Here's a thread to talk again about the last debate for the French presidential election. Here's my opinion on candidate performance and what they said.
> Melanchon Many consider him the victor and he did earn few more points, making him almost tied with Fillon. Problem is: all he did was mocking and correcting others. At no point he actually made a clear proposition. For him, being president is more about morality and making decisions but while I kinda agree, you can feel the ideas he defends aren't exactly his convictions. He play the extreme left because it's his niche, that's all.
> Fillon Cold and defensive, he wasn't happy to be here and used most of his time to shut off anyone mocking him for the affairs. As usual, he was true to his convictions: the future is bleak, we need to make money, let's destroy public services and sell it to the private sector... except when he has to talk about "urgent" problems like terrorism and promise more public jobs against that while he was the one to reduce them in the first place. That's one of his true weakness, not the affairs.
> Marine LePen She barely said anything. I think she was too happy to not be the center of all attacks and choosed to be "presidential" by not going all out... but it ended up kinda weak. Her program ended up very social economically, with her defending public services the most (I was surprise by that) and very right-wing socialy (France is Catholic... Melanchon gunned her down for that one).
> Macron Asselinaut destroyed him with this simple truth: he agrees with everyone. Why ? Because he'll say anything to get votes and have no convictions whatsoever.
> Poutou He was weird at the start and way too agressive but became a bit more interesting towards the end while discussing better issues. He's coherent for what he wants.
> Arthaud Complete opposite of Poutou, she came up ridiculous, bringing the fight against business owners in EVERY SINGLE QUESTION like a broken record.
> Asselinaut He was so against Europe, it kinda sounded like Arthaud and capitalism but he was more coherent and more, MUCH more argumentative. Problem is, he tried to do his usual lectures about constitution and the 1m30s format to answer is NOT a good format for that. Citing articles is NOT a good idea.
> Cheminade He talked as if everyone already knows what he thinks and that made him unclear on many subjects. He corrected many other candidates but that make him looks like an old boring teacher, not a candidate.
> Hamon I AM NOT MELANCHON ! LOOK AT ME ! He tried desperatly to act as the "anti-system" candidate but is still far too tame to exist amongst the likes of Melanchon or Lepen. The man is the candidate of the goddam socialist party and acts like he's Poutou. It was a mistake to pick him and he should assume Hollande's legacy and go down with the ship if need be, not trying to prove he's different and end up with even LESS vote.
> NDA It's painful when he talks but he attacked and embarassed so many people, he gets a pass. The man is mostly a fraud, he was abandonned by everyone after a failed coup inside his party and now only his ego keeps him in politics.
> LaSalle Oh please, please shut up.
Caleb Roberts
I might add the worst offender during the debate was Ruth Elkrief, the journalist, extremely pro-Macron and very very stupid in her questioning. My favorite quote being "Stop talking amongst yourselves ! This is not a dialog, this is a debate !"
Easton Cox
bump
Colton Martin
Le Pen is a terrible at both debates and politics. The only reason she's supported is because she's the only one candidate "racist".
Eli Martinez
Your pic is stupid. Marine LePen is the president of a major party in France. Asselinaut has few adherents and, most importantly, his party never won anything anywhere or even made a serious result. Medias are usually focusing on serious candidate.
BUT the last part of the french campaign is different, we're one of the rare countries forcing medias to talk equally about all candidates but their candidature is official (so now). So stop complaining, in Burgerland it's money who decide if medias talk about you or not.
Also I have watch several years ago numerous videos of Asselinaut talking about Europe and while he raises valid points about the weakness of Europe, his logic is self-defeating because it invalids any type of union between people, including a country.
Charles Roberts
Might I ask why you were surprised towards le Pen's economic policy, I had always thought she was pretty inline with standard French thinking economically but on the social scale was where she departed from the 'norm'
Ian Anderson
>it invalids any type of union between people, including a country. What do you mean? He is right. Only Nationial-Socialism works.
Also this kind of reasoning is leading nowhere. If Le Pen were truly an opposition she would be as much censored as Asselineau from the beginning. They want you to fight "the great replacement" instead of the banks and that's why you'll never win.
