The Next President of France will be...

Valord

Bob24 wrote: »

Now frankly I don't think anyone should be reading too much into this beyond saying all 4 have chances of making it to the second round. I wouldn't be surprised if for a number if reasons these polls are up to 5% of for any of those candidates either up or down, which could completely change the order of arrival.

This should be the major takeaway from the polls. Any poll taking a shift within 3 points up or down should not be completely surprising, which means nobody is safe right now. Nate Silver also suggested in the latest 538 podcast that, based on the spread of polling numbers by different pollsters, there seems to be a herding effect going on, which could mean the polls are ignoring outliers that may turn out to be true. This election is highly uncertain, at least for the first round.

Leonard Hofstadter

Valord wrote: »

This should be the major takeaway from the polls. Any poll taking a shift within 3 points up or down should not be completely surprising, which means nobody is safe right now. Nate Silver also suggested in the latest 538 podcast that, based on the spread of polling numbers by different pollsters, there seems to be a herding effect going on, which could mean the polls are ignoring outliers that may turn out to be true. This election is highly uncertain, at least for the first round.

Herding happened in the UK in 2015, which is one of the reasons why they got it so wrong when it came to the Tory vs Labour vote.

Basically herding happens when a polling company finds out its results are quite different to what everyone else is publishing and therefore feel there is a sampling bias in their poll, so they need to 'correct' it, after all if you post a seemingly dodgy poll then your reputation may take a bit of a hammering.

There could easily be herding in the French ones, it really is too close to call.

Bob24

Valord wrote: »

Bob24 wrote: »

Now frankly I don't think anyone should be reading too much into this beyond saying all 4 have chances of making it to the second round. I wouldn't be surprised if for a number if reasons these polls are up to 5% of for any of those candidates either up or down, which could completely change the order of arrival.

This should be the major takeaway from the polls. Any poll taking a shift within 3 points up or down should not be completely surprising, which means nobody is safe right now. Nate Silver also suggested in the latest 538 podcast that, based on the spread of polling numbers by different pollsters, there seems to be a herding effect going on, which could mean the polls are ignoring outliers that may turn out to be true. This election is highly uncertain, at least for the first round.

Yes this is my first reason for being cautious. The other one is that there is still a good number of undecided voters (or people who will change their mind at the last minute) so things could evolve over the weekend and we won't have a picture of it as polls are now banned until after the results of the first round are published.

4068ac1elhodqr

Valord wrote: »

Do they really need a plan B? I've been thinking about this today and from what I could find, both Melenchon and LePen are only pushing for a referendum on membership, not a straight exit from the Union. Recent opinion polls suggest that over 70% of French voters want to maintain the Euro as a currency, never mind just membership, despite French dissatisfaction with the EU. It would take quite a strong change of public opinion to get to the same level of closeness as we saw in the UK on quitting.

LePen would have a very strong opinion on the free movement of people, which was the primary driver of Brexit occurring.

4068ac1elhodqr

Rightwing wrote: »

I've a 4 figure sum on Macron @ 4/5.
Seems like free cash to me.

:eek: Pick a horse

from the Arc du Carrousel, there's four of them with not a lot of a handicap between them, well three of them anyway with a fair chance.

Rjd2

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/855468435274379264

Pretty good from Nate.

I don't think she is a no hoper, but I suspect many including the betting industry are running scared of another Brexit/Trump hammering.

A few bookmakers have been arbing Macron quite a bit, clearly trying their best to duck Le Pen.

Chuchote

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/855468435274379264

Pretty good from Nate.

I don't think she is a no hoper, but I suspect many including the betting industry are running scared of another Brexit/Trump hammering.

A few bookmakers have been arbing Macron quite a bit, clearly trying their best to duck Le Pen.

Arbing? New word to me - what does it mean, please?

Rightwing

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

:eek: Pick a horse

from the Arc du Carrousel, there's four of them with not a lot of a handicap between them, well three of them anyway with a fair chance.

No.

The only threat to Marcon is Fillon. From a betting perspective, if you think Fillon won't make the 2nd round, put the house on Marcon.

PopePalpatine

Chuchote wrote: »

Arbing? New word to me - what does it mean, please?

It's betting on all possible outcomes in such a way that you're guaranteed a profit.

