Posted on 04/23/2007 2:17:58 AM PDT by Cincinna
Nicolas Sarkozy, the conservative, and Ségolène Royal, the Socialist, won the first round of the presidential election on Sunday, setting up a classic left-right contest next month between two candidates with competing visions of how to govern France.
Whoever is elected will also usher in a new generation of leadership: For the first time, France will have an elected president who did not come of age during World War II.
With more than 99 percent of the vote counted, Mr. Sarkozy was leading with about 30.7 percent of the vote, and Ms. Royal had about 25.2 percent. François Bayrou, the centrist who vowed to plot a new, conciliatory way of governing, came in a distant third with about 18.4 percent.
A field of nine other candidates, including the far-right Jean-Marie Le Pen, who came in second in the first round in 2002, captured the remaining vote.
The balloting on Sunday was marked by high anxiety, sunny weather and an exceptionally
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
People think of left and right as a line with clearly defined opposite ends. But I think it is more of a circle. As you walk around it clockwise you go from more liberal to more conservative but than as you approach the top the positions begin to blur back from conservative to liberal. This is why Hitler and Stalin, supposedly polar opposites, had so many similar policies (nationalized industry, forced internment of political enemies, extensive militarization, etc). Some argue thus that Hitler was really a leftist, but I argue that at this point he (and Stalin) were both extremists at that point of the spectrum where the extremes come together and "left" and "right" dont mean anything.
So LePen is at that junction point. He has some conservative values (tough on crime) but a lot of socialistic leanings too.
What is much more interesting about Sarko is that he isn’t from the same group as the rest of them. The rest of them went to the same university, studying the same stuff. Imagine if there was only one good university for law/political science/etc. and every major politican from every political party graduated from there. Like the Ivy League, but instead of having the same ideology, it’s much more incestuous. We have a lot of politicians in the US who come from non-law backgrounds and not from the Ivy League either.
What has happened in Europe is a complete disconnect between the ruling class and the voters. They have much more of a connection with each other than with their own party members. Sarko might be a little different. At the very least, he will not have this petulant third-world attitude that results in leaders blaming the US for every rainstorm and opposing us out of pure spite and bile.
“Le Pen, who got only 11 % of the vote and 4th place, is rumored to be endorsing Segolene Royal.”
I doubt it.
I will only believe that if I see it.
A brilliant way to put it. But, I expect the racaille to test Sarkozy early in his term, trying to provoke a tough response that further radicalizes the suburbs.
I think so as well. Eventually, it will take its toll. At first, the average Frenchman will have no use for the rioters, but eventually, something really tragic will happen, the Left will blame it on Sarkozy and more reasonable people will say that he didn't "do enough."
Fascists, socialists, and communists are all allies. The Nazis and communists joined together to destroy the Weimar Republic and then Hitler and Stalin joined again to start World War II.
The positive way to look at it is that the democratic candidates got 50% of the vote. The negative take is that the various socialist and fascist candidates got nearly 50%.
Which begs the philosophical question: If a nation of cheese-eating surrender monkeys falls in a sea of Islamo-Fascist thuggery and oppression, does it make a sound?
In fact both Bubba and his WINO went to Yale Law School.
And of course GHWB went to Yale.
So our recent Presidents and nominees have been to Yale, and many have been related. That makes our politics even more incestuous and elitist than France’s current election.
Plus with Reid surrendering to Al-Qaida we can’t even call the French names for the 1940 defeat with a straight face. The French did lose after a hard-fought battle, after all. The only thing we lost was in our will at home, not our will or ability in Iraq.
Only Harry Reid squeaking like a gerbil. That guy is worse than anyone in France's 1940 Cabinet IMHO.
There is no such thing as a conservative in France....the country is too far gone to make any difference
Supposedly, Chirac is considered a conservative over there.
It’s not nearly the same. And the fact is that Bush’s graduate education was at Harvard (and the business school, no less!). Harvard law is more distinct from Harvard business than it is from Yale law.
But they’re all wusses. Nothing compares to a Ph.D. in math.
This is not a thread hijack! I am unarmed!
Sarkozy sounds like the least objectionable candidate imo.Problem is,how conservative is he?I’ve heard various opinions re this man-who do you trust?Ex-Is he pro or anti-US?I’ve heard both opinions.Anyone with good info i can peruse?Thanx
If Sarkozy is conservative, then who the f**k is Segolene?
Should we care?
Royal is a hard core Socialist. She is the candidate of the Socialist Party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.