Connor Jackson
>she was pretty inline with standard French thinking economically The FN was always extremely vague about economical matters, mostly because Jean-Marie didn't care (talking money is dirty).
So when she had to come up with an economical program (since now people realise that's the most important thing) she couldn't go with the globalism advocated by the "UMPS" (sic) and was mocked about protectionism so she turned it around by trying to emulate her way the "good old days" of DeGaulle who had inherit the very pro-public sector policies of the 4th Republic.
So now she's defending the public sector, she wants more public workers (I didn't know she would say that but I don't believe a word) and even said she wants more teachers, her mortal ennemies. That was surprising.
Asselinaut argued Europe is a failure from the start because you can't expect Polish people to make sacrifices for French people.
I would return the argument by saying you can't expect Bretons to make sacrifices for Parisians or Marseillais to make sacrifces for Normands. Oh wait you can. That's called a union. There's is no reason, except superficially historical (nations didn't really exist until the 19th century) to be able to do that only on the national level.
Joshua Clark
Bumping to contribute meme magic. Soyez Braves Pour La France
John Thompson
I might add my main regret was absolutly NOBODY amongst the 11 even talked about the Justice system desperatly needing funds.
Even when talking about police, state workers, etc... NOBODY mentionned the fact France has at least HALF the number of juges compare to Europe and has prisons at 200% capacity. Something drastic needs to be done and they don't even talk about it.
Aiden Flores
Well Asselineau does talk about it but since he isn't racist we can't vote for him, right?
Julian Parker
>187 >188 >... Truly his main priority
I'm sure all candidates have something similar in their program but when they don't even take one second to say a word about it, you can be sure they won't do a thing.
I want a candidate to say on television something like I WILL DOUBLE JUSTICE BUDGET and he will get my vote. And no, double isn't too much, it's barely what we need.
Mason Campbell
This is a presidential election and not the legislative ones.
>Il ne faut pas confondre « chef d’État » et Premier ministre >ARTICLE 20. >Le Gouvernement détermine et conduit la politique de la nation. >Il dispose de l'administration et de la force armée. >Il est responsable devant le Parlement dans les conditions et suivant les procédures prévues aux >articles 49 et 50.
En gros la présidentielle est un choix stratégique pour l'ensemble du pays et les législatives sont pour les choix tactiques (les détails et les petites lois). Les 10 autres candidats mentent sur les pouvoirs qu'ils auront une fois élu (y comprit MLP, ce qui est louche).
Adam Garcia
>This is a presidential election and not the legislative ones. That was a stupid cop out and everyone knows it. The president pick the government amongst the majority OF COURSE his opinion about those things matter (unless it's a cohabitation but we're not in this situation).
And if a presidential candidate promise at every turn to double the justice budget and gets elected, i'd be curious to see the parliement who would refuse him.
Josiah Morris
The Asselineau shill is shareblue or some shit just paid to derail French election threads. Same with the Swiss Fillon shill.
They shill like it is their job, because it is. This is why 4 Sup Forums is not as far ahead as other places on the French election. Deliberate disruption of these threads.
Christopher Rivera
>Les 10 autres candidats mentent sur les pouvoirs qu'ils auront une fois élu (y comprit MLP, ce qui est louche). France is a very presidential system and he really has power. Of course, like Cheminade points out, there is many outside forces that might make him do stuff but only because he wants to please them, not because he has to.
MLP is bullshiting her way to power like her dad always did. She knows most people don't know what a president can do or not and she can promise whatever they want to hear. That said, a president with no hopes of fitting with the system can pretty much change anything he wants as long as one third of the parlement doesn't want him out.
Josiah Sanders
UPR is one of the poorest political party that ever existed and I doubt they would be able to pay any shills.
Asher Jones
Asselineau is party made to take votes from the FN, it's pretty clear.
Aiden Gutierrez
Actually, it's the opposite. FN is a controlled opposition made to steal votes from the real ones.
John Reyes
They aren't being paid by Asselineau and Fillon they are probably paid by some organisation which supports the EU, something like that. These threads are always completely derailed by them, that's their purpose.
Caleb Reyes
>controlled opposition a controlled opposition isn't supposed to win...
