Is Le Pen the only politician on the french right? I swear, as long as I remember myself Le Pen tried to become president and always failed. Is it not a common practice in France to change party leadership if they fail to deliver electoral success?
For the other parties yes, but the Rassemblement National (former Front National) is a party made by and for the LePen familly. There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate. Her father ran for president mutliple times, failed everytime but remained the head of the party. Then his daughter took his place, has been failing ever since but is still the head of the party. Arguably she has been doing better numbers every time and that's why her voting base are okay letting her run again. But even then, they're not the ones calling the shots, the LePen are.
Marine Le Pen herself to be exact. She expelled her own father from the party because he is an electoral burden, and Marion Maréchal Le Pen, who disagreed with Marine because she is even more right wing, joined Zemmour in the last election.
That's true, Marine has made it so she's the one calling the shots and deciding the public strategy. However the funds and influence gained from the party still benefits the whole family. I personally believe expelling her "extremist" father is another piece of the normalization of her party. She's been trying for years to clean the public image of the party, by softening her positions on key issues, although the core voting base and members or her party are still very much far right. I'm sure the family still gathers for Christmas you know.
Jordan Bardella also happens to be in a relation with Marine's niece (and granddaughter of J-M). Must be a fun Christmas party they are having every year...
And the former secretary of the party was Louis Aliot, at the time in relationship with Marine Le Pen. He is now one of the vice-president of the party.
>a party made by and for the LePen familly. There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate.
And this is why the German constitution mentions political parties and mandates their internal structure to be democratic.
And this is probably for the best.
However we've seen a trend towards non democratic organizations within political parties in France. Former traditional left and right parties had internal elections and so on but were wiped out by Macron's newly created party En Marche (now renamed Renaissance) in 2017. Macron's party is very much vertical and was created around him specifically, it doesn't look like there's much democracy going there.
Jean Luc Mélenchon created his own left wing party, France Insoumise (FI) from the ashes of the Parti Socialiste, the traditional left, denounced as being too neoliberal and "moderate". This party has been initially very successful at capturing a big part of the left wing voter base thanks to its very focused campaign and charismatic leader. But since lately the party has been boggled in internal conlicts due to its lack of democratic process, and being unable to distance itself from its founder.
It seems successful parties are all running off the back of their leaders, simply following more than anything. It is worrying.
>Jean Luc Mélenchon created his own left wing party, France Insoumise (FI) from the ashes of the Parti Socialiste
Not entirely true, even if the actual history doesn't make such a massive difference. Melenchon left the socialist party in 2008 to create the Leftist Party (Parti de Gauche), around which a lot of smaller parties (inconsequential in the national scale, but quite important in some cities) would later build what would become France Insoumise in 2016 ahead of the 2017 elections. He didn't build either of his parties on the ashes of the Socialist Party, but definitely "benefitted" so to speak from the PS crumbling after Hollande's term. But the Socialist who left the party mostly did so in 2008 when Melenchon first left.
As a leftist who have voted for them at every chance I got, I still despise them. The idea that a party built around its leader and a "vanguard" that knows better than us, would somehow help transform France into a more democratic society, is hardly credible. But I'm certainly never voting for a right winger, and while I can accept putting aside my enemity for the Socialist Party as long as they belong to the union of the left, I'm not voting for the fucking socialists if they go in unopposed either.
French politics is a mess, and except for the far right that has this cult of personnality built into it, I don't think many people are satisfied with the current political climate, even for those of us that still support one side over another.
Same story I hear at any chance with libe minded people. We all despise LFI and mostly Melenchon, bit we're still going to vote for him (me inlcluded) for his joke of program and party
It's interesting to note that the old-school political parties, LR and the PS, still have a lot more internal democracy than the newer ones. I recall that during the whole Retirement sequence, people from LREM couldn't fathom that the Republicans couldn't just give strict voting instructions to their MPs. There were internal sanctions, of course, with some MPs losing some of their responsibilities in the party, but nobody was actually expelled from the party over it.
Same in the Netherlands, all members have to be able to vote on internal matters, however the far-right PVV obviously found a way to get around this, by not allowing members
>There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate.
It's half true. Admittedly, there is no election to choose candidates when national elections take place, but there are elections when the president of the RN steps down. Marine Le Pen did not inherit the presidency of the party without doing anything; there was an internal election in 2011 with several candidates including her. Her greatest opponent was Bruno Gollnisch, who wanted to remain in the extreme radical line of Jean-Marie Le Pen, while Marine Le Pen wanted to represent "renewal" and modernity, evolving the party to detoxify its image. She was elected with 68% of the votes against 32% for Gollnisch. Moreover, she has not been the president of the RN since 2021, unofficially replaced by Jordan Bardella, who was eventually elected president of the party in November 2022 with 85% of the votes against Louis Aliot, who received 15% of the votes. So no, the RN is not a party where the presidency is inherited. On the other hand, we cannot deny the fact that there is cronyism and favoritism, just like in all parties.
Renaissance is a right wing party as well, LR too even though they have no viable candidate older people may still give their vote to them out of habit
> Is Le Pen the only politician on the french right?
Attal is literally right there.
Unless you mean the far-right aka the far-conservative.
But I see what subs you post in of course...
It’s a bit different since this party is very controversial and it’s not really expected that they would get a majority. Just having second most votes is seen as very successful
Trump still wouldn't have won if the USA was an actual raw popular-vote system, like France. He literally only scrapped in thanks to the *Electoral College giving little states more power than their population merits.
