[Vicomte13]

(1) Thanks for the article. Very good.

(2) I'd put the odds at 52-48 Royal. But it will be close. The "I'm voting for a woman because she's a woman" vote is going to matter this time. Whether it will be enough to give Royal the win or not will be interesting, because the other side of the coin is "A woman is not strong enough to be President of the Republic", which will cut the other way. Maybe Sarkozy will win.

(3) I do want to point out to that Sarkozy firmly rejects the American war in Iraq as a mistake. He supports Chirac's opposition to the war.

[Cincinna]

The four major polls in France have them at a statistical dead heat, well within the margin of error. http://www.lemonde.fr/web/vi/0,47-0@2-823448,54-848463,0.html

If there is a shift of few point difference, it is still within the margin of error, and thus impossible to predict.

Since turnout in France is so high, the question of who and who will not turn out to vote doesn't figure in.

How reliable have French polls been in the past? Is their such a thing as a post-convention bounce?

[BillyBoy]

>> I do want to point out to that Sarkozy firmly rejects the American war in Iraq as a mistake. He supports Chirac's opposition to the war. <<

Can't believe people are getting excited that France's idea of a "right wing" politican is winning. So what? France's CURRENT president is from their "right-wing" party. The same party that nominated Jac Chirac nominated this guy. The only reason they DIDN'T nominate Chirac again is he didn't announce his candidacy because knows he'd lose a third term. Here's the new guy:

"I am not a conservative. I do not want an immobile France. I want innovation, creativity, the struggle against injustices."

Oh yeah, this guy is our buddy.

Sarko vs. Royale is simply left-wing vs. far-left wing. Another "victory" like when gay-marrage luvin' Gavin Newsom became Mayor of San Francisco instead of the Green Party guy.