon's current support. All Valls would achieve in doing would be draining support away from Macron, which is bad for obvious reasons.

Hamon is also unpopular - 13%. His far left policies don't resonate with a lot of French voters.

Neither one of them was ever going to make it to the second round. At least Hamon can maintain the support of some of his own party, something Valls couldn't have done.

Also, I wouldn't call Hamon far-left. He's to the left of the center-left, but not by that much. He's arguably more moderate than Corbyn (who I also wouldn't classify as far-left).

[Baltenstein]

Hamon is also unpopular - 13%. His far left policies don't resonate with a lot of French voters.

Neither one of them was ever going to make it to the second round. At least Hamon can maintain the support of some of his own party, something Valls couldn't have done.

Also, I wouldn't call Hamon far-left. He's to the left of the center-left, but not by that much. He's arguably more moderate than Corbyn (who I also wouldn't classify as far-left).

Which is why he is going to tank in the elections. Really, the PS should have decided to either go full Leftist and embrace an alliance with Melenchon, or go full Centrist and nominate Valls as their candidate.
By choosing this wishy-washy in-between they are going to lose the Centrist vote to Macron and split the Leftist vote with Melenchon, and will end up with a comically small - for a governing party - share of the overall vote.

[Novus America]

Neither one of them was ever going to make it to the second round. At least Hamon can maintain the support of some of his own party, something Valls couldn't have done.

Also, I wouldn't call Hamon far-left. He's to the left of the center-left, but not by that much. He's arguably more moderate than Corbyn (who I also wouldn't classify as far-left).

Which is why he is going to tank in the elections. Really, the PS should have decided to either go full Leftist and embrace an alliance with Melenchon, or go full Centrist and nominate Valls as their candidate.
By choosing this wishy-washy in-between they are going to lose the Centrist vote to Macron and split the Leftist vote with Melenchon, and will end up with a comically small - for a governing party - share of the overall vote.

In all fairness they were DOA. They had no chance no matter who they ran.

[Minoa]

In LePen's defense, she disowned and disenfranchised her father. A lot of French jews, too, support FN. I'd have preferred Fillon or Juppé in regards to immigration policy and economic policy, Macron vs LePen is definitely a battle of lesser of two evils.

I can't find any sources at the moment but I do remember reading some newspaper intrigue that depicted FN still harboring some suspicious ties. Was it some sort of conference with some nazi-esque group in Austria?

Anyway, she certainly has made efforts into making her party more presentable.

While I appreciate some of the efforts that Marine Le Pen has done, the backlash that is happening in the US against Donald Trump makes hard nationalism a very bad idea in my opinion.

[Aelex]

While I appreciate some of the efforts that Marine Le Pen has done, the backlash that is happening in the US against Donald Trump makes hard nationalism a very bad idea in my opinion.

Why the U.S having problems with its democratically elected president mean that us French should stop being proud of our Nation and valuing its own interests over all?
I'm having trouble following your logic.

[Collatis]

Socialists are equally split between Hamon and Macron

[Major-Tom]

Socialists are equally split between Hamon and Macron

Doesn't matter, it will be LePen vs Macron, unless Fillon can pull a miracle out.

[Minoa]

While I appreciate some of the efforts that Marine Le Pen has done, the backlash that is happening in the US against Donald Trump makes hard nationalism a very bad idea in my opinion.

Why the U.S having problems with its democratically elected president mean that us French should stop being proud of our Nation and valuing its own interests over all?
I'm having trouble following your logic.

Since when did I say that France must surrender every vestige of cultural identity just because so many people are merely fleeing war? I am a supporter of secularism, but I mean neutrality towards religion.

What I clearly don't support is racial hatred, whether it is Muslims, Jewish, or others. Banning all Muslims just because of the actions of Raqqa (the de facto capital of ISIL) is a clear act of racial hatred.

[Aelex]

Since when did I say that France must surrender every vestige of cultural identity just because so many people are merely fleeing war? I am a supporter of secularism, but I mean neutrality towards religion.

