Can Marine Le Pen Pull Off French Election Stunner? Germany Loses No Matter Who Wins

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Conventional wisdom suggests National Front candidate Marine le Pen will make it to the second round in French elections, then lose in a landslide to whoever her opponent happens to be.

I believe le Pen’s odds of winning it outright are far better than most think.

Current Polls

french-election-2017-01-14

Chart from Wikipedia, with image clips added.

Top Five candidates

  1. Marine le Pen: National Front – Eurosceptic, Anti-Immigration – 25%
  2. François Fillon: Republicans – Center Right – 24%
  3. Emmanuel Macron: En Marche! – Socialist – 17%
  4. Manuel Valls: Socialist – 11%
  5. Jean-Luc Mélenchon: Left Front – Socialist – 13%

In France, the winners of each party square off in around one of national elections. If no one gets 50% of the vote, the top two square off in round two.

With about 25% or so solid votes, le Pen is likely to make it to the second round. The others battle to see who comes up against le Pen.

Eurointelligence Reports

January 13: Yesterday night the seven candidates for the left primaries had their first debate. It was sometimes painful to watch and it is not clear how much the audience took home from the long catalogue of measures the candidates were quizzed about. All tried to differentiate themselves from François Hollande, and lashed out against the common enemy François Fillon. All were eager to show how presidential they are and how well they represent the real socialist heart. Though it did not look like they succeeded. One blogger wrote that there was one irreconcilable division, that is between the candidates and their audience.

 

François Fillon, meanwhile, has his own rebellion to deal with. Laurent Wauquiez, Christian Estrosi, and other ex-Sarkozists, insist on making their own mark and call for changes to Fillon’s programme. When Fillon made his big appearance in Nice, Estrosi told everyone in front of the presidential candidate that he is not a “Filloniste”. Laurent Wauquiez, who was fired by Fillon, is leading this mini-revolt. He recently called for a de-taxation of supplementary working hours, one of Sarkozy’s key measures, which is absolutely not in the Fillon’s programme, writes Marianne. Brice Hortefeux, another Sarkozy ally, said they want to enrich the programme. Fillon, however, remains firm and will not give in to those demands. His campaign chief dismissed those efforts as coming from bad losers or small players. The risk is that he may alienate the Sarkozy wing, though.

 

January 12: For Macron, no politics goes without narrative and no narrative without ideal. So, what is his ideal? Some friends call him a real libertarian, others a real democrat, who has yet to find a socially empathetic narrative. In 2015 he outlined his three dreams – equality, Europe and industry. When it comes to Europe, he may well compare with Jacques Delors, who like him was not loved by the Socialist party and made his way. But this comparison only holds on Europe. Macron’s economic ideal is inspired by new-Keynesian thinking, and the idea that social improvement is achieved by eliminating unjust rents that keep up barriers in society.

 

January 11: Emmanuel Macron is the most pro-European among the presidential candidates, though will he really be ready to confront the Germans and change the course of the eurozone? We have our doubts, but he is the only candidate with at least an explicit eurozone agenda. In his speech at Humboldt University in Berlin yesterday he promised that, if elected, he would propose a common eurozone budget for investment and financial assistance in case of shocks. At the EU council in December 2017 he would propose democratic conventions in all EU countries for 6-10 months.

 

We note that his Berlin speech did not make headlines in the French press. They were more interested in comparing Macron with the Socialist candidates or to François Fillon, or in the question whether Macron exaggerated his arguments. There is a clear national bias in reporting, as we have observed so many times in the past.

 

The Front National took the chance to pick up on the point that Macron gave his speech in English rather than French. Pauvre France, tweeted Marine Le Pen. Florian Philippot writes it only shows Macron’s disrespect for the French language, and that he does not believe in France.

 

The latest Ifop poll for Paris Match shows Marine Le Pen (26%) advancing to the pole position for the first round, overtaking Francois Fillon (24%). Macron comes third (17%), far ahead of the Manuel Valls (10.5%). Le Pen is still expected to lose in the second round against Fillon (64% to 36%) or Macron (65% to 35%). We agree with François Heisbourg, who tweeted that this is a wildly unpredictable election.

Wildly Unpredictable

I agree with Eurointelligence this is a wildly unpredictable election.

Already we have seen “wild” results with former president Nicolas Sarkozy unexpectedly getting clobbered in the first round of the primary by Francois Fillon.

Germany a Loser No Matter Who Wins?

