[QUOTE][IMG]https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2017/02/21/16/macron-france-getty.jpg[/IMG]
[B]French independent candidate Emmanuel Macron would easily beat far-right leader Marine Le Pen in the second round of the country's presidential election in May, according to two new surveys.[/B]
The pollsters said Mr Macron has been buoyed by the alliance announced this week with centrist politician Francois Bayrou, which has enabled him to move ahead of conservative candidate Francois Fillon.
A poll by Odoxa/Dentsu-Consulting showed Mr Macron, 39, a former economy minister running without the support of any traditional political party, would beat Ms Le Pen in the run-off with 61 per cent of the vote, versus 39 per cent for her.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Another poll by Figaro/LCI showed Mr Macron winning the runoff by 58 per cent to 42 per cent for Ms Le Pen.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Ms Le Pen, leader of the anti-immigrant and anti-European Union National Front, would lead in the first round of voting with 27 per cent, both polls showed, followed by Mr Macron with 25 per cent and Mr Fillon with 19 per cent.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]At the rally, Ms Le Pen accused ex-financier Mr Macron of being backed by banks and media groups, and said the justice system was being used to influence the outcome of the election.
Her chief of staff was put under formal investigation on Wednesday over alleged misuse of European Union funds. Another associate was also placed under formal investigation in a separate probe over campaign financing on Saturday.[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/marine-le-pen-emmanuel-macron-france-president-elections-polls-survey-a7601011.html"]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/marine-le-pen-emmanuel-macron-france-president-elections-polls-survey-a7601011.html[/URL]
[quote]French independent candidate Emmanuel Macron would easily beat far-right leader Marine Le Pen in the second round of the country's presidential election in May, according to [del]two new surveys[/del] increasingly nervous journalists[/quote]
I'm getting this sense of Deja'vu, and I'm not sure how to explain it.
b u l l s h i t
We already knew this, but last I checked, her points have been rising as of late. It will be interesting if she wins because we will finally get an idea that polling doesn't work well anymore because people are saying one thing and then voting another.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51895221][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51895223]I'm getting this sense of Deja'vu, and I'm not sure how to explain it.[/QUOTE]
yeah just like with hofer lol
Make France Great Again
R I G G E D P O L L S
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51895223]I'm getting this sense of Deja'vu, and I'm not sure how to explain it.[/QUOTE]
Russia hacks Macron
he's still predicted to get totally bodied in the first round so idk how biased towards him these pollsters are
[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;51895273]Russia hacks Macron[/QUOTE]
To be fair, Russia's funding her party. It's not too far-fetched that like Trump, it'll be trying to help her by digging up dirt on her opponents.
I can only hope the French aren't going to be fools like the US, Britain, and Italy, but hope can only go so far.
[QUOTE=AnnieOakley;51895307]I can only hope the French aren't going to be fools like the US, Britain, and Italy, but hope can only go so far.[/QUOTE]
Don't worry we will not vote Twice for the left parties.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51895223]I'm getting this sense of Deja'vu, and I'm not sure how to explain it.[/QUOTE]
The astroturfing going on around this clinton wannabe is through the roof. I've yet to meet a supporter of his in person.
Regardless in this case Emmanuel is a man and Marine is a woman. I don't believe we should be so quick to dismiss sexism as one of the factors that influenced the results of the american election. Needless to say this is not the turn2 I look foward to.
[QUOTE=AnnieOakley;51895307]I can only hope the French aren't going to be fools like the US, Britain, and Italy, but hope can only go so far.[/QUOTE]
This whole rhetoric of "everyone who doesn't share my political opinions is an idiot" is getting pretty boring. It's statements like that which push people to vote for far-right candidates in the first place because you alienate an entire portion of the voting base. Hilary did this with her "deplorables" comment and it didn't turn out well for her. If you really want people to stop voting for far-right candidates, you'll have much more luck trying to understand them instead of assuming idiocy.