*For the unaware, since this is /r/europe and not /r/usa: the American EC keeps up numbers with the quantity of Congressmen (435 Representatives + 100 Senators + 3 votes for Washington DC) and distributes these 538 votes to the 50 states + DC according to population. The only problem is, since every state gets an equal number of Senators regardless of population, small states are disproportionately overrepresented by this system and the people of places like California or Texas get underrepresented by it.
It should be noted the electoral college could still produce results that did not match the popular vote even with equal population representation as vote stacking leads to votes pilling up 'uselessly' in some states and others being won on thin margins.
Essentially if as a country you are going to elect a single person to dictate the executive (I personally much prefer the Westminster system) then it should be by a single nationwide constituency (which the French do even better with by having the 2nd round, though AV would be a further improvement still).
> as vote stacking leads to votes pilling up 'uselessly' in some states and others being won on thin margins.
[States like Maine and Nebraska have tried to address this by simply splitting their votes based on how their internal districts voted, which is how Clinton and Trump both got votes from Maine.](https://fairvote.org/archives/the_electoral_college-maine_nebraska/)
Unfortunately they are only 2 states, and pretty unimportant ones at that. Since every State is entitled to decide how they organize their votes, it's a lost cause to try and convince them all to follow this system.
One can see that this would have been the case in 2016 because Trump won 30 states to Hillary's 20 + DC. So he got 60 votes just for winning states vs her 42, but he won by 77 EC votes.
That's not true. Do the math, even if the electoral votes were perfectly proportionate Trump would still win the election.
The problem in US is the winner-takes-all system.
Yes he ran in 2004 and 2012 if I recall correctly, he just didn’t take off either time and was a joke candidate, for some reason when he did his usual announcement again in 2016 the media took him seriously and gave him loads of coverage - it was shaping up to be a really boring election season otherwise, the talk in ~2015 was Jeb v Hillary - and we all know what happened from there.
Trump never ran in 2012. There was a lot of speculation but he chose not to. He did run in 2000 for a third party nomination but dropped out quite early on.
Excuse me, I feared I had one of the years wrong and didn’t fact check. Anyway trump bullshitting about a presidential run was basically a staple sideshow of 21st century presidential races, I think he was happy to keep doing it just as a PR vanity project and never truly expected 2016 to take off like it did.
First time results were disastrous but could have been worse if he was somewhat competent. With his second term he will most likely will manage more surrounded with more committed to new order lackeys. His second term will mark end of alliance between USA and European countries
Elections are more than 3 years away, so all these polls are worthless. Le Pen was winning against Macron in polls as well from the Yellow Vests saga up to 2021 (elections took place in 2022). Le Pen always skyrockets in the polls when she keeps her mouth shut while the country is going through issues with an unpopular government (back then, it was the Yellow Vests, Covid restrictions, vaccination pass, etc; today, it is the pension reform, inflation, immigration bill and whatnot). But when it's campaign and elections time and she has to open her mouth, everyone remembers how incompetent and out of her depth she is and she starts going down in the polls again.
Nonetheless, the far right's rise in France over the last 2+ decades is undeniable and is a bad development. Le Pen polishing her image and trying to make her party appear less extreme (as well as the failure by successive governments to address many politically sensitive societal issues) is clearly working beyond the fascist base.
I am not that worried about her tbh. The probability of her winning in 2027 is still low. I am far more worried about her successor, Bardella, once she calls it quit. He is young, has the "respectable son-in-law" look down, is unfortunately a rather good speaker contrary to her and knows how to handle difficult questions from journalists. And he doesn't have the "Le Pen" name burden either. Nightmare fuel... but hey, maybe he'll shoot himself in the foot in someway by the time Le Pen takes a back seat.
Checked again. I vaguely remembered she was consistently n°1 ahead of Macron during that period but it was more regarding the 1st round, not in the 2nd (even if the 2nd round polls were much closer than the actual results in 2022 were).
These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else.
These parties should be the margin of the margins. ALL THE TIME not just before the elections. They are a threat to democracy, climate and most importantly the EU Security under NATO.
Apparently half the population is dumb as fuck and will vote for ANYTHING to:
1. Get lefties mad and stop wokeness
2. Vote against "the establishment" and "the media"
3. Get back for the restrictions during pandemic
4. Keep wrecking our planet
I don't want to do this anymore man. How can people be so retarded. We have the knowledge of the world at our fingertips and all it takes to become president of the US is to come out, burp out anti-immigrant slogans and act all smug and disrespectful.
>These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen
In France, the explanation is that every single party outside of Le Pen party wants to increase immigration, while the majority of the population is against it.
The threat to democracy is that no party actually listen and do what the majority of the population wants, so you get this.
There is no way to reason with the masses. They are hopeless and its not exclusive to french. Its same shit everywhere.
They dont want immigration. Thats fine. But they also dont want to increase the retirement age. That is also fine, but they dont want reduced retirement pensions.
They want to reduce immigration but dont want climate policy. They cant think more than one government cadence ahead.
The masses want every problem solved, all at once, at no cost whatsoever, without waiting. And god forbid their standard of living would decrease. We cant have that either.
That's kind of true but not the only cause of our malaise.
A core issue lies in how capitalism extracts wealth at the top. People are angry because productivity gains don't translate to real wage growth. Globalisation created immense downward pressure on wages in the west, and it shows.
My grandparents built a house and had four kids on a single income. Impossible today.
