French election: Marine Le Pen could still become France's next president, new analysis finds - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52167938]Le Pen over Macron, she is at least clear on what her plan is, he seems like a really big unknown.[/QUOTE] Macron has a 17 page document on his presidential plan available for free on his website and it's pretty concise and clear. It's not a "big unknown". He has a list of set measures he wants to introduce (some of which I agree with, others I definitely don't), a majority of which are realistically achievable and don't promise a shift in the balance of the world order. Le Pen's plan is also populist dogshit, appealing to old racist fucks and bitter assholes first and reasonable citizens second. As a side observation the similar document she issues on her own website is literally just full of pictures of herself among buzzword-filled shit promises she can't possibly keep. She's yet another politician who's roping disgruntled voters into supporting her by promising to magically force companies to open factories in France and prevent the closing of existing ones - something Macron warned against by personally moving to one of those closing factories to tell the workers that presidents don't have magical powers to order companies around this way.

[QUOTE=NapyDaWise;52165586]BTW it looks like there's around 30% of both Melenchon and Fillon voters that will not vote on the 2nd turn. That's a good chunk of people Macron should try to talk to.[/QUOTE] You do realize that those are two diametrically opposed ideologies, right? Being a centrist, he's already a compromise between left and right. If he tried to appeal more to abstainers from one side of the aisle or the other, he'd risk losing the more moderate voters from the opposite side.

From what it sounds like, to me it's not that most people voted for macron because of his program or lack thereof (because he does have one lol,) but because he appears to be the candidate to be of sound mind. While the others, except somewhat Fillon, have programs and backgrounds littered with absolute insanity. [QUOTE=Boilrig;52168141]From my point of view I'd rather take Le Pen, because Macron seems like a guy who takes economics like its a rulebook especially in the area of deregulation which isn't exactly what economies need or what people want.[/QUOTE] You know economists to take concern about things like social welfare and whatnot right? Just as an example when polled you'll find most economists [URL="http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/carbon-taxes-ii"]to be supportive[/URL] of taxing the shit out of carbon. Regulations also have a really strong place in the current neoclassical synthesis pretty much all credible economists work from.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52168377]You know economists to take concern about things like social welfare and whatnot right? Just as an example when polled you'll find most economists [URL="http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/carbon-taxes-ii"]to be supportive[/URL] of taxing the shit out of carbon. Regulations also have a really strong place in the current neoclassical synthesis pretty much all credible economists work from.[/QUOTE] Don't mix Economics and Economists up, yes Economists do take concern, they may push for these policies, but that doesn't mean they share its principles. Government implementation has been handed to the politicians and they implement it how they see, picking and choosing which economic theories to run with. Yes, regulations have a strong place in neoclassical economics, but from the view that there should be restrictions and limitations for government to intervene in the market. For Macron, he believes that pushing for deregulation will make France more competitive, and economics say Yes it will, however it doesn't state that the companies that have moved to other EU states will return. His push for these policies is essentially a Race to the bottom, which is similar to what Trump is doing. I also don't know how that will help with their [URL="https://www.ft.com/content/ab4f1d98-f1d4-11e6-8758-6876151821a6"]current deficit issue[/URL].

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168432]Don't mix Economics and Economists up, yes Economists do take concern, they may push for these policies, but that doesn't mean they share its principles. Government implementation has been handed to the politicians and they implement it how they see, picking and choosing which economic theories to run with. Yes, regulations have a strong place in neoclassical economics, but from the view that there should be restrictions and limitations for government to intervene in the market. For Macron, he believes that pushing for deregulation will make France more competitive, and economics say Yes it will, however it doesn't state that the companies that have moved to other EU states will return. His push for these policies is essentially a Race to the bottom, which is similar to what Trump is doing.[/QUOTE] And you think the candidate who openly admires Trump is going to do things any different?