[QUOTE=Sanxy;51898721]This whole rhetoric of "everyone who doesn't share my political opinions is an idiot" is getting pretty boring. It's statements like that which push people to vote for far-right candidates in the first place because you alienate an entire portion of the voting base. Hilary did this with her "deplorables" comment and it didn't turn out well for her. If you really want people to stop voting for far-right candidates, you'll have much more luck trying to understand them instead of assuming idiocy.[/QUOTE]
What is there really to understand? People having knee-jerk reactions to complex immigration issues? People buying into the fancy stories being spun by populists that aren't backed by facts? People not realising that the idiocy of those political platforms should not be ignored? People that protest vote because they don't like their options?
I think we understand them very well, we just underestimated how much reach they have nowadays, and how many people are still susceptible to wishful thinking.
[QUOTE=Sanxy;51898721]This whole rhetoric of "everyone who doesn't share my political opinions is an idiot" is getting pretty boring. [B]It's statements like that which push people to vote for far-right candidates[/B] in the first place because you alienate an entire portion of the voting base. Hilary did this with her "deplorables" comment and it didn't turn out well for her. If you really want people to stop voting for far-right candidates, you'll have much more luck trying to understand them instead of assuming idiocy.[/QUOTE]
Okay so, are these far right candidates and policies legitimate choices that should be respected, and held to the same level of scrutiny as any other political opinion, OR are they a spiteful consequence of left leaning people not taking far right voters seriously?
Because you can't have both. I'm real sick of not only seeing the rise of right wing, reactionary authoritarian politics, but also, the supporters of these politics then blaming the left for 'making them vote that way'. It's like it's impossible or these people to genuinely stand for what they've voted for.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51898767]Thanks for giving these handy tips to all campaign managers browsing Facepunch[/QUOTE]
Nice job not actually addressing my point.
[QUOTE=Clavus;51898798]What is there really to understand? People having knee-jerk reactions to complex immigration issues? People buying into the fancy stories being spun by populists that aren't backed by facts? People not realising that the idiocy of those political platforms should not be ignored? People that protest vote because they don't like their options?
I think we understand them very well, we just underestimated how much reach they have nowadays, and how many people are still susceptible to wishful thinking.[/QUOTE]
I would agree that some of it was a knee-jerk reaction; that is undeniable. However, I would not agree that the countries are foolish; that is entirelty subjective. I've yet to see someone actually understand fully what this whole move to the right and populism is all about, and arguably, no one fully does at the moment. I do think there is an element of wishful thinking to it though, and you'd be right to suggest that. Does that make people idiots? No. Does it make them manipulated? Yes.
[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51898871]Okay so, are these far right candidates and policies legitimate choices that should be respected, and held to the same level of scrutiny as any other political opinion, OR are they a spiteful consequence of left leaning people not taking far right voters seriously?
Because you can't have both. I'm real sick of not only seeing the rise of right-wing, reactionary authoritarian politics, but also, the supporters of these politics then blaming the left for 'making them vote that way'. It's like it's impossible or these people to genuinely stand for what they've voted for.[/QUOTE]
I never implied that that they were politically legitimate choices that should be respected. I was simply stating that the initial remark that the poster made was the same lack of understanding was a definite contributor to the rise of the far right. I never said it was the rejection of the left specifically either. I cited a "left" wing party as an example, but it's an issue that spans across the entirety of contemporary politics - right wing and left wing parties alike. Both Democrats and Republicans saw Trump voters as problematic initially. Generally, my point is that the "idiot voter" stance is the same sort of ignorance that they claim to be criticisng.
[QUOTE=Sanxy;51898721]This whole rhetoric of "everyone who doesn't share my political opinions is an idiot" is getting pretty boring. It's statements like that which push people to vote for far-right candidates in the first place because you alienate an entire portion of the voting base. Hilary did this with her "deplorables" comment and it didn't turn out well for her. If you really want people to stop voting for far-right candidates, you'll have much more luck trying to understand them instead of assuming idiocy.[/QUOTE]
Le Pen's party was literally founded by Nazi sympathizers and is funded by Russian Oligarchs.
Also the deplorables comment was completely accurate as far as I'm concerned. Have you been to /pol/ or any other place that describes itself as "alt-right"? They're white nationalist fascists. Literally deplorable.
You know what gets people like Le Pen into power?
Thinking they wont get into power.
The thing about a two-round election is that there are, well, two rounds. Since Marine Le Pen is almost a dead cert to come first in the first round, whomever comes second will be the exclusive choice against her in the next round. This significantly increases the chance of anybody else beating her.