Calina

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Previous BVA poll:

Macron 24% (so -1)
Le Pen 23% (same)
M?lenchon 19% (+0.5%)
Fillon 19% (same)

Therefore, it seems the attack had zero impact.

I can't see how the attack could even have been a factor in that particular poll as the time overlap was very limited.

For Forks Sake

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Would be interesting to hear the view of white van man/lady in small town Fr.
Much like Trump's success around the dust belt, Melenchon may become magnetic.

Here's the (impractical) offer:

'Work less, earn more, retire early, oh and don't worry about any healthcare or childcare costs.
A referendum? Sure we'll get you one of those too' (probably).

Sounds suspiciously like how Greece was being run, and didn't that work out well :rolleyes:

Chuchote

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Sounds suspiciously like how Greece was being run, and didn't that work out well :rolleyes:

Wasn't the Greeks' problem, like our own, cowboy bankers rather than egalitarian social policies? Don't they have loads of billionaire shipowners who pretend to live elsewhere so they won't pay tax in their own country?

4068ac1elhodqr

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Sounds suspiciously like how Greece was being run, and didn't that work out well :rolleyes:

Maybe so, but in Morketing don't let a very, very, good sales pitch get in the way of the likely aftermath :pac: Maybe those 32-hr weeks will even create more employment to facilitate the new shift patterns if folks only show up for half the week.

Isn't one of the other candidates a former investment banker for the world's largest banking dynasties, which may or may not be of benefit to the 99%.

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Maybe so, but in Morketing don't let a very very good sales pitch get in the way of the likely aftermath :pac:

Isn't one of the other candidates a former investment banker for the world's largest banking dynasties, which may or may not be of benefit to the 99%.

That would be Macron who is pretty much leading for voting intention at the moment. You could have named him as I assume you knew this.

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

That would be Macron who is pretty much leading for voting intention at the moment. You could have named him as I assume you knew this.

Maybe, and may this factor be of any influence during this current rise of populism, power to the people and all that jazz? Who knows...

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Maybe, and may this factor be of any influence during this current rise of populism, power to the people and all that jazz? Who knows...

Are you trying to say "Macron was a Rothschilds banker and this is why Le Pen is popular?"

If not, you should be aware of the fact that this is what it sounds like.

I doubt it is a factor anyway. I think Macron is a fascinating character in a lot of respects - he has 2 years government experience as an appointee by Hollande, he has not got grass roots experience to any great extent and yet here he is. Against that, Le Pen is that great thing which we rail against here in Ireland, out of a family of politicians with a fairly hefty grass roots structure behind her and at least some history of winning election.

Arguably, she's political establishment where he, to a great extent, is not. I don't think anyone is accusing him of populism though although on paper, his route the presidential election has more in common with Trump than it does with Francois Fillon.

The growth in populism cannot be explained in simple terms. Like anything, a lot of roots factor into it, and there are localised things as well. Would Le Pen exist if the FN didn't already exist? I have doubts.

AfD is currently tearing itself apart in Koln which leads me to think fringehood is going to be its ultimate destiny.

I'm of the opinion that Le Pen's best option for making president is by getting into the second round with Melenchon and even then I'm not sure it's certain.

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

"Macron was a Rothschilds banker and this is why Le Pen is popular?"

Nope, not saying that, you are. I'm simply asking within the wider context if he's a natural choice considering all factors?
Any votes he may loose - may in fact go directly to underrated Mel, and not Le Pen.

Le Pen is entirely different and her steadfast but significant supporters have a more narrow framset, and who knows in the light of recent events may even have swelled. The bookies have her a firm fav to win the 1st round, but this could be a protest vote.

The 1st round voters will vote with their hearts, then later with their minds.

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Nope, not saying that, you are. I'm simply asking within the wider context if he's a natural choice considering all factors?
Any votes he may loose - may in fact go directly to underrated Mel, and not Le Pen.

Le Pen is entirely different and her steadfast but significant supporters have a more narrow framset, and who knows in the light of recent events may even have swelled. The bookies have her a firm fav to win the 1st round, but this could be a protest vote.

The 1st round voters will vote with their hearts, then later with their minds.

Out of interest, what French media do you read?

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

Out of interest, what French media do you read?