  • Le Pen: Eurosceptic – Seeks better relations with Russia
  • Macron: Pro Europe but seeks a common eurozone budget for investment and financial assistance in case of shocks.
  • Mélenchon: A socialist who will not be in favor of reforms France desperately needs
  • Valls: After the 2016 Nice attack, he was booed for saying that “France will have to live with terrorism.”
  • Fillon: Fillon aims to reduce the public sector and cut 500,000 civil-service jobs.  He wants the state healthcare program (securité sociale) to work better with fewer payments. Fillon is in favor of increasing the retirement age to 65. He seeks better relations with Russia.

Of the five, Germany could work best with Fillon. But his pro-Russia stance poses at least a minor problem.

Fillon vs. Le Pen

le-pen-fillon

Can Le Pen Win?

I think the current odds are wildly off, just as there were in the US with Trump. Le Pen is eurosceptic, but she will not seek to gut civil-service. Her message that France throws money at the EU will resonate with some. She regularly denounces France’s bandwagoning towards the USA. Her anti-immigration message will appeal to anyone who blames immigration for loss of jobs.

Since Bottoming in November, Le Pen has steadily picked up voter approval vs. Fillon.

What happened? Fillon had to disclose more and more of his policies in his  primary vs. Sarkozy.

Many of Le Pen’s ideas are socialistic at heart. The socialists will not want an increased work week, hundreds of thousands of civil service jobs cut, etc.

In round one of the French presidential election there will be lots of mud thrown, some of it at le Pen, but most of it will go to Macron, Mélenchon, Valls, and Fillon, all wanting the second spot.

It is by no means certain le Pen makes it to the second round, but that outcome is highly likely.

And if le Pen comes out better than expected, especially if there is a big mud-fight among the others, her chances in round 2 are far better than most believe.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
samjam7's picture

Anything that hurts Merkel that deceiving Globalist who would sell her children for their goals if she had any, is good!

Jubal Early's picture

She is a witch from the Hartz mountains and she sold her soul to satan.

When you observe how the electorate across northern Europe is swinging towards nationalist anti-immigration parties, and you observe how Brexit and Trump both show that electorates are becoming unpredictable, then the logical conclusion is that they will try to prevent these elections.  I would expect a wave of escalating ISIS* terrorist attacks across Europe in the coming months.

Question:  If Le Pen is an anti-EU nationalist and a socialist, does that not make her a National Socialist?  Isn't time to cast off this false tribal dialectic and admit that the real fight is statists, national and international, vs the rest of us?

*ISIS=Israeli Secret Services

Captain Chlamydia's picture

Excellent question. Imho Le Pen could indeed be described as a National Socialist. 

Democracy will either lead to Hunger Games /1984 or the people will grow brains and switch to libertarianism.

Ghordius's picture

there are plenty of political parties that could be described as National Socialist

the Scottish National Party (SNP), for example. interestingly, it's pro-EU

meanwhile, "National" does not mean pro-Russia or anti-Russia

or, as this article goes, pro-Merkel or anti-Merkel, or pro-Germany or anti-Germany

the conventional wisdom of Le Pen winning a place in the first round and losing it on the second round is still based on everybody else choosing the second option instead of her

meaning socialists voting for a Republican conservative (center-right) or the other way round

"seeking better relations with Russia" is not a monopoly of Le Pen. Fillon, for example, is depicted as being the better Friend Of Putin (according to Politico, "FOP") then Le Pen

the typical US-UK vision is bipolar, "black vs white", and unsuited to the multi-dimensional politics of the european continent

we'll see, we'll see. tomorrow, the British PM May will unveil her vision for "Global Britain"

"global" used in the sense of free trade in the freest trade sense

what was the most used definition of "globalist" again? pro-free-trade?

Paul Kersey's picture

Perhaps enough voters, who understand that the New World Order is little more than a takeover by elite overlords, will vote to try and end it. After all, what kind of a fair government,"by the people", would want a continuation of this?

 

"DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) -- The gap between the super-rich and the poorest half of the global population is starker than previously thought, with just eight men, from Bill Gates to Michael Bloomberg, owning as much wealth as 3.6 billion people, according to an analysis by Oxfam released Monday. Presenting its findings on the dawn of the annual gathering of the global political and business elites in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, anti-poverty organization Oxfam says the gap between the very rich and poor is far greater than just a year ago. It's urging leaders to do more than pay lip-service to the problem."

 

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_DAVOS_INEQUALITY?SITE=AP&SECTI...