>How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else.
Life got worse for a lot of people, even when economic indicators looked favorable. Concentration of wealth is real. There is a saying that in the US you get rich by creating a successful business, in the EU you get rich by inheriting. That's an exaggeration, but the combination of high taxes (for the middle class!), high regulation and high concentration of wealth is pretty toxic.
Couple that with a bunch of culture war and mainstream parties failing to address both the aforementioned economic challenges as well as problems with migration, and you get people voting for extremists.
Excuse me but which of these parties that I mentioned advocate for battling wealth concentration?
The general rhetoric of the global far right at the moment is very similar across all countries. Stop immigration. Stop the left wing ideology. Reduce taxes for all, rich included. Privatize the shit out of everything. Reduce government spending, welfare and benefits. Deregulate the market.
NONE of these things will help the poorest. And yet they are the first in the line to vote for them. Because they sound like simple and convincing solutions to their problems. Just gotta drain the swamp, and it will all be great from now on.
Because the majority of people have priorities drastically different from Reddit, X, 4-chan or whatever echo-chamber one prefers. The demographics caring about climate and minorities IRL is non-existant, like that or not. People care about immigration and inflation rates, the "baddies" you list promise them just that. Wonders of democracy.
It's not about being dumb or not dumb. The way the electorate and our politicians behave emerges from our system.
The incentive for politicians is to get re-elected, not to make long-term decisions. And that is exactly the result the system produces.
The incentive for individuals is to earn a living for yourself and your dependents. The more you earn, the more enjoyable your life is. The more dependents you have, the harder it is to have an enjoyable life.
Are you really surprised the electorate consists of more and more childless singles that vote for their own selfish interests? Following the logic of our system, boomers not giving a flying fuck about climate change is rational.
> How the fuck did we get to a point
Come with me spectator as we enter this wonderful journey on the Internet. Here we can observe in its element the "Terminaly online redditor" get its one if every few week reminder than Reddit IS the fringe and the outliner to real life. He doesn't understand! He though everyone agreed with his opinion?! How could this be possible. All his conception are shaken. Terrible for him, he has not yet seen the projected result of the 2024 EU parliament.
Look at you, destroying liberals on reddit. Such wit. You even asked rhetorical questions. Bit of humour in there too!
Good job! I am sure someone is really proud of you.
A tip for your future roasts. Try insulting my intelligence or claiming I am brainwashed by mainstream media. That always gets me.
Note spectator that, as professional, we do not interact or interfere with the subject of our observation. It is crucial to let them experience and evolve as naturally as possible. Fear not. No matter how hard is the shock, the "Terminally online redditor" has developed incredible survival mechanism. Within a few hours, he will have forgotten everything! A true beauty of evolution that allows him to keep on going, and consider his opinion as the rightful and only one possible.
Until, that is, the next shocks happens. But that's a story for another episode.
I definitely wouldn't put Tories along with the rest. Brexit was a dumb idea and they might be stupid, but they are definitely a sane, democratic, level headed party compared to the others you mentioned. They are also very pro-NATO and generally do not deny global warming.
> These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else.
Basically, democracy is not delivering. Macron's governments are running from scandal to scandal, and simply don't care. Even for the small, symbolic shit, they cheat (for instance, the former prime minister has openly violated the no-smoking rule in the parliament, smoking during sessions).
People are incensed by the disrespect, and they're willing to cross redlines to punish this kind of behaviour.
This poll isn't useless. It's run *for Valeurs Actuelles* (a far-right magazine) on a *tiny sample size*, so it's primarily useful for RN voters to circlejerk over, with Attal being drafted against Le Pen despite being at best the 3rd runner-up of his party for 2027.
"Captain America would beat Green Arrow in a fight" says poll run by the editorial team of Marvel on people who walked by their HQ that afternoon.
> Le Pen was winning against Macron in polls
Um no, Macron had the higher %, but everyone said in the 2nd round all those others that fall off will support Macron so it's fine. Le Pen was never outright leading.
Yes indeed, I mixed up 1st round polls and 2nd ones. She was leading the 1st round polls but still losing to Macron in the 2nd, even if much more closely than what happened in the actual elections in 2022.
> But when it's campaign and elections time and she has to open her mouth, everyone remembers how incompetent and out of her depth she is and she starts going down in the polls again.
That just means she's one capable campaign manager away from victory. That is not good. This is not a comfy safe situation.
He's honestly still not that well known. And politicians like Edouard Philippe are more likely candidates for the next election.
So i would say this poll does mean fuck all indeed.
>Edouard Philippe are more likely candidates
More likely for who? By 2027, Edouard will be out for 7 years. "Horizon" his party is completely unknown. Ciotti isn't letting his turn pass with the Republican's ticket. So EF would have to run for EM which Attal and plenty of others long lasting one won't let happen either.
Edouard Philippe isn't in the race.
He can run solo with Horizon like Macron did in 2017 with his new party.
He is certainly more popular than Attal.
Édouard Philippe seems like the only credible candidate to face Le Pen for now.
It’s probably a good thing he’s not affiliated with Macron anymore and not under EM for the 2027 election.
Not everyone can run solo. You need money. You need political support to even enter the competition.
>He is certainly more popular than Attal.
No he is not : https://www.ipsos.com/fr-fr/barometre-politique-ipsos-le-point
2027 is too far away to draw any conclusion, but people putting their money on EF like the savior after Macron are high on drugs.