Only one called 'instinct & foresight weekly', it was the same one that predicted Con-Maj, Brexit and Trump.
Unfortunately it missed 5,000/1 Leicester winning the premier league.

This one is very tricky with so many equal horses.
Do you not feel LePen is a safe bet to win the 1st round? Or is that going to be the one you fancy?

CelticRambler

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Sounds suspiciously like how Greece was being run, and didn't that work out well :rolleyes:

It's also how France has been run for decades, and it's not working out any better.

France's biggest problem is that it is a federation of culturally different states in all but name. The challenges of running e.g. a united Belgium or a united Ireland are exaggerated six-fold, with the "ordinary people" constantly voting for people whose promises will deliver the exact opposite of what the people need.

Down the road from me, a car-parts factory is about to close with the loss of a couple of hundred jobs. Instead of coming up with innovative ideas for creating or attracting new business to the area, making use of the numerous vacant buildings already available, these guys have been demonstrating in Paris, demanding that Hollande & Co. save their jobs.

This is re-run of the same story regarding a medical devices manufacturer up the road, the one and only factory in the German-owned multinational group that operated at a loss.

Successive governments - left and right - over the last five decades have done everything to convince the "peuple ordinaire" that they can have their cake and eat it. You'd have to live here to fully appreciate the blank look on the faces of even quite well-educated people when you suggest that something should be done differently (and it's damn near impossible to get support for any project that isn't framed in exactly the same terms as the six that have failed)

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

I'm simply asking within the wider context if he's a natural choice considering all factors?

...

The 1st round voters will vote with their hearts, then later with their minds.

Not this time! Voters understand that this Round One is not like any other.

Somewhat ironically, though, some of the most vociferous Le Pen supporters insist that they're going to vote for her because they to get rid of old-school politics ... even though she's as old-school and as much a child of the establishment as Valls, Sarkozy, Hollande, Hamon, Chirac and Mitterand.

Macron is the only one (of the main contenders) who doesn't have that political baggage.

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Only one called 'instinct & foresight weekly', it was the same one that predicted Con-Maj, Brexit and Trump.
Unfortunately it missed 5,000/1 Leicester winning the premier league.

This one is very tricky with so many equal horses.
Do you not feel LePen is a safe bet to win the 1st round? Or is that going to be the one you fancy?

I asked you what French media you read and the impression I am left with is that you read none and at a guess, you probably don't read any French much either.

I don't feel Le Pen is a safe bet to win the 1st round. The top three at least are within the margin of error for most polls which means there is still a possibility also that she doesn't even make the second round. IMO, the figures are too close to calculate first round results with any confidence at all. There are no safe bets as it were. But my view is coloured by the fact that I speak French, can read French media, can listen to French media, have listened to Le Pen being interviewed. In French. In that context I am not surprised that Fillon has not completely collapsed. He has done a super job on presenting his responses to the scandals surrounding him at the moment and he's helped by the factor of not being the worst of a bad lot. I personally question his party's wisdom in selecting him given his links to Russia but he did win a primary so I have to accept that decision.

What I am most interested in is who actually winds up being president. As a result, my key concern is less who wins the first round and more who gets into the second round.

You give the impression that for you this is gambling entertainment. I live about 50km from the French border and about 100,000 a day cross the border into the city where I work from France. What happens in France politically matters to my life. There are people on this thread who are French, there are people here who live in France. I don't think it's a game to them either.

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

I don't feel Le Pen is a safe bet to win the 1st round.

Très correct. But feel you could be incorrect in your forecast.

I also wasn't in Britian during Brexit, nor or sat extensively watching CNN's coverage of Donald, not even bothering to read 'usa today' once during 2016.

You mention polls rather a lot, they're useful to an extent. A much better 'live poll' is that without bias or any media influence and that is the betting exchange markets which today offers Macron about 33% of implied chance, vs e.g. LePen 60%+ for 1st round. That's people's cold cash, not sentiment, not wishful thinking, not long stories, just insight and selection.



Make no mistake the future of the EU could be at stake, everyone has their own idea of what's best and frankly who really knows for sure. My real interest is in cutting through the noise to more accurately gauge what the actual outcome shall be. Don't have a strong preference for any candidate, but have a interest in predicting which one it will actually be.