What I clearly don't support is racial hatred, whether it is Muslims, Jewish, or others. Banning all Muslims just because of the actions of Raqqa (the de facto capital of ISIL) is a clear act of racial hatred.

We are already Laïque and thus neutral toward all religions. And we have no vocation to welcome all the misery of the world.

And who is banning all Muslims? And how is banning people from a country you're at war with and who are likely to harbor terrorist sympathy "racial hatred".

[Theodorex]

She seems to have some momentum now.

[Minoa]

She seems to have some momentum now.

Source please?

Since when did I say that France must surrender every vestige of cultural identity just because so many people are merely fleeing war? I am a supporter of secularism, but I mean neutrality towards religion.

What I clearly don't support is racial hatred, whether it is Muslims, Jewish, or others. Banning all Muslims just because of the actions of Raqqa (the de facto capital of ISIL) is a clear act of racial hatred.

We are already Laïque and thus neutral toward all religions. And we have no vocation to welcome all the misery of the world.

And who is banning all Muslims? And how is banning people from a country you're at war with and who are likely to harbor terrorist sympathy "racial hatred".

What about the refugees? The case for accepting refugees from Syria and most of Iraq are really strong with all that violence going on. However, I understand that there is a lot of inconsistency on how to deal with asylum applications, and while I am aware of the recent EU deal, there has to be a way to allow countries that welcome refugees, like Canada, to step in to help process asylum applications and offer places to refugees, to relieve the understandable logistical nightmare.

In general, assuming that all Muslims are terrorists and being hostile to them, like what Donald Trump was in his campaign rhetoric, only worsens the vicious cycle and risks total and utter disaster and regret. If I could vote in this election, I would go for Macron, and then pressure Macron to work with Trudeau and Merkel (or Schulz) to make the job of finding refugees a home a lot easier. If we started assuming good faith and be like "okay, you are fleeing a war, let us find you a suitable home", there would be little to no reason to be radicalised.

I know it isn't easy, but it would be a lot better than giving ISIL a reason to escalate the vicious cycle.

[Aelex]

What about the refugees? The case for accepting refugees from Syria and most of Iraq are really strong with all that violence going on. However, I understand that there is a lot of inconsistency on how to deal with asylum applications, and while I am aware of the recent EU deal, there has to be a way to allow countries that welcome refugees, like Canada, to step in to help process asylum applications and offer places to refugees, to relieve the understandable logistical nightmare.

In general, assuming that all Muslims are terrorists and being hostile to them, like what Donald Trump was in his campaign rhetoric, only worsens the vicious cycle and risks total and utter disaster and regret. If I could vote in this election, I would go for Macron, and then pressure Macron to work with Trudeau and Merkel (or Schulz) to make the job of finding refugees a home a lot easier. If we started assuming good faith and be like "okay, you are fleeing a war, let us find you a suitable home", there would be little to no reason to be radicalised.

I know it isn't easy, but it would be a lot better than giving ISIL a reason to escalate the vicious cycle.

If we just refused them, then there will be no need about fearing their radicalization in the first place. Moreover, we're half a continent away from their war zone. If the only thing they care about is to escape then they can't stay in the neighboring countries. If what they're interested in is welfare, then where is the problem with just telling them to fuck off?
Anyway, I.S.I.S need no reason to escalate the vicious circle as they've been doing it already. Kindest thing we could do is just step up the level and actually try to use overwhelming force to destroy them rather than just keeping at bombing them from time to time and watching the Kurds and the Syrian Army do all the fighting.

[Minoa]

What about the refugees? The case for accepting refugees from Syria and most of Iraq are really strong with all that violence going on. However, I understand that there is a lot of inconsistency on how to deal with asylum applications, and while I am aware of the recent EU deal, there has to be a way to allow countries that welcome refugees, like Canada, to step in to help process asylum applications and offer places to refugees, to relieve the understandable logistical nightmare.