Ghordius's picture

I'm fine with the definition of "New World Order" as a takeover of the super-rich

my point is that in the ideological setup that continental europeans have, it's all perfectly accountable to excesses of Liberalism (TM, classic)

to which both conservatives and socialists have a remedy: higher taxes for the rich. works only onshore, of course

meanwhile, neither the EUR nor the EU are as such a thing for the super-rich. (in London, for example, you'll find lots of those specimen that are completely unfazed by the UK using the Pound instead of the EUR, or the UK exiting the EU. the super-rich don't care about the setup)

nor is NATO, nor is Russia. or the current proxy wars going on

there is a tendency, among populists, to mistake the illness for the body, the corruption for the institution, and to ask for the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater and...

... then wonder why this does not happen, or does not give the expected results if it happens

VinceFostersGhost's picture

 

 

Can Marine Le Pen Pull Off French Election Stunner?

 

Yes.

 

I also said that Trump would win.

Salzburg1756's picture

It's over before it's over: she won't get more than 30%.

BarkingCat's picture

Stop spamming with your virus infected shitty blog.

Publicus_Reanimated's picture

France Withdraws from NATO -- breaking news from 1966.

samjam7's picture

Ghordius I don't think anyone in here claimed that the EUR or the EU were a thing for the super-rich, they may well prefer less regulated and taxed 'shores' to live and linger. However, what the EU and the EUR does do is help them in their quest to accumulate disproportionate wealth and power due to the usual liberal trade regimes and centralization of political decision making. As usual while you have a point in what you say, you omit the juicy important bits that matter in the case of Brussels.

Ghordius's picture

"what the EU and the EUR does do is help them in their quest to accumulate disproportionate wealth and power due to the usual liberal trade regimes and centralization of political decision making "

and how centralized is political decision making, in the EU? I remember CETA, and the Walloon Parliament

meanwhile, the UK is being led towards "Global Britain". a vision of a even moar liberal trade regime... outside of the EU, which is seen as "protectionistic", particularly by plenty of US multinationals which want to access the EU markets

how does your narrative stand if the UK becomes "The Queen Of Offshore" and London even more "The Playground Of The Global Oligarchs and Superrich"... outside the EU?

samjam7's picture

Ghordius, why are you so preocupied with the UK? What is about them that worries you so much? That they could fare better economically than i.e. your over-regulated Germany? The British have their government to make decisions for them and if their leaders feel global free trade is the best option then so they shall do that. And if the Brits get unahppy about the rising wealth gap they will vote in another government. I personally do not believe in the "Global Britain" meme, which Maye is currently pushing but at least it is their elected representatives that take these decisions, unlike some shady Commission in Brussels that tries to push through CETA. (May I remind you that CETA was only voted on due to heavy pressure from several states and certainly not to the liking of Juncker who first proposed to by-pass national parliaments).

Ghordius's picture

I tend to be preoccupied... some one or two decades before most are

my preoccupation is geopolitical, not "oh, Britain could fare better"

you don't believe in that "Global Britain" meme. fine, we'll hear from May, tomorrow

(your reminder: so what? my point is confirmed. parliaments matter, and sovereignty, here, is in parliament)

Paul Kersey's picture

"or the UK exiting the EU. the super-rich don't care about the setup)"

Then why did Soros use fear mongering to try and convince the Brits to vote against Brexit?

“Too many believe that a vote to leave the EU will have no effect on their personal financial position,” he adds. “This is wishful thinking. It would have at least one very clear and immediate effect that will touch every household.”

Soros cites data from the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund, and the Institute for Fiscal Studies stating that if Britain leaves the EU, the average U.K. household will lose £3,000 to £5,000 annually."

Ghordius's picture

you mean why PM Cameron resorted to fearmongering, and inviting Obama to speak?

ask Hungary's PM Victor Orban about Soros

Soros "likes" the EU only when he can use it as a playground for his ideals

again: you guys are making out of all this a constant "black vs white" two-sided affair only

Paul Kersey's picture

"again: you guys are making out of all this a constant "black vs white" two-sided affair only"

Ghordius, it is a two-sided issue. One is either in favor of plutocratic rule, or one is against it. Where do you stand?