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Très correct. But feel you could be incorrect in your forecast.

I also wasn't in Britian during Brexit, nor or sat extensively watching CNN's coverage of Donald, not even bothering to read 'usa today' once during 2016.

You mention polls rather a lot, they're useful to an extent. A much better 'live poll' is that without bias or any media influence and that is the betting exchange markets which today offers Macron about 33% of implied chance, vs e.g. LePen 60%+ for 1st round. That's people's cold cash, not sentiment, not wishful thinking, not long stories, just insight and selection.



Make no mistake the future of the EU could be at stake, everyone has their own idea of what's best and frankly who really knows for sure. My real interest is in cutting through the noise to more accurately gauge what the actual outcome shall be. Don't have a strong preference for any candidate, but have a interest in predicting which one it will actually be.

Are you talking about winning the first round or winning the presidency? It's not clear to me from this post.

Betting public are self selecting and often not local to the election. I've never seen them as cold hard cash so much as dreamers. Gambling is always wishful thinking regardless of how often you think it's anything else.

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

Are you talking about winning the first round or winning the presidency? It's not clear to me from this post.

1st round, Macron only has 33% of winning this, Pen 60% according to these certain markets. Polls call it even between the two. Polls are usually smaller sample groups, can contain bias, some are even paid-for. Which is best to believe, that is the real question?

Outright is probably too close to call at this stage, a days a long time...

Essentially it's a form of speculative investment, much like what Macron did in investment banking, not suitable for the majority. Neither is all those folks who are selling their euro's now in case of a 10% € FX drop in May. Property flippers and car re-sellers too, they all require very high self-discipline.

Only interested in the truth of this event based on the choice the public of France will make. But once you have any strong individual preference you views become distorted to suit and conform to your ideals, and any accuracy lessens with that.

Calina

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

1st round, Macron only has 33% of winning this, Pen 60% according to these certain markets. Polls call it even between the two. Polls are usually smaller sample groups, can contain bias, some are even paid-for. Which is best to believe, that is the real question?

Outright is probably too close to call at this stage, a days a long time...

Essentially it's a form of speculative investment, much like what Macron did in investment banking, not suitable for the majority. Neither is all those folks who are selling their euro's now in case of a 10% € FX drop in May. Property flippers and car re-sellers too, they all require very high self-discipline.

Only interested in the truth of this event based on the choice the public of France will make. But once you have any strong individual preference you views become distorted to suit and conform to your ideals, and any accuracy lessens with that.

Tell me, how much time have you spent studying statistics and maths?

4068ac1elhodqr

Calina wrote: »

Tell me, how much time have you spent studying statistics and maths?

Only what is required. I hear there is a surplus of pollsters and statisticians globally at the moment, it's become a saturated trade of late.

There's an old saying: "Some people spend all their time studying the roots of trees to understand how they work, others simply pick the fruit from the branches".

Wish you well with your hopes, ideals and aspirations. I'll be reading through the lines and seeking the truth.

/ this conversation has now ended.

An Ciarraioch

Except, of course, there has also been talk of Momentum members putting money on Corbyn to influence the market, so betting volume is hardly an infallible indicator.

Calina

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Except, of course, there has also been talk of Momentum members putting money on Corbyn to influence the market, so betting volume is hardly an infallible indicator.

This is the interesting thing. The betting markets got Brexit very wrong and they weren't optimal for the US election either. Their population can be extremely self selection and for every cold blooded "in this to make money" there are any number of emotional gamblers who make the error of thinking that their wishful thinking is based on rational thinking. From the point of view of the French election, I don't know how safe they are because with the best will in the world, I can't identify the source of the population contributing to the numbers.

The thing is, betting is rarely cold and rational. Many people bet on people they want to win; some people bet several ways in an attempt to cover all their options. But in general, the vast majority of people who bet lose money. If Marine Le Pen was a certainty to win the French election or a specific stage of it, the odds would reflect that and punters would be hard pressed to make money on it unless they bet at a point where that certainty did not exist or linked it with an event of a less certain outcome.

With respect to polls in France, they have not generally been very wrong particularly with respect to the presidential. However, the polling companies have tended to voice concern about this one given that for the first round at least, the top three candidates are within the polling margins of error and the fourth is not that far back either.