Polls are imperfect and shouldn't be taken as gospel, but it's weird seeing the cognitive dissonance of pro-Le Pen people who cite her 26% first round polling as definite fact, and then say the second round is just too unpredictable for anything to be accurate.
[QUOTE=Sanxy;51898918]I've yet to see someone actually understand fully what this whole move to the right and populism is all about, and arguably, no one fully does at the moment.[/QUOTE]
How can you verify if anyone gets the 'full picture'? The rise of populism is actually well understood, but hard to fight because there are so many elements to it. We understand it, but the only thing we can do is to reject the platform, show why it's wrong.
In the end, if someone votes on a foolish platform for foolish reasons, shouldn't we call that person a fool? I'm not saying that should be part of the discourse in trying to educate them, since there's no point in telling them they're fools. You can't win by demonising people, you need to offer them a way out of their line of thinking.
[QUOTE=Scarabix;51898507]The astroturfing going on around this clinton wannabe is through the roof. I've yet to meet a supporter of his in person.[/QUOTE]
Seems like another case of anecdotal experience. People (mostly) tend to connect with people who share their political views. I personally know quite a few people who consider him as an interesting option for the first round and I know absolutely [I]nobody[/I] who would vote for Le Pen over him.
Also this poll is for a hypothetical second round situation, these results stem more from people who'd have anyone other Le Pen than from people who completely support Macron, so your "astroturfing" argument is irrelevant.
Having seen Brexit and the 2016 US election, people should realize that polls and actual voting performance are two separate things and while I wouldn't say polls are unreliable, they don't magically predict the outcome of an election. Sure, I could easily say something when asked by a news outlet, but then not actually go out to vote (Oh, sure, there's no way X would win, 84% of people said they wouldn't vote for him: Maybe I gave a bullshit answer because hypothetical me is an asshole) and while the poll would be accurate, it wouldn't be reflected as such in voter turnout if 5000 people did the same thing I did.
People can say "POLLS GOT BREXIT WRONG" and "POLLS GOT HILLARY WRONG", but the key fact there was that both were within about five points of eachother throughout the whole thing. The smallest gap these polls show is 16 points.
Polls for the 2016 election were actually more accurate than they were for 2012.
[QUOTE=pierre0158;51898480]Don't worry we will not vote Twice for the left parties.[/QUOTE]
It's no wonder the right is making such a harsh comeback when the face of socialism in France is François fucking Hollande, the most ridiculous man on the planet. It's a terrible shame; I've noticed quite a few people wholly rejecting socialism over here because Hollande effectively ridiculed the left in France.
Trump won because of the electoral college, the FBI, and because of third parties. None of these things are a problem in the french system.
Overconfidence, however, is TOTALLY an issue.
La Pen is a non-starter to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, obviously, but my god what's with the Neolibs/Third Way/Centrists? Fuckin gross.
I'm not up to speed on French politics, but is the socialist party so unpalatable that you're gonna have to elect French Bill Clinton to stop female Trump??
[QUOTE=HappyCompy;51904240]La Pen is a non-starter to anyone with two brain cells to rub together, obviously, but my god what's with the Neolibs/Third Way/Centrists? Fuckin gross.
I'm not up to speed on French politics, but is the socialist party so unpalatable that you're gonna have to elect French Bill Clinton to stop female Trump??[/QUOTE]
Apparently from what I gathered The socialist party didn't do too well last time in power.
[QUOTE=person11;51902778]Trump won because of the electoral college, the FBI, and because of third parties. None of these things are a problem in the french system.
Overconfidence, however, is TOTALLY an issue.[/QUOTE]
Or people who didnt vote all them (and yes that included third parties too) are most realistically blame for Trump win election.
And I mostly agree everything you said except Third Parties because they were originally spoilied for Trump judging in Popular vote results.
[IMG]http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/pie.php?fact=6&year=2016&off=0&fips=0&elect=0[/IMG] (Blue are Trump, Red are Hillary and Yellow and Green are everything else)
[URL="http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2016&f=0&off=0&elect=0"]http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=2016&f=0&off=0&elect=0[/URL]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