Vageling's picture

Though I agree that it's more colorful in Europe, Europe is plagued with the black vs white virus as well. Remember? Right and left? Whereas the main factor nowadays seems to be immigration that determines it. You can have many "left" policies but when you want to uphold the immigration laws (because the majority are just that, economical immigrants seeking free money) you are labeled right. It's something that's forced upon us. Thank the little socialists for that. It's either you are down with the dogma or you're somebody that needs to be exposed of. It forces people to take sides being taken hostage in the black vs white thinking. 

 

Publicus_Reanimated's picture

The spectrum of establishment politicians in Europe is much narrower than in the U.S.  On our side of the pond we truly have prominent figures on the right in positions of great power.  In Europe you are left, middle left or hard left.  That's why there was a gaping hole on the right just waiting for the first bold would-be leader to fill.

Please, if there is a God, let Trump force all NATO members to pony up their fair share of money for their own defense.  Our subsidizing the European welfare state has made socialism's rise possible.  What irony.  Let the lefties figure out how to balance their budgets when their defense costs triple.

Matteo S.'s picture

@Publicus_Reanimated : Your subsidizing of the european welfare systems ????? What a funny joke !!!!

The US is THE net capital importer on the planet. It sucks in world savings to pay for its huge trade and budget deficits (meaning the US consumes far more than It can afford but pays real goods with paper worth nothing thanks to its imperial leverage). Europe runs a current account excedent and is a net capital exporter.

Encroaching Darkness's picture

"there is a tendency, among populists, to mistake the illness for the body, the corruption for the institution, and to ask for the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater and...

... then wonder why this does not happen, or does not give the expected results if it happens"

Ghordius, those who hold power PREVENT any gradual, slow paced and remedial change. If you run a ministry, you stop the small reforms, the gradual rollbacks of over-reach, the simple stops and minor improvements that might allow some of the pressure to dissipate, because that would reduce your influence. You resist even acknowledging that there are any problems, or minimize the scope, so that you can hold on to every privilege, every perk, every reward that you have managed to acquire, knowing that most will accept, most will allow, and the few marginal malcontents can be safely ignored.

Then you are amazed and wonder why the whole population suddenly seems to hate you, and rises up against you, sometimes with guillotines. It is what you made NECESSARY because of your greed, lust and ambition, but you will be the last to see it.

whatamaroon's picture

And 6 of those were/are hitlery supporters.

HopefulCynic's picture

As a leaning libertarian i can state that for now Classic Liberalism and libertarianism is in a hiatus, the world is not ready, not even close, the world needs the Right and strong leadership to overcome the educational crisis brough on by the dumbing down of the western population. The world needs some far right dictators (yes I hate the idea), sadly, and you can thank the CRAZY Left for that. 

Ghordius's picture

can't say it does compute to me that you describe yourself as "leaning libertarian" while asking for "a strong leadership"

sure, you write that you "hate the idea of far right dictators", but it's sad, for me, that you seem to think it needs a far right dictator to "fix education"

but there it is: illiberal, pro-national, anti-socialist... libertarians

might makes sense in the US, but not on this european continent, with it's harsher competition among political parties

Ballin D's picture

I'm understanding his point to mean that libertarianism is the ideal endpoint but it wouldn't be a good idea to enact it today because so many have lived most of their lives as useless dependents. In the us, Obama (and to a lesser extent the bushes and clinton) have worked hard to weaken people and create a dictatorship that it would take a dictator to roll the idiocy back without having to negotiate with losers ever step of the way.

 

You remind me of an economist with this entire thread. You put so much effort and thought into each post but then manage to miss the mark each time and fail to sync up with the real world.

tuetenueggel's picture

NAZIS called themselves Socialists. The never had been.

Hitler was financed by industry and wealthy establishment. They had made a very profitable decission:

Money for even more money. The war payed them off.

Déjà view's picture

Germanic speaking nations plus Finland can create a new Hanseatic League...West Franks can take everyone else with them!

Ghordius's picture

people tend to assume that if someone takes up a label to describe himself as such, that there is some merit in it

"National" means conservative, to a certain point statist, too, and focused on the needs of the Nation, most often defined as the People of the same heritage, culture, speaking the same language, etc.

so a "National" party can be full conservative, period, or be National Liberal (TM, in the classic sense used everywhere except in the US) or National Socialist

the German NSDAP was clearly il-liberal, anti-liberal. it's focus was fighting the excesses of liberalism. London's plutocrats, NY's plutocrats, the global money-lenders, international banking, and so on

both conservatives and socialists have often axes to grind with liberals, and so the NSDAP was both National conservative and socialist, to historic extremes

counterexample: our dear ZH fellows that constantly moan about socialism, for whom socialism is evil, period. they would give a good example for National Liberal, in most of the cases. it's conservative and liberal (again, not in the US sense of the word) and anti-socialist. "smacker" comes to mind

Déjà view's picture

Bismarck initially introduced most German social programs during last 2 decades of the 19 century...NAZI's introduced restrictive Ladenschlussgesetz.