In general, there isn't a surplus of statisticians; in fact there's quite a lot of demand for them particularly if they have strong programming and datebase skills. More often than not though their role description is data scientist or data analyst. Paddy Power has a few on board. Their job is to maximise the money that PP can make out of the punters. I got interest from a few betting/gambling services but chose not to get involved in that industry.

Tomorrow is going to be an interesting day. I think there's a PhD to be had in English language coverage of this election but that is for later. In the meantime, there are a couple of outcomes which would give clearer likelihoods for final outcome and a couple which may not necessarily be so clear cut.

CelticRambler

Who cares who wins the first round? That's not how the president of France is elected!

I'm sure there are plenty of non-voters gambling their non-French fortunes on a Brexit-Trump-LePen hat trick, but it's been clear from the beginning of this thread that most contributors with no direct connection to France have no idea how irrelevant it is to the final outcome who "wins" the first round.

FWIW, on the basis of my exchanges with real-world French voters, I'm going to guess (yeah, guess) that tomorrow's result with be Macron-Fillon-LePen-M?lenchon in that order ... possibly with a re-count if the Fillon-LePen score is reversed and very tight.

Calina

CelticRambler wrote: »

Who cares who wins the first round? That's not how the president of France is elected!

I'm sure there are plenty of non-voters gambling their non-French fortunes on a Brexit-Trump-LePen hat trick, but it's been clear from the beginning of this thread that most contributors with no direct connection to France have no idea how irrelevant it is to the final outcome who "wins" the first round.

FWIW, on the basis of my exchanges with real-world French voters, I'm going to guess (yeah, guess) that tomorrow's result with be Macron-Fillon-LePen-M?lenchon in that order ... possibly with a re-count if the Fillon-LePen score is reversed and very tight.

Well yes, this is it. The first round is only important insofar as it provides us with an A/B option unless (highly unlikely as the polls would have to be spectacularly wrong) someone manages to win 50+% of the vote in the first round and then it's moot. I've noted that my primary interest is in the ultimate winner because a) that impacts on France and b) potentially frontalier zones in the countries bordering France. But the other thing is I suspect that under the circumstances of the Brexit debates happening in the UK, Le Pen's performance could have an impact to some extent on the British general election - I suspect the results of a British election just after a Le Pen victory might differ to some extent from those just after a Le Pen loss. And round two will be done by the time 8 June rolls around. Which in a lot of ways is ironic.

VG31

Although Brexit and Trump's win were a shock, it wasn't as if the polls were completely wrong. There were many polls where leave was marginally ahead of remain and likewise with Trump and Clinton. People talk about the polls being wrong, but they weren't that far off. Brexit only passed narrowly and Clinton won the popular vote.

If Le Pen somehow managed to defeat Macron in the runoff despite his 20-25 point leave over her, that would be a failure of the opinion polls!

A lot of people seem to be overlooking this when discussing the French election. All the leave side had to gain was 3-4%, not 20%.

Calina

VG31 wrote: »

Although Brexit and Trump's win were a shock, it wasn't as if the polls were completely wrong. There were many polls where leave was marginally ahead of remain and likewise with Trump and Clinton. People talk about the polls being wrong, but they weren't that far off. Brexit only passed narrowly and Clinton won the popular vote.

If Le Pen somehow managed to defeat Macron in the runoff despite his 20-25 point leave over her, that would be a failure of the opinion polls!

A lot of people seem to be overlooking this when discussing the French election. All the leave side had to gain was 3-4%, not 20%.

Yes, but I would like to note that the betting markets and polls are not the same. IIRC, the betting markets estimated the probability that Brexit would win at around 25% and while arguable that left the door open for a Brexit victory it does call into the question "money where mouth is, cold hard cash more likely to be rational".

The Trump/Clinton ones I tend to see as slightly different because there were two outcomes to review there one being the electoral college and one being the popular vote. Broadly speaking, the polls matched the popular vote but there were few if any accurate calls on the electoral college. As a side note one of the things that shocked me about that was how many people in the US in particular did not appear to understand how their own presidential electoral system operated. You cannot say the same about the French. They know exactly how this works.