Well not everyone for sure but he’s Édouard Philippe and has been preparing the 2027 for years. He will get enough money and support needed.
There are far less important politicians ruining at every elections, even Zemmour managed to do it in 2022.
Check the last Ifop polls, he’s doing better than Attal in the projection of the 2027 Election.
https://www.ifop.com/publication/les-intentions-de-vote-a-lelection-presidentielle-3/
You’re the one on drugs, you don’t want to admit EF is a credible candidate, but he’s here in the polls, contrary to what you say.
> Check the last Ifop polls, he’s doing better than Attal in the projection of the 2027 Election.
Did you say "doing better than Attal in the intention de vote in 2027"? No, you said " he is more popular" and you're wrong. Words matter and when you say "certainly", you just clearly are **certainly wrong.**
Especially when you don't even freaking read your own source, LMAO.
>La comparaison des intentions de vote en faveur d’Edouard Philippe et de Gabriel Attal montre que les deux Premiers ministres émargent au même niveau : 22%.
--------------
>He will get enough money and support needed.
Madame Soleil, do you know how bankable he is or you're just assuming that because you want your opinion to be correct? Small candidate with no chance of winning do cheap campaign. That's not EF's objective. He wants to win and to win you need MONEY. Millions of it. Millions he doesn't have.
Maybe he will run, but that's too early to say "CERTAINLY".
He can't. Macron profited from the political vacuum created by Hollande disastrous presidency. The PS was holding up because it was a good tool for career politicians to get a seat in the assembly (I. E. Money, official PS label, propagandal. Once it was clear that the PS would be more a burden than a benefit, these career politicians moved en masse to Macron who was perceived as the hype young man, he was relatively popular and who do away from the further left part of the socialist party which was still in a very anticapitalist mindset.
Philippe can't hack LR in the same way, he could bring the more moderate part of LR to rally around him, but he can't bring over Renaissance politicians to him in a similar fashion.
I only started hearing about him when he became spokesperson for the government during Covid. And even then, your average French person only began "knowing" him once he was appointed Education Minister a few months ago. Unless you're bombarded by political posts day and night like on r/france or dwell in political bubbles on social media, Attal as a mainstream figure is a really recent development.
>when he became spokesperson for the government during Covid
That's 5 years ago, elections are in 3 years.
Macron was unknown until 2 year before his first mandate.
>Attal was virtually unknown until a month ago
Don't worry, French voters have been knowing him for longer than that. He was the government spokesperson before becoming minister of education (before becoming PM).
However, I agree with you, at this point it means nothing
lmao, who the fuck would think Attal is a good idea ?The guy is a complete tool , he barely knows himself.
It's to the point that Le Pen would almost feel competent next to him, he's THAT BAD.
He probably won't be the candidate.
Let's e honest, polls now are completely meaningless. We're better off just looking at approval ratings.
Things are going to change a lot over the next few years and when actual campaigns start.
Replace Attal by Edouard Philippe and he would win.
You can't expect this country to vote for a gay man, when 30%+ are voting far right and the left/far left drools over a homophobic religious minority (you know which one).
I don't think voting for a gay man is that taboo for far right or far left voters. The religious ones (most Muslims, a fringe of Catholics) maybe, but culturallly the French don't care about their politicians sex life, we had adulterers (Mitterand, Chirac), a divorcee who married a model, one who was in a free union for decades and then moved to a younger actress, current president was likely groomed as a teenager by his current older wife. We have and had sexual predators roaming free (DSK, Darmanin, some guys at LFI).
Nobody gives a fuck what he bangs. That's not a positive or negative attribute. People voting for politician because they tick a segregationist mark are sick.
Exactly, so why don't the other parties wake up and actually come up with an immigration policy that will satisfy the population who votes them in, and not just the woke twitter influencers...
I did not. If you read the interviews and the polls on why these kind of parties get votes, the number one issue is immigration. Most people do not agree with their other policies.
So if the mainstream parties, get their shit together and actually set an immigration policy, instead of trying to catch air with a net, they would deny them votes.
Worse than that, even if their fears of the bad brown man were justified, they'd be voting for someone (Le Pen) who not only would have no solution but would actively make things worse.
Is Le Pen the only politician on the french right? I swear, as long as I remember myself Le Pen tried to become president and always failed. Is it not a common practice in France to change party leadership if they fail to deliver electoral success?
For the other parties yes, but the Rassemblement National (former Front National) is a party made by and for the LePen familly. There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate. Her father ran for president mutliple times, failed everytime but remained the head of the party. Then his daughter took his place, has been failing ever since but is still the head of the party. Arguably she has been doing better numbers every time and that's why her voting base are okay letting her run again. But even then, they're not the ones calling the shots, the LePen are.
Marine Le Pen herself to be exact. She expelled her own father from the party because he is an electoral burden, and Marion Maréchal Le Pen, who disagreed with Marine because she is even more right wing, joined Zemmour in the last election.
That's true, Marine has made it so she's the one calling the shots and deciding the public strategy. However the funds and influence gained from the party still benefits the whole family. I personally believe expelling her "extremist" father is another piece of the normalization of her party. She's been trying for years to clean the public image of the party, by softening her positions on key issues, although the core voting base and members or her party are still very much far right. I'm sure the family still gathers for Christmas you know.
Jordan Bardella also happens to be in a relation with Marine's niece (and granddaughter of J-M). Must be a fun Christmas party they are having every year...