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168438]And you think the candidate who openly admires Trump is going to do things any different?[/QUOTE] She is going the opposite way and wants to increase spending and instead do a form of protectionism.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168447]She is going the opposite way and wants to increase spending and instead do a form of protectionism.[/QUOTE] She's backpedaling on the subject of the EU already, she says any crap she can to get elected. If you want to know what her real policies will be, just try and imagine what will net her and her party the biggest amount of money possible once she's in power. Taking her claims as truth is naive as fuck, and that's without even going into the feasibility of her stated policies.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168331]You do realize that those are two diametrically opposed ideologies, right? Being a centrist, he's already a compromise between left and right. If he tried to appeal more to abstainers from one side of the aisle or the other, he'd risk losing the more moderate voters from the opposite side.[/QUOTE] Because bashing the people that said they won't vote will make them change their minds, right? That's the main problem, instead of trying to understand the preoccupations of everyone, he's asking for a vote of confidence. He's not uniting anyone behind a common enemy. He's not presidential at all. A bit like Hillary actually, dismissing the protest voters as dumb fucks, in turn making them more prone to actually go far right. And to be fair it wouldn't take much to change my mind and most of the abstention people. Like, promising to change the voting system would be a great thing that won't make him go back on his "promises". The thing is, left and right don't mean much nowadays. I think it's slowly shifting to a "pro-system" and "anti-system", for a lack of better words, and MLP and Melenchon are 2 very opposite sides of the "anti-system". He already has the approval of most of the pro-system, he should at least be open and say "I hear you, let's talk about it" instead of dismissing everybody. This guy will get elected with around 10% (77% voters, 24% of macron voters, 56% actually agree with his policies) of the french population actually behind him, but he want another Chirac vs Le Pen just so he can claim he has 80% behind him. Still one week to go, I hope he'll change his mind soon.

[QUOTE=RB33;52167111]If for example, you're far-left, your choice here is between a establishment banker and a nationalist. Neither is a good choice and doesn't further your views. Not taking part gives less legitimacy to the system, which will increase the need to reform it.[/QUOTE] Are we talking about not showing up to vote or showing up to vote blank? Is there a difference? Because I don't see how not showing up to vote sends any sort of message.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168455]She's backpedaling on the subject of the EU already, she says any crap she can to get elected. If you want to know what her real policies will be, just try and imagine what will net her and her party the biggest amount of money possible once she's in power. Taking her claims as truth is naive as fuck, and that's without even going into the feasibility of her stated policies.[/QUOTE] She backpedaled on the Euro thing, but considering that she just picked up the anti-eu candidate to be PM if she wins, she's still going against the EU hard. By going off your statement about her "real policies", I could easily say the same about Macron and his ties to the banking world and subsequent cuts to tax rates for his friends. We don't know how both of these candidates will go, but Le Pen seems way more solid than Macron.

[QUOTE=NapyDaWise;52168457]And to be fair it wouldn't take much to change my mind and most of the abstention people. Like, promising to change the voting system would be a great thing that won't make him go back on his "promises".[/QUOTE] Change it to what, though? The Condorcet method would arguably be the most democratic one, but it also favors centrists like him as a result. Wouldn't that be perceived as a way to help himself?