Mezcita

VG31 wrote: »

Although Brexit and Trump's win were a shock, it wasn't as if the polls were completely wrong. There were many polls where leave was marginally ahead of remain and likewise with Trump and Clinton. People talk about the polls being wrong, but they weren't that far off. Brexit only passed narrowly and Clinton won the popular vote.

Brexit was 10/1 the night before the vote. Trump was 4/1 the week before.

VG31

Mezcita wrote: »

Brexit was 10/1 the night before the vote. Trump was 4/1 the week before.

I said that Brexit and Trump weren't that much of a shock based on the opinion polls.

The bookies were surprised, but they're not exactly an accurate prediction of the results.

Calina wrote: »

Yes, but I would like to note that the betting markets and polls are not the same.

I wasn't referring to the betting markets.

An Ciarraioch

What do we make of Filteris, then? They attempt to convert the "digital weight" of candidates into polling data, but it hardly seems representative of France as a whole:

https://www.lesechos.fr/elections/presidentielle-2017/0211996004416-presidentielle-le-scrutin-donnera-t-il-raison-aux-pronostics-decries-de-filteris-2081551.php

Calina

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

What do we make of Filteris, then? They attempt to convert the "digital weight" of candidates into polling data, but it hardly seems representative of France as a whole:

https://www.lesechos.fr/elections/presidentielle-2017/0211996004416-presidentielle-le-scrutin-donnera-t-il-raison-aux-pronostics-decries-de-filteris-2081551.php

Unless sentiment analysis has improved big time in terms of what the people pushing it consider as acceptable errors, it really is not something I would rely on. The criticisms of Nicolas Vanderbiest in general still apply and even the big data gatherers like Facebook have at best a poor record in terms of assessing automatically the sentiment in texts. Worth noting also that I think a significant amount of the textual analysis work done to support sentiment analysis is done in English and I don't know how reliable NLP done on non-English texts are atm (although I think Baidu might have done a lot of advances for Chinese in the last few years). Would quibble about the suggestion that Twitter is fully public though because it isn't. You can protect your tweets on twitter so Filtris would have to be following anyone who did that. But anyway twitter is not representative of any population as a whole in general as it skews young and it skews digital native.

My main issue though is that twitter is heavily gamed with bots at the moment and I would want to be sure that any sentiment analysis based on something like an election could tune out thousand time retweets. They are unclear on how they handle things like this although they are implying they might be able to take account of it but don't filter it out. He's not going to specify their underlying algorithms in any detail but from what I am reading here, they sound awfully fluffy to me. It's like guessing how much rain fell oer 6 days and then averaging it to five places of decimals. Looks massively accurate but the input data is less than precise so you have five places of decimal precision of cotton wool basically.

Lastly, it seems to me to be unclear what they are trying to do. Are they trying to predict an outcome or calculate a probability or what?

Je rappelle aussi que nous ne calculons pas des intentions de vote mais un "poids numérique" à travers lequel on tente de faire une corrélation avec le résultat à venir

(En savoir plus sur https://www.lesechos.fr/elections/presidentielle-2017/0211996004416-presidentielle-le-scrutin-donnera-t-il-raison-aux-pronostics-decries-de-filteris-2081551.php#fJovPAOBxF3gOfmG.99)

"I remind you also that we don't calculate voting intention but a digital weight which we then try to correlate with the result to come".

It's some kind of prediction wrapped up in and this is not our area which I tend to see as a bit of a cop out.

Rightwing

I don't think the French people have the courage to vote for anyone but Macron, but let's see. I'll readily admit and lose cash if they prove otherwise.

CelticRambler

Are you sure you've got that the right way round? If it's a question of courage, surely voting for the one and only non-politician is a brave move?

In any case, I've spent the last six hours mercilessly teasing the French natives that make up my social circle about how this might be the last they'll see of me, as I'll have to go into exile after Madame La Pr?sidente is elected. In this group, age range 20-80, typically left-leaning, 100% of them are going to vote (some have a three-hour drive home, and were delaying their departure from our evening event so that they could go straight to the polling booth and vote before going to bed :pac: ) and 100% were determined to keep MLP out of office.

OK, so it's not a scientifically valid sample, but I reckon the turnout will be about normal, and I will not be the least bit surprised to hear that MLP has not made it to the second round.