In general, assuming that all Muslims are terrorists and being hostile to them, like what Donald Trump was in his campaign rhetoric, only worsens the vicious cycle and risks total and utter disaster and regret. If I could vote in this election, I would go for Macron, and then pressure Macron to work with Trudeau and Merkel (or Schulz) to make the job of finding refugees a home a lot easier. If we started assuming good faith and be like "okay, you are fleeing a war, let us find you a suitable home", there would be little to no reason to be radicalised.

I know it isn't easy, but it would be a lot better than giving ISIL a reason to escalate the vicious cycle.

If we just refused them, then there will be no need about fearing their radicalization in the first place. Moreover, we're half a continent away from their war zone. If the only thing they care about is to escape then they can't stay in the neighboring countries. If what they're interested in is welfare, then where is the problem with just telling them to fuck off?
Anyway, I.S.I.S need no reason to escalate the vicious circle as they've been doing it already. Kindest thing we could do is just step up the level and actually try to use overwhelming force to destroy them rather than just keeping at bombing them from time to time and watching the Kurds and the Syrian Army do all the fighting.

Okay, let me put it another way: a family supports neither side of the war, refuses to take sides, and has fled Syria: given all the fighting that is going on now, they have a certain risk of losing their lives if were they to be deported to Syria, even if they never cared about the war. How would you approach this?

For me, I would accept their claim at face value, since condemning them to die in the war zone is tantamount to legalising murder.

[Aelex]

Okay, let me put it another way: a family supports neither side of the war, refuses to take sides, and has fled Syria: given all the fighting that is going on now, they have a certain risk of losing their lives if were they to be deported to Syria, even if they never cared about the war. How would you approach this?

For me, I would accept their claim at face value, since condemning them to die in the war zone is tantamount to legalising murder.

Send them back to Turkey, Jordan or any of the other country neighboring Syria. Once more, we have no obligation nor even reason to accept people coming from a region we're at war with.

[Aelex]

France like every major country have a responsibility to all people from Africa and the Middle East because of the past. Not so many years ago Nicholas Sarkozy participated in the destruction of Libya.

We had responsibilities to them when they were still our colonies. Now? We have no responsibility but to serve best our own interests.

[Minoa]

Okay, let me put it another way: a family supports neither side of the war, refuses to take sides, and has fled Syria: given all the fighting that is going on now, they have a certain risk of losing their lives if were they to be deported to Syria, even if they never cared about the war. How would you approach this?

For me, I would accept their claim at face value, since condemning them to die in the war zone is tantamount to legalising murder.

Send them back to Turkey, Jordan or any of the other country neighboring Syria. Once more, we have no obligation nor even reason to accept people coming from a region we're at war with.

The conditions of the refugee camps there are already atrocious, not to mention that they have been attacked before.

After some number crunching with the expected run-off, using sources listed under this:


Opinion polls are never definitive: you can see how the undecided switching to a given candidate can change the percentages greatly.

[Aelex]

The conditions of the refugee camps there are already atrocious, not to mention that they have been attacked before.

After some number crunching with the expected run-off, using sources listed under this:

(Image)
Opinion polls are never definitive: you can see how the undecided switching to a given candidate can change the percentages greatly.

Sad. But not our problem.

And I don't give any shit about polls in general.

[Secundus Imperium Romanum]

I'm not French, but I think the right will win. The French people are very tired of these terrorist attacks and call for a more serious leader on this issue, now on the far right is complicated, as it may happen what happened in the Netherlands

[Never had a pot noodle]

I'm not French, but I think the right will win. The French people are very tired of these terrorist attacks and call for a more serious leader on this issue, now on the far right is complicated, as it may happen what happened in the Netherlands

In 2015, just after one of the worst terrorist attacks occurred, the far right didn't win a majority in a single region.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_regional_elections,_2015

These aren't polls they're how people actually voted.

[Minoa]

This is why I never said that the polls are definitive: however, it entices me to crunch them for some reason. Maybe a return to maths may be on the horizon, but I haven't been so dedicated to the subject since 2009.

[Never had a pot noodle]

I think the media might just be exaggerating the chances of Le Pen since worried people click more. But in reality the French have a much more concrete understanding of their values than Anglo Saxon countries (especially America), so it's much less easy for a Trump like character to succeed.