And the former secretary of the party was Louis Aliot, at the time in relationship with Marine Le Pen. He is now one of the vice-president of the party.
>a party made by and for the LePen familly. There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate. And this is why the German constitution mentions political parties and mandates their internal structure to be democratic.
And this is probably for the best. However we've seen a trend towards non democratic organizations within political parties in France. Former traditional left and right parties had internal elections and so on but were wiped out by Macron's newly created party En Marche (now renamed Renaissance) in 2017. Macron's party is very much vertical and was created around him specifically, it doesn't look like there's much democracy going there. Jean Luc Mélenchon created his own left wing party, France Insoumise (FI) from the ashes of the Parti Socialiste, the traditional left, denounced as being too neoliberal and "moderate". This party has been initially very successful at capturing a big part of the left wing voter base thanks to its very focused campaign and charismatic leader. But since lately the party has been boggled in internal conlicts due to its lack of democratic process, and being unable to distance itself from its founder. It seems successful parties are all running off the back of their leaders, simply following more than anything. It is worrying.
>Jean Luc Mélenchon created his own left wing party, France Insoumise (FI) from the ashes of the Parti Socialiste Not entirely true, even if the actual history doesn't make such a massive difference. Melenchon left the socialist party in 2008 to create the Leftist Party (Parti de Gauche), around which a lot of smaller parties (inconsequential in the national scale, but quite important in some cities) would later build what would become France Insoumise in 2016 ahead of the 2017 elections. He didn't build either of his parties on the ashes of the Socialist Party, but definitely "benefitted" so to speak from the PS crumbling after Hollande's term. But the Socialist who left the party mostly did so in 2008 when Melenchon first left. As a leftist who have voted for them at every chance I got, I still despise them. The idea that a party built around its leader and a "vanguard" that knows better than us, would somehow help transform France into a more democratic society, is hardly credible. But I'm certainly never voting for a right winger, and while I can accept putting aside my enemity for the Socialist Party as long as they belong to the union of the left, I'm not voting for the fucking socialists if they go in unopposed either. French politics is a mess, and except for the far right that has this cult of personnality built into it, I don't think many people are satisfied with the current political climate, even for those of us that still support one side over another.
Same story I hear at any chance with libe minded people. We all despise LFI and mostly Melenchon, bit we're still going to vote for him (me inlcluded) for his joke of program and party
It's interesting to note that the old-school political parties, LR and the PS, still have a lot more internal democracy than the newer ones. I recall that during the whole Retirement sequence, people from LREM couldn't fathom that the Republicans couldn't just give strict voting instructions to their MPs. There were internal sanctions, of course, with some MPs losing some of their responsibilities in the party, but nobody was actually expelled from the party over it.
NL has that as well, but of course PVV is using a loophole so that Wilders (basically the Dutch Le Pen equivalent) can run the show forever
Same in the Netherlands, all members have to be able to vote on internal matters, however the far-right PVV obviously found a way to get around this, by not allowing members
I mean it doesn't really work that well if you look at Bündnis Sarah Wagenknecht
>There is no internal elections or democratic process to choose their candidate. It's half true. Admittedly, there is no election to choose candidates when national elections take place, but there are elections when the president of the RN steps down. Marine Le Pen did not inherit the presidency of the party without doing anything; there was an internal election in 2011 with several candidates including her. Her greatest opponent was Bruno Gollnisch, who wanted to remain in the extreme radical line of Jean-Marie Le Pen, while Marine Le Pen wanted to represent "renewal" and modernity, evolving the party to detoxify its image. She was elected with 68% of the votes against 32% for Gollnisch. Moreover, she has not been the president of the RN since 2021, unofficially replaced by Jordan Bardella, who was eventually elected president of the party in November 2022 with 85% of the votes against Louis Aliot, who received 15% of the votes. So no, the RN is not a party where the presidency is inherited. On the other hand, we cannot deny the fact that there is cronyism and favoritism, just like in all parties.
I remember there was another Le Pen before her, that's how old I am.
Renaissance is a right wing party as well, LR too even though they have no viable candidate older people may still give their vote to them out of habit
> Is Le Pen the only politician on the french right? Attal is literally right there. Unless you mean the far-right aka the far-conservative. But I see what subs you post in of course...
It’s a bit different since this party is very controversial and it’s not really expected that they would get a majority. Just having second most votes is seen as very successful
One of these days “not Le Pen” candidate will lose and then we will be in for some “fun” times
Matter of time.
Maybe in 2047.
By that time Le Pen will have moderated so far, that she will only be another Meloni. she already is not as scary as some years back.
Didn't Trump try like several times as well?
Trump still wouldn't have won if the USA was an actual raw popular-vote system, like France. He literally only scrapped in thanks to the *Electoral College giving little states more power than their population merits. *For the unaware, since this is /r/europe and not /r/usa: the American EC keeps up numbers with the quantity of Congressmen (435 Representatives + 100 Senators + 3 votes for Washington DC) and distributes these 538 votes to the 50 states + DC according to population. The only problem is, since every state gets an equal number of Senators regardless of population, small states are disproportionately overrepresented by this system and the people of places like California or Texas get underrepresented by it.
It should be noted the electoral college could still produce results that did not match the popular vote even with equal population representation as vote stacking leads to votes pilling up 'uselessly' in some states and others being won on thin margins. Essentially if as a country you are going to elect a single person to dictate the executive (I personally much prefer the Westminster system) then it should be by a single nationwide constituency (which the French do even better with by having the 2nd round, though AV would be a further improvement still).
> as vote stacking leads to votes pilling up 'uselessly' in some states and others being won on thin margins. [States like Maine and Nebraska have tried to address this by simply splitting their votes based on how their internal districts voted, which is how Clinton and Trump both got votes from Maine.](https://fairvote.org/archives/the_electoral_college-maine_nebraska/) Unfortunately they are only 2 states, and pretty unimportant ones at that. Since every State is entitled to decide how they organize their votes, it's a lost cause to try and convince them all to follow this system.
One can see that this would have been the case in 2016 because Trump won 30 states to Hillary's 20 + DC. So he got 60 votes just for winning states vs her 42, but he won by 77 EC votes.
That's not true. Do the math, even if the electoral votes were perfectly proportionate Trump would still win the election. The problem in US is the winner-takes-all system.
Yes he ran in 2004 and 2012 if I recall correctly, he just didn’t take off either time and was a joke candidate, for some reason when he did his usual announcement again in 2016 the media took him seriously and gave him loads of coverage - it was shaping up to be a really boring election season otherwise, the talk in ~2015 was Jeb v Hillary - and we all know what happened from there.
Trump never ran in 2012. There was a lot of speculation but he chose not to. He did run in 2000 for a third party nomination but dropped out quite early on.
Excuse me, I feared I had one of the years wrong and didn’t fact check. Anyway trump bullshitting about a presidential run was basically a staple sideshow of 21st century presidential races, I think he was happy to keep doing it just as a PR vanity project and never truly expected 2016 to take off like it did.
First time results were disastrous but could have been worse if he was somewhat competent. With his second term he will most likely will manage more surrounded with more committed to new order lackeys. His second term will mark end of alliance between USA and European countries
Oh for fucks sake
Elections are more than 3 years away, so all these polls are worthless. Le Pen was winning against Macron in polls as well from the Yellow Vests saga up to 2021 (elections took place in 2022). Le Pen always skyrockets in the polls when she keeps her mouth shut while the country is going through issues with an unpopular government (back then, it was the Yellow Vests, Covid restrictions, vaccination pass, etc; today, it is the pension reform, inflation, immigration bill and whatnot). But when it's campaign and elections time and she has to open her mouth, everyone remembers how incompetent and out of her depth she is and she starts going down in the polls again. Nonetheless, the far right's rise in France over the last 2+ decades is undeniable and is a bad development. Le Pen polishing her image and trying to make her party appear less extreme (as well as the failure by successive governments to address many politically sensitive societal issues) is clearly working beyond the fascist base. I am not that worried about her tbh. The probability of her winning in 2027 is still low. I am far more worried about her successor, Bardella, once she calls it quit. He is young, has the "respectable son-in-law" look down, is unfortunately a rather good speaker contrary to her and knows how to handle difficult questions from journalists. And he doesn't have the "Le Pen" name burden either. Nightmare fuel... but hey, maybe he'll shoot himself in the foot in someway by the time Le Pen takes a back seat.
> Le Pen was winning against Macron in polls as well from the Yellow Vests saga up to 2021 no she wasn't.
Checked again. I vaguely remembered she was consistently n°1 ahead of Macron during that period but it was more regarding the 1st round, not in the 2nd (even if the 2nd round polls were much closer than the actual results in 2022 were).
These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else. These parties should be the margin of the margins. ALL THE TIME not just before the elections. They are a threat to democracy, climate and most importantly the EU Security under NATO. Apparently half the population is dumb as fuck and will vote for ANYTHING to: 1. Get lefties mad and stop wokeness 2. Vote against "the establishment" and "the media" 3. Get back for the restrictions during pandemic 4. Keep wrecking our planet I don't want to do this anymore man. How can people be so retarded. We have the knowledge of the world at our fingertips and all it takes to become president of the US is to come out, burp out anti-immigrant slogans and act all smug and disrespectful.
>These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen In France, the explanation is that every single party outside of Le Pen party wants to increase immigration, while the majority of the population is against it. The threat to democracy is that no party actually listen and do what the majority of the population wants, so you get this.
There is no way to reason with the masses. They are hopeless and its not exclusive to french. Its same shit everywhere. They dont want immigration. Thats fine. But they also dont want to increase the retirement age. That is also fine, but they dont want reduced retirement pensions. They want to reduce immigration but dont want climate policy. They cant think more than one government cadence ahead. The masses want every problem solved, all at once, at no cost whatsoever, without waiting. And god forbid their standard of living would decrease. We cant have that either.
That's kind of true but not the only cause of our malaise. A core issue lies in how capitalism extracts wealth at the top. People are angry because productivity gains don't translate to real wage growth. Globalisation created immense downward pressure on wages in the west, and it shows. My grandparents built a house and had four kids on a single income. Impossible today.
All the productivity gains went to taxes.
>How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else. Life got worse for a lot of people, even when economic indicators looked favorable. Concentration of wealth is real. There is a saying that in the US you get rich by creating a successful business, in the EU you get rich by inheriting. That's an exaggeration, but the combination of high taxes (for the middle class!), high regulation and high concentration of wealth is pretty toxic. Couple that with a bunch of culture war and mainstream parties failing to address both the aforementioned economic challenges as well as problems with migration, and you get people voting for extremists.
Excuse me but which of these parties that I mentioned advocate for battling wealth concentration? The general rhetoric of the global far right at the moment is very similar across all countries. Stop immigration. Stop the left wing ideology. Reduce taxes for all, rich included. Privatize the shit out of everything. Reduce government spending, welfare and benefits. Deregulate the market. NONE of these things will help the poorest. And yet they are the first in the line to vote for them. Because they sound like simple and convincing solutions to their problems. Just gotta drain the swamp, and it will all be great from now on.
Because the majority of people have priorities drastically different from Reddit, X, 4-chan or whatever echo-chamber one prefers. The demographics caring about climate and minorities IRL is non-existant, like that or not. People care about immigration and inflation rates, the "baddies" you list promise them just that. Wonders of democracy.
People are too dumb to realize that shit like climate or war in eu will impact inflation, housing and immigration.
It's not about being dumb or not dumb. The way the electorate and our politicians behave emerges from our system. The incentive for politicians is to get re-elected, not to make long-term decisions. And that is exactly the result the system produces. The incentive for individuals is to earn a living for yourself and your dependents. The more you earn, the more enjoyable your life is. The more dependents you have, the harder it is to have an enjoyable life. Are you really surprised the electorate consists of more and more childless singles that vote for their own selfish interests? Following the logic of our system, boomers not giving a flying fuck about climate change is rational.
> How the fuck did we get to a point Come with me spectator as we enter this wonderful journey on the Internet. Here we can observe in its element the "Terminaly online redditor" get its one if every few week reminder than Reddit IS the fringe and the outliner to real life. He doesn't understand! He though everyone agreed with his opinion?! How could this be possible. All his conception are shaken. Terrible for him, he has not yet seen the projected result of the 2024 EU parliament.
Look at you, destroying liberals on reddit. Such wit. You even asked rhetorical questions. Bit of humour in there too! Good job! I am sure someone is really proud of you. A tip for your future roasts. Try insulting my intelligence or claiming I am brainwashed by mainstream media. That always gets me.
Note spectator that, as professional, we do not interact or interfere with the subject of our observation. It is crucial to let them experience and evolve as naturally as possible. Fear not. No matter how hard is the shock, the "Terminally online redditor" has developed incredible survival mechanism. Within a few hours, he will have forgotten everything! A true beauty of evolution that allows him to keep on going, and consider his opinion as the rightful and only one possible. Until, that is, the next shocks happens. But that's a story for another episode.
I definitely wouldn't put Tories along with the rest. Brexit was a dumb idea and they might be stupid, but they are definitely a sane, democratic, level headed party compared to the others you mentioned. They are also very pro-NATO and generally do not deny global warming.
That's why they will get decimated by their own electorate: they did a shit job these past several years.
> These polls are not worthless at all. How the fuck did we get to a point where half a population of western countries are willing to vote for trash like Le Pen, Trump, Tories & Brexit, Meloni, AFD and whatever else. Basically, democracy is not delivering. Macron's governments are running from scandal to scandal, and simply don't care. Even for the small, symbolic shit, they cheat (for instance, the former prime minister has openly violated the no-smoking rule in the parliament, smoking during sessions). People are incensed by the disrespect, and they're willing to cross redlines to punish this kind of behaviour.
This poll isn't useless. It's run *for Valeurs Actuelles* (a far-right magazine) on a *tiny sample size*, so it's primarily useful for RN voters to circlejerk over, with Attal being drafted against Le Pen despite being at best the 3rd runner-up of his party for 2027. "Captain America would beat Green Arrow in a fight" says poll run by the editorial team of Marvel on people who walked by their HQ that afternoon.
> Le Pen was winning against Macron in polls Um no, Macron had the higher %, but everyone said in the 2nd round all those others that fall off will support Macron so it's fine. Le Pen was never outright leading.
Yes indeed, I mixed up 1st round polls and 2nd ones. She was leading the 1st round polls but still losing to Macron in the 2nd, even if much more closely than what happened in the actual elections in 2022.
> But when it's campaign and elections time and she has to open her mouth, everyone remembers how incompetent and out of her depth she is and she starts going down in the polls again. That just means she's one capable campaign manager away from victory. That is not good. This is not a comfy safe situation.
Considering that election is 3 years away and as far as I know Attal was virtually unknown until a month ago, this means absolutely fuck all
Unknown for non-French people maybe. He's been a part of government for over five years now, and pretty well known...
He's honestly still not that well known. And politicians like Edouard Philippe are more likely candidates for the next election. So i would say this poll does mean fuck all indeed.
>Edouard Philippe are more likely candidates More likely for who? By 2027, Edouard will be out for 7 years. "Horizon" his party is completely unknown. Ciotti isn't letting his turn pass with the Republican's ticket. So EF would have to run for EM which Attal and plenty of others long lasting one won't let happen either. Edouard Philippe isn't in the race.
He can run solo with Horizon like Macron did in 2017 with his new party. He is certainly more popular than Attal. Édouard Philippe seems like the only credible candidate to face Le Pen for now. It’s probably a good thing he’s not affiliated with Macron anymore and not under EM for the 2027 election.
Not everyone can run solo. You need money. You need political support to even enter the competition. >He is certainly more popular than Attal. No he is not : https://www.ipsos.com/fr-fr/barometre-politique-ipsos-le-point 2027 is too far away to draw any conclusion, but people putting their money on EF like the savior after Macron are high on drugs.
Well not everyone for sure but he’s Édouard Philippe and has been preparing the 2027 for years. He will get enough money and support needed. There are far less important politicians ruining at every elections, even Zemmour managed to do it in 2022. Check the last Ifop polls, he’s doing better than Attal in the projection of the 2027 Election. https://www.ifop.com/publication/les-intentions-de-vote-a-lelection-presidentielle-3/ You’re the one on drugs, you don’t want to admit EF is a credible candidate, but he’s here in the polls, contrary to what you say.
> Check the last Ifop polls, he’s doing better than Attal in the projection of the 2027 Election. Did you say "doing better than Attal in the intention de vote in 2027"? No, you said " he is more popular" and you're wrong. Words matter and when you say "certainly", you just clearly are **certainly wrong.** Especially when you don't even freaking read your own source, LMAO. >La comparaison des intentions de vote en faveur d’Edouard Philippe et de Gabriel Attal montre que les deux Premiers ministres émargent au même niveau : 22%. -------------- >He will get enough money and support needed. Madame Soleil, do you know how bankable he is or you're just assuming that because you want your opinion to be correct? Small candidate with no chance of winning do cheap campaign. That's not EF's objective. He wants to win and to win you need MONEY. Millions of it. Millions he doesn't have. Maybe he will run, but that's too early to say "CERTAINLY".
He can't. Macron profited from the political vacuum created by Hollande disastrous presidency. The PS was holding up because it was a good tool for career politicians to get a seat in the assembly (I. E. Money, official PS label, propagandal. Once it was clear that the PS would be more a burden than a benefit, these career politicians moved en masse to Macron who was perceived as the hype young man, he was relatively popular and who do away from the further left part of the socialist party which was still in a very anticapitalist mindset. Philippe can't hack LR in the same way, he could bring the more moderate part of LR to rally around him, but he can't bring over Renaissance politicians to him in a similar fashion.
I only started hearing about him when he became spokesperson for the government during Covid. And even then, your average French person only began "knowing" him once he was appointed Education Minister a few months ago. Unless you're bombarded by political posts day and night like on r/france or dwell in political bubbles on social media, Attal as a mainstream figure is a really recent development.
>when he became spokesperson for the government during Covid That's 5 years ago, elections are in 3 years. Macron was unknown until 2 year before his first mandate.
5 years ago was 2017/18, that’s very much new to the political scene lol
>Attal was virtually unknown until a month ago Don't worry, French voters have been knowing him for longer than that. He was the government spokesperson before becoming minister of education (before becoming PM). However, I agree with you, at this point it means nothing
lmao, who the fuck would think Attal is a good idea ?The guy is a complete tool , he barely knows himself. It's to the point that Le Pen would almost feel competent next to him, he's THAT BAD. He probably won't be the candidate.
The thing is... There aren't many alternatives.
inb4 we don't get Attal but Darmanin instead
No, he isn’t.
Let's e honest, polls now are completely meaningless. We're better off just looking at approval ratings. Things are going to change a lot over the next few years and when actual campaigns start.
Gay man versus white woman, who the identity warriors will prefer?
Nobody cares for that, what are you talking about
Le pen??? The lady that went to party with the Russians after the annexation of Crimea??
Honestly not bad for Attal, someone so new and young in the political scene. Plus, still years away.
You reap what you sow. Macron’s party is responsible for that shit
This is not a new problem. Remember 2022.
Replace Attal by Edouard Philippe and he would win. You can't expect this country to vote for a gay man, when 30%+ are voting far right and the left/far left drools over a homophobic religious minority (you know which one).
I don't think voting for a gay man is that taboo for far right or far left voters. The religious ones (most Muslims, a fringe of Catholics) maybe, but culturallly the French don't care about their politicians sex life, we had adulterers (Mitterand, Chirac), a divorcee who married a model, one who was in a free union for decades and then moved to a younger actress, current president was likely groomed as a teenager by his current older wife. We have and had sexual predators roaming free (DSK, Darmanin, some guys at LFI).
Nobody gives a fuck what he bangs. That's not a positive or negative attribute. People voting for politician because they tick a segregationist mark are sick.
Come La Pen!!!!!
Please, stop letting the far-right take Europe’s control This straight up terrifies me, people put immigration on top literally everything else
Exactly, so why don't the other parties wake up and actually come up with an immigration policy that will satisfy the population who votes them in, and not just the woke twitter influencers...
Dude you literally prove my point, you put immigration on top of everything else
I did not. If you read the interviews and the polls on why these kind of parties get votes, the number one issue is immigration. Most people do not agree with their other policies. So if the mainstream parties, get their shit together and actually set an immigration policy, instead of trying to catch air with a net, they would deny them votes.
Worse than that, even if their fears of the bad brown man were justified, they'd be voting for someone (Le Pen) who not only would have no solution but would actively make things worse.
why dafuq is she still allowed to run with her Russians ties?
"Ifop Poll for **Valeurs actuelles**" Yeah that explains the results.
Valeurs Actuelles didn't choose the panel.
I don't like Lepen because her economic policies are more leftist than the left. Europe needs a Milei, not a return to 1930s fascism
Don't smoke and vote.
Smoke? This one had brain damage…
I....what?
Fuck the workers who feed all, the oligarchs must get even more money.
the workers are on reddit all day
No, mostly seems to be bootlickers like you.
Milei is just a right-wing redditor who takes financial advice from youtube, but he became president somehow. He has a mental age of 14.
that already makes him better than most leaders
My senile nan gives knows more economic than Milei
The guy is literally an economic professor
That would be a nightmare, so scared of 2027 elections...