Ghordius's picture

correct, but Otto von Bismarck did it to pre-empt the socialists

what he introduced is still kind of the hall-mark of the modern national state, btw

social security in the sense of pensions (SS in the US) and insurance against disability

it's very hard to find anybody outside of the US that would note his reforms as "socialist"

it's similar to the "national health insurance" debate. every first world country has something like that, even Canada, or the UK's NHS. not the US, and no, "Obamacare" does not count as such

Publicus_Reanimated's picture

Well said.  FDR fulfilled the same function in the U.S.  His sole purpose of being was to fend off a socialist revolution in this country by throwing enough of a sop at the masses that they would not embrace Debs et al.  TPTB were bound and determined to get FDR into office.  RIP Huey P. Long.

HopefulCynic's picture

He nationalised a lot of Industry, like good socialists. They (NAZIs) also introduced a lot of regulations and social programs. Yep a complete socialist economy. 

Ballin D's picture

American socialism is "financed by industry and wealthy establishment."

 

Are you trying to argue with yourself?

Sanity Bear's picture

> Isn't time to cast off this false tribal dialectic and admit that the real fight is statists, national and international, vs the rest of us?

You would think so, but after watching so many alleged libertarians take the side of the establishment against Trump, the only political battle lines I see are globalists/oligarchy vs. everyone else, where nationalists - statist or otherwise - are in the latter group.

Sadly way too many self-labeled libertarians are under the delusion that there will somehow be more liberty under a one-world government controlled by the likes of Soros.

Socratic Dog's picture

Socialist is a socialist, Jubal.  The brand doesn't matter.  The planned outcome is always the same: the bankers own everything. 

If, perchance, the party is not a pawn of the bankers, then it is not socialist, regardless of its name.  Did Hitler really move against the bankers?  If he did, he wasn't a socialist, national or any other brand.

tuetenueggel's picture

She is a dumb onion.

No kids at all because nobody f....ed her. Neither did I.

gespiri's picture

That's the thing......Merkel has no kids which is why she doesn't care about the future of Germany.

Elco the Constitutionalist's picture
Elco the Constitutionalist (not verified) Jan 16, 2017 4:14 AM

She won't win. It will be a close election with results predetermined to make it look believable.

The Management's picture

Another repeat of Austria...interesting idea. I really hope not, i like Le Pen. She may become inevitable though if Trumps world requires her. Plus by the time the elections arrive a lot may have already changed judging by how fast the pendulum is swinging.

jerry1800's picture

in the 2.round lefties will vote Francois Fillion, like Chirac 2002

mog's picture

Marine le Pen.
The new Joan 'Arc.
To rescue France and restore its sovereignty and independence.
Lets hope the French have more brains than to allow this 'Joan' to be symbolicly burnt at the stake.
Elect her for the sake of France and the peace of the planet.
Vive Madame le Pen.
Saviour of the French people.

Ghordius's picture

plenty of British history books will tell you that Joan d'Arc was a witch, and that the English were 100% right to burn her on a stake

(rest deleted, I was incorrect. Le Pen has by now stated that she wants to leave the EU)

Innominate's picture

I'm British and that's complete BS. "British" history books will give you what both parties thought and did at the time.

You are full blown Anglophobe.

Ghordius's picture

I have a whole collection of British history books that prove my point, and call your point BS

oh, poor Ghordius, an Anglophobe! wish I was so, at times

strike that, pardon me (insert sarcasm), poor Brits. we Continentals are so mean to you, eh?

look how we are forcing you to stay in the EU, forcing you to go metric, forcing you to all those bad, bad things

btw, when are you leaving? and I'd be fine with my Anglo-bashing, if it was really a phobia. but it's more a kind of itch

Joe A's picture

Bravo for the correction.

Ghordius's picture

I really missed that turn. methinks she's gone bananas, with that. particularly if she is really for all that

Joe A's picture

She might win the first round but she will most likely not win the second round. But, you never know. France will get a conservative president anyway.

Jubal Early's picture

France will get a zionist president anyway.

Fixed it for you