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52168459]Are we talking about not showing up to vote or showing up to vote blank? Is there a difference? Because I don't see how not showing up to vote sends any sort of message.[/QUOTE] Problem is blank votes aren't mediatised. Meaning most people thinks not voting sends a bigger message. What I think is they aren't mediatised because they often do 1 or 2% at best, so we don't really care about that. However, if blank voters suddenly get 10, 15%, they'll talk about it. This is a discussion people are having during the open concertation of the France Insoumise movement (the results are supposed to arrive on tuesday btw). People are pushing for mass blank votes, which I think is the only way to actually send a bit of a message. But it's a weird issue anyway since having a majority of blank votes wouldn't change the actual result, only showing that people aren't happy. [QUOTE=_Axel;52168471]Change it to what, though? The Condorcet method would arguably be the most democratic one, but it also favors centrists like him as a result. Wouldn't that be perceived as a way to help himself?[/QUOTE] I don't care if it helps him or not, as long as it's more democratic. If it actually shows that he has support, sure, no problem, more people will feel their vote matters, and that's an important part of the democracy. The current voting system will make him think he has 60% of french people behind him, while they'll actually vote against MLP, which is a huge difference.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168432]Don't mix Economics and Economists up, yes Economists do take concern, they may push for these policies, but that doesn't mean they share its principles. Government implementation has been handed to the politicians and they implement it how they see, picking and choosing which economic theories to run with. Yes, regulations have a strong place in neoclassical economics, but from the view that there should be restrictions and limitations for government to intervene in the market. For Macron, he believes that pushing for deregulation will make France more competitive, and economics say Yes it will, however it doesn't state that the companies that have moved to other EU states will return. His push for these policies is essentially a Race to the bottom, which is similar to what Trump is doing. I also don't know how that will help with their [URL="https://www.ft.com/content/ab4f1d98-f1d4-11e6-8758-6876151821a6"]current deficit issue[/URL].[/QUOTE] link is paywalled Economics says yes it will because it does. Even if businesses that "moved" to other EU states don't return, it still paves the way for France to be more friendly of a country to do business in, ergo, more businesses hire. A ranking which, by the way, France falls behind in compared to other western European countries. Macron is nothing like Trump. He's not pushing for massive deregulation in the same way. He wants to lessen some, lower taxation of certain types, and potentially even lessen some worker's protections (e.g. max 35 hour work week becomes 39 hours.) Which might suck immediately but that's the importance of having something like economics be able to say "this will do long-term good." And I also have to mention the alternatives, fiscal disaster plus possible isolation with melenchon, or fiscal disaster plus isolation with le pen.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168463]She backpedaled on the Euro thing, but considering that she just picked up the anti-eu candidate to be PM if she wins, she's still going against the EU hard.[/quote] Lol, you mean the slimy opportunist who betrayed his own party and accepted LP's offer without consulting them? His VP resigned right after that. If you think this guy has principles you're way more gullible than I thought. [Quote]By going off your statement about her "real policies", I could easily say the same about Macron and his ties to the banking world and subsequent cuts to tax rates for his friends. We don't know how both of these candidates will go, but Le Pen seems way more solid than Macron.[/QUOTE] The head of a Holocaust-denying, overtly racist scam, involved in affairs, who stole European money for her own party, and wants to institute a not-even-thinly-veiled "national preference" is more solid than a bland politician who will at worst continue enacting policies similar to his predecessor's? Either you're delusional, or you poorly hide the fact that you just support whoever's shamelessly pushing your alt-right agenda.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168463]Le Pen seems way more solid than Macron.[/QUOTE] Be honest, the only reason you say that is because you have hard-on for anti-EU stuff, you can't hide it anymore after spouting that dumb "LONG LIVE THE EMPIRE!" shit.

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52168484]link is paywalled Economics says yes it will because it does. Even if businesses that "moved" to other EU states don't return, it still paves the way for France to be more friendly of a country to do business in, ergo, more businesses hire. A ranking which, by the way, France falls behind in compared to other western European countries. Macron is nothing like Trump. He's not pushing for massive deregulation in the same way. He wants to lessen some, lower taxation of certain types, and potentially even lessen some worker's protections (e.g. max 35 hour work week becomes 39 hours.) Which might suck immediately but that's the importance of having something like economics be able to say "this will do long-term good." And I also have to mention the alternatives, fiscal disaster plus possible isolation with melenchon, or fiscal disaster plus isolation with le pen.[/QUOTE] Economics saying it will, doesn't actually make it true. Economics talks about minimum wage, and if it increased it would lead to job losses, but the stats show against that. As I said, you don't take Economics as a rulebook, that was never its intention, any economist will tell you that. Both ways are plausible and have the possibility of leading to disaster. [QUOTE=Gwoodman;52168506]Be honest, the only reason you say that is because you have hard-on for anti-EU stuff, you can't hide it anymore after spouting that dumb "LONG LIVE THE EMPIRE!" shit.[/QUOTE] Honestly, I'm not viewing from the anti-EU standpoint, because that relies on a referendum later on if Le Pen wins, so that's another thing. I'm looking at it from the view that all I'm seeing is cuts and not a lot of details behind them, deregulation isn't as nice as it sounds, we've done it in NZ and it just leads to shit and people getting hurt somewhere along the line.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168532]Economics saying it will, doesn't actually make it true. Economics talks about minimum wage, and if it increased it would lead to job losses, but the stats show against that. As I said, you don't take Economics as a rulebook, that was never its intention, any economist will tell you that. Both ways are plausible and have the possibility of leading to disaster.[/QUOTE] It's generally a good idea to listen to economists when it comes to things like the economy though, because while you're right in that economics isn't as accurate as a natural science or anything, that doesn't mean you should just ignore everything or anything economists have to say in order to believe the complete opposite.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52168541]It's generally a good idea to listen to economists when it comes to things like the economy though, because while you're right in that economics isn't as accurate as a natural science or anything, that doesn't mean you should just ignore everything or anything economists have to say in order to believe the complete opposite.[/QUOTE] Basically this, the thing is economics is with both Macron and Le Pen. There are arguments for and against a lot of the topics they are bringing up.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168532]Economics saying it will, doesn't actually make it true. Economics talks about minimum wage, and if it increased it would lead to job losses, but the stats show against that. As I said, you don't take Economics as a rulebook, that was never its intention, any economist will tell you that. Both ways are plausible and have the possibility of leading to disaster.[/QUOTE] Economics aren't an exact science, but that doesn't mean everything has an equal chance of occuring, that's nonsense.

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168532]Economics saying it will, doesn't actually make it true. Economics talks about minimum wage, and if it increased it would lead to job losses, but the stats show against that. As I said, you don't take Economics as a rulebook, that was never its intention, any economist will tell you that. [/QUOTE] no it doesn't ? ? ? ? ? ? maybe if you just graph a demand curve and say "price floor = deadweight loss my nigga" but economists know that that model has assumptions of a perfectly competitive market with zero friction. Thus it's not actually used when talking small minimum wage increases. Economics isn't unaware of non-perfectly competive markets or friction lmao

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168558]Basically this, the thing is economics is with both Macron and Le Pen. There are arguments for and against a lot of the topics they are bringing up.[/QUOTE] The consensus is with Macron though? They don't have equal support among economists at all.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168559]Economics aren't an exact science, but that doesn't mean everything has an equal chance of occuring, that's nonsense.[/QUOTE] Of course. But both Le Pens and Macrons are legit economic strategies. I personally don't agree with either of them.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168566]The consensus is with Macron though? They don't have equal support among economists at all.[/QUOTE] climate change denial is legit because i can find climate scientists that agree with me

[QUOTE=Boilrig;52168575]Of course. But both Le Pens and Macrons are legit economic strategies. I personally don't agree with either of them.[/QUOTE] bruv, denying climate change, protectionism, and all the other fun stuff that Le Pen is planning to roll out only harms the economy as well as the people in the long term.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52168459]Are we talking about not showing up to vote or showing up to vote blank? Is there a difference? Because I don't see how not showing up to vote sends any sort of message.[/QUOTE] If the people don't take part in the system, can it really be called democratic and representative of the people, i don't think so.

[QUOTE=RB33;52168645]If the people don't take part in the system, can it really be called democratic and representative of the people, i don't think so.[/QUOTE] So you support making voting mandatory then?

[QUOTE=_Axel;52168649]So you support making voting mandatory then?[/QUOTE] Sure, but first the system would have to be one which makes sure that your vote always counts.

[QUOTE=RB33;52168656]Sure, but first the system would have to be one which makes sure that your vote always counts.[/QUOTE] That's a very vague condition. What does a vote "counting" means? Any vote that isn't for the winner doesn't count in the end.

[QUOTE=_Axel;52169019]That's a very vague condition. What does a vote "counting" means? Any vote that isn't for the winner doesn't count in the end.[/QUOTE] Any system where your vote didn't go for someone, let's say I voted Hamon, but since he was so far behind, I had ranked my vote, so it went to Mélenchon instead after Hamon was eliminated, pushing him into the second round or maybe just being elected in the first round. In a proportional system, your vote counts even if doesn't win a majority locally.

[QUOTE=RB33;52169044]Any system where your vote didn't go for someone, let's say I voted Hamon, but since he was so far behind, I had ranked my vote, so it went to Mélenchon instead after Hamon was eliminated, pushing him into the second round or maybe just being elected in the first round. In a proportional system, your vote counts even if doesn't win a majority locally.[/QUOTE] I'd say any ranked system is objectively better than what we currently have, yes. There are dozens of different ranked systems though, which of those is the best one?