Chuchote

CelticRambler wrote: »

Are you sure you've got that the right way round? If it's a question of courage, surely voting for the one and only non-politician is a brave move?

In any case, I've spent the last six hours mercilessly teasing the French natives that make up my social circle about how this might be the last they'll see of me, as I'll have to go into exile after Madame La Pr?sidente is elected. In this group, age range 20-80, typically left-leaning, 100% of them are going to vote (some have a three-hour drive home, and were delaying their departure from our evening event so that they could go straight to the polling booth and vote before going to bed :pac: ) and 100% were determined to keep MLP out of office.

OK, so it's not a scientifically valid sample, but I reckon the turnout will be about normal, and I will not be the least bit surprised to hear that MLP has not made it to the second round.

Fingers crossed so tight I can barely tpye.

Bob24

CelticRambler wrote: »

I will not be the least bit surprised to hear that MLP has not made it to the second round.

High turnout yes. But I'd be very surprised not to see Le Pen in the second round.

I know you know this already, but since the choice has become very much of a class-based vote with each social class defending its own interest, querying one's social circle really doesn't tell much about the final outcome. Similarly to what you described, it would be easy to find someone honestly saying "In this group, age range 20-80, typically left-leaning, 100% of them are going to vote and 100% were determined to bring MLP into office" (typically an unemployed person or low-skilled worker in a small town, but not only).

One thing which scares me is that based on the people I talk to (demographics partly similar to yours), most correspond to what you describe in terms of wanting to keep Le Pen out (although not all as I know some Le Pen and Melanchon supporters who don't necessarily fit their model electorates) but on the other hand they don't really like any of the candidates at all and they are just thinking of which one to vote for to make sure Le Pen doesn't win (and they openly say they don't plan to give their presidential choice a majority in the legislative elections). That the main driver for people to make their choice can become "what is the best way to keep Le Pen out?" is a sign of how rotten things have become in French politics.

ChikiChiki

I'll be very surprised if Marine LePen does not win this election. The media and pollsters seem to be very disingenuous to the true level of support that LePen actually has. Its more wishful thinking on their part that she does not come through.

Who would you vote if facing the challenges France currently face?

Chuchote

Cartoon version of Mélenchon's policies https://avenirencommun.fr/bd/

This frame refers to elected politicians who form a class in solidarity with the super-rich. Luckily, we don't have that problem in Ireland :eek:



By the way, the Dutch word for a tax on the very rich means, in translation, "Scrooge McDuck tax"


And who would I vote for? I really don't know. Maybe Macron, but his soaring confidence combined with his lack of hands-on experience, and his unsettling resemblance to Tony Blair gives me the creeps. Maybe Mélenchon, but I don't know enough about him and fear that the Scrooge McDuck class in Europe would break him as they did the Greeks

listermint

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I'll be very surprised if Marine LePen does not win this election. The media and pollsters seem to be very disingenuous to the true level of support that LePen actually has. Its more wishful thinking on their part that she does not come through.

Who would you vote if facing the challenges France currently face?

I would definitely put my vote behind Millionaires who got their wealth from Daddy, with no concept of what a normal persons day looks like, I mean it make the most sense being an right winger to vote these sorts into power all over the world...

red ears

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I'll be very surprised if Marine LePen does not win this election. The media and pollsters seem to be very disingenuous to the true level of support that LePen actually has. Its more wishful thinking on their part that she does not come through.

Who would you vote if facing the challenges France currently face?

Remember shy right leaning voters too. People fear a browbeating from the oh so 'tolerant' left so they deny being for trump, for brexit, for le pen etc.

Rjd2

Bob24 wrote: »

One think which scares me is that based on the people I talk to (demographics partly similar to yours), most correspond to what you describe in terms of wanting to keep Le Pen out (although not all as I know some Le Pen and Melanchon supporters who don't necessarily fit their model electorates) but on the other hand they don't really like any of the candidates at all and they are just thinking of which one to vote for to make sure Le Pen doesn't win (and they openly say they don't plan to give their presidential choice a majority in the legislative elections). That the main driver for people to make their choice can become "what is the best way to keep Le Pen out?" is a sign of how rotten things have become and French politics.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/04/frances-deplorable-election-unified-voters-disgust/

Pretty good article on this. Its a crazy election so far, but if I was French I'd be pretty depressed as lets be honest, its not just MLP who is flawed in this campaign.

Bob24

red ears wrote: »

Remember shy right leaning voters too. People fear a browbeating from the oh so 'tolerant' left so they deny being for trump, for brexit, for le pen etc.

There has also been talks about a shy Fillon vote because is supporters have had enough with being told how much of a crook some of those "tolerant" people you describe think he is.

Having said that, what I am reading is that while these will play a part in social discussions or in the media, opinion polls are should be able to ignore the issue as they are either anonymised phone calls or internet questionnaires with no consequence for expressing your opinion. We shall know in a few hours from now.

CelticRambler

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I'll be very surprised if Marine LePen does not win this election. The media and pollsters seem to be very disingenuous to the true level of support that LePen actually has.

And where are you getting your indications of her "true level" of support from?

Bob24 wrote: »

That the main driver for people to make their choice can become "what is the best way to keep Le Pen out?" is a sign of how rotten things have become in French politics.

I disagree. I refer back to the early days of this thread when I suggested that, for once, the French electorate might realise that this two-round system was no longer fit for purpose; that in this election, they did not have the luxury of casting a protest vote out or blind tribal loyalty.

I think in the opinion polls we've seen that the electorate has already decided to whittle down the field to just four candidates - not including the PS - and today we'll see a concerted effort by the anyone-but-MLP majority to have her excluded from the Round Two contest.

Then the election campaign can begin in earnest! :pac:

Valord

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

1st round, Macron only has 33% of winning this, Pen 60% according to these certain markets. Polls call it even between the two. Polls are usually smaller sample groups, can contain bias, some are even paid-for. Which is best to believe, that is the real question?

What is the relevance of this? Unless you're suggesting MLP gets 50% in the first round, winning the first round is utterly worthless. Why are you focusing on only "certain" betting markets and what ones are they? If I look at Paddy Power, I see Macron at 4-to-6 while LePen is 10-to-3 to win. Not that I'm saying that proves anything, except that you seem to be selective in your own predictors too.

Calina wrote: »

The Trump/Clinton ones I tend to see as slightly different because there were two outcomes to review there one being the electoral college and one being the popular vote. Broadly speaking, the polls matched the popular vote but there were few if any accurate calls on the electoral college.

While they didn't pitch it as the most likely outcome, 538 were the only outlet I saw discussing the possibility of an EC/PV split going to Trump, and they gave it about a 10% chance of happening (higher than many were giving of Trump winning at all). They were the only ones I remember who actually explained how the EC was stacked in Trump's favour, while conventional wisdom pushed the "blue wall" myth (which Trump, bizarrely, still holds on to if his recent tweets are any indication).

ChikiChiki wrote: »

I'll be very surprised if Marine LePen does not win this election. The media and pollsters seem to be very disingenuous to the true level of support that LePen actually has. Its more wishful thinking on their part that she does not come through.

How is that, in any way, not just wishful thinking on your part? Why do they seem "disingenuous" to you, besides the fact that they're not saying what you want to hear? I'm not sure if you noticed, but MLP is a close second in polls (and first for a long time before this), meaning pollsters are expecting her to make it through the first round.

red ears wrote: »

Remember shy right leaning voters too. People fear a browbeating from the oh so 'tolerant' left so they deny being for trump, for brexit, for le pen etc.

This is completely hypocritical. I don't know the situation in France, but in the American election, openly supporting Hillary Clinton was just as controversial as supporting Trump and was guaranteed to cause serious blowback from the "open minded right". Nobody likes it when people vote for candidates they hate, it's not a partisan problem.

Christy42

red ears wrote: »

Remember shy right leaning voters too. People fear a browbeating from the oh so 'tolerant' left so they deny being for trump, for brexit, for le pen etc.

Brexit had a 4% swing and the polls were going that. The polls in Trump's case were largely accurate and off by 2%. MLP would need a swing of at least 15% depending on who goes through.

Also there has been little evidence of the shy voter for previous French elections here (or indeed Trump for that matter).

CelticRambler

In thirteen years living with them, I don't think I've ever met a shy French voter. :pac: