The Next President of France will be...

snowflaker

Ah the Globalist Elite back Marcon, according to the twitter Alt-right

Everyone bar Alt-right is backing Macron now! (maybe not the communists either!)

snowflaker

Stheno wrote: »

Thanks, I was trying to figure it out.

I wonder if his pro open borders policy supporting Merkel will be his undoing?

Cant see over 50% of French voters backing Le Pen, like SF she's transfer toxic - you either back Le Pen, or you don't.

Valord

snowflaker wrote: »

Ah the Globalist Elite back Marcon, according to the twitter Alt-right

Everyone bar Alt-right is backing Macron now! (maybe not the communists either!)

I think "globalist" has just become another buzzword for the alt-right. Anyone they don't like is the favourite of globalists. It's easier to whip people up against concepts like immigration and tolerance when you convince people that they're the product of George Soros and a shadowy cabal of bankers, rather than products of empathy.

Stheno wrote: »

Thanks, I was trying to figure it out.

I wonder if his pro open borders policy supporting Merkel will be his undoing?

It will be interesting to see. Seems like a divisive issue across the EU, and it's sometimes hard to tell whether it relates specifically to refugees or to EU citizen movement in general. In the UK, for example, most of the blame was pointed at eastern European immigrants rather than Syrians or Afghans. Macron seems to be by far the most unabashedly pro-EU person who ran in this race (even campaigning for more refugees), and he still seems to have come out on top, so perhaps France isn't as protectionist as some other parts of Europe.

Also worth noting that in Germany, while the refugee crisis hurt Merkel to an extent, she remains very popular and has a good chance at winning re-election later in the year. Her top contender is Martin Schultz, who is also extremely pro-EU.

Stheno

snowflaker wrote: »

Cant see over 50% of French voters backing Le Pen, like SF she's transfer toxic - you either back Le Pen, or you don't.

I would have thought the same tbh

But if immigration is a big topic in France (not sure if it is) then it's a clear shoot out here between pro and anti.

hatrickpatrick

Cina wrote: »

Sorry... You want to see society crumble or something? That's almost sociopathic.

The fact that the wellbeing of the elite is now equated with society's wellbeing is evidence that either their propaganda has paid off, or that they have successfully rigged everything so that our wellbeing depends on keeping them in their undeserved positions of power, tbh. I don't want to see human civilisation crumble, but I certainly want to see the institutions which currently hold immense power without being directly elected by and accountable to the people (the EU bureaucracy, banks, politician-buying corporations and lobby groups, and other assorted vested interests) removed from power.

If there's a way to do that without society crumbling in the process, that's obviously what I want. If society has to crumble in order to subsequently arrive at a freer place without unelected power, then that in my view is a debate that we have to have - it's not as clear cut as a simple "no", that much I'm certain of. It's more a question of how many sacrifices, and in which areas, (a) do we have to make, and (b) are we willing to make, to achieve a truly democratic society without any power that is not in some way answerable to all of the people who inhabit such a society - not just those with money, or those with the right surname, or those with the right ideology?

4068ac1elhodqr

Update (may need verified) but latest report said (at 66% through count).
M 23.1%
LP 23.1%
As of just gone 10.30pm Paris time, with some gains likely from larger cities to Macron perhaps.

Valord

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The fact that the wellbeing of the elite is now equated with society's wellbeing is evidence that either their propaganda has paid off, or that they have successfully rigged everything so that our wellbeing depends on keeping them in their undeserved positions of power, tbh. I don't want to see human civilisation crumble, but I certainly want to see the institutions which currently hold immense power without being directly elected by and accountable to the people (the EU bureaucracy, banks, politician-buying corporations and lobby groups, and other assorted vested interests) removed from power.

If there's a way to do that without society crumbling in the process, that's obviously what I want. If society has to crumble in order to subsequently arrive at a freer place without unelected power, then that in my view is a debate that we have to have - it's not as clear cut as a simple "no", that much I'm certain of. It's more a question of how many sacrifices, and in which areas, (a) do we have to make, and (b) are we willing to make, to achieve a truly democratic society without any power that is not in some way answerable to all of the people who inhabit such a society - not just those with money, or those with the right surname, or those with the right ideology?

Even running with this idea that our current society is terribly flawed an undemocratic, the series of events that you seem to think will occur in the event of an MLP victory do not appear anything close to certain, or even all that likely. Aside from the fact that society would most likely not "collapse" as a result of a far-right presidency, or even a French exit from the EU, even if it did and we had a clean reset, I don't see why the next society built up would suddenly be free of things like rich people, banks and bureaucracy.

hatrickpatrick

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

Weren't you a Soc Dem a few months ago? Thankfully, highly unlikely that Communists and far-left will swing to the far-right.

I'm a soc-dem, but I'm anti-establishment first and foremost. Above all else, I am no longer willing to put up with people wielding power in society that has not been given to them by the people, through democratic means. I'm not opposed to swimming through some sh!t to get there - the question is how much sh!t do we have to swim through. And I'm not sure what my answer would be if I was asked how much sh!t I'd be willing to swim through.

I suppose it's like the dilemma of having to remove healthy tissue in order to cure a patient of cancer. How much healthy tissue is tolerable, beyond which succumbing to or living with the cancer is preferable, will depend on the individual patient. To those who view me as wanting to see society crumble, I'd simply argue that I am perhaps willing to go further than most to remove said cancer - if I have to live in a time of nastiness and unpleasantness, but with the understanding that it clears the way for future generations of humans to create a society which functions better than what we have now, then I'm willing to do that - the question is how much unpleasantness before it stops being worth it. Before the American election, I drew the line at Donald Trump. Now that he's in, I wonder if we're better off letting the alt-right f*ck everything up so that there's no status quo for the elite to defend.

seenitall

Delighted with this result.

The French people have truly presented themselves with a very stark choice here; whatever happens from here on in, they are choosing their own destiny.

Gawd I love democracy in action

Yourself isit

CelticRambler wrote: »

Nope. None. They've all cast their votes now! :pac:



What is courageous about voting for socio-economic suicide?

The good news is that, at <22% this is the worst result for the Front National in any election of the last five years, down from 25-28% of the national vote in the most recent ballots.

Presumably melenchon took some of that vote

hatrickpatrick

Valord wrote: »

Even running with this idea that our current society is terribly flawed an undemocratic, the serious of events that you seem to think will occur in the event of an MLP victory do not appear anything close to certain, or even all that likely. Aside from the fact that society would most likely not "collapse" as a result of a far-right presidency, or even a French exit from the EU, even if it did and we had a clean reset, I don't see why the next society built up would suddenly be free of things like rich people, banks and bureaucracy.

I'm not hoping society will crumble. But I did hope that Brexit would serve as a wake-up call to the EU to get its sh!t together and stop insisting that ordinary people pay for the wrongdoing of others, which has now been conclusively shown to have been an ideological stance rather than a scientific one. Brexit didn't do it, but how much bigger a tide of anti-EU sentiment are the aforementioned elites willing to tolerate before they start actually listening to the concerns of the people who are trying to dismantle the project?

I'd much rather save the EU than let it disintegrate, but my loyalties most certainly lie with reform > disintegration > status quo, in that order of preference. That's what I'm saying.

Yourself isit

Valord wrote: »

From what I've seen of him, he certainly seems to be billed as a very centrist candidate. He was a member of the Socialist party but he's in the vain of centrists like Clinton and Blair. He also says he wants to transcend the whole left-right divide. He's pretty to the right on trade and to the left on issues like refugee resettlement. I'm sure people will be putting him in some kind of a box but he does seem like a fairly unique figure as far as policies go.

?

Pretty much standard globalised rhethoric. He represents about the 20% of population, the vote he got.

4068ac1elhodqr

69.5% of votes counted:
Le Pen 23.06%
Macron 23.12%

Donal55

0-0 at half time.
All to play for.

CelticRambler

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

Update (may need verified) but latest report said (at 66% through count).
M 23.1%
LP 23.1%
As of just gone 10.30pm Paris time, with some gains likely from larger cities to Macron perhaps.

Bearing in mind that you said earlier that you don't look at or read French media, where do you get your information from?

Only ten départements have yet declared results. Everyone else is still working off the Ipsos provisional (revised) estimates that put Macron nearly two points ahead of MLP.

Valord

CelticRambler wrote: »

Bearing in mind that you said earlier that you don't look at or read French media, where do you get your information from?

Only ten départements have yet declared results. Everyone else is still working off the Ipsos provisional (revised) estimates that put Macron nearly two points ahead of MLP.

Interior Ministry currently has it at
23.3% for MLP,
23% for Macron
at 70% counted.

BBC reports Macron is still expected to come out on top due to the uncounted votes being demographically good for him though. That was as of 10:10pm GMT.

Akrasia

Valord wrote: »

Even running with this idea that our current society is terribly flawed an undemocratic, the series of events that you seem to think will occur in the event of an MLP victory do not appear anything close to certain, or even all that likely. Aside from the fact that society would most likely not "collapse" as a result of a far-right presidency, or even a French exit from the EU, even if it did and we had a clean reset, I don't see why the next society built up would suddenly be free of things like rich people, banks and bureaucracy.

Society will collapse if countries keep electing isolationist right wing politicians who won't do what is required to tackle global warming.

Le pen was a global warming denier up until recently , while Macron wants to invest in a 21st century renewable energy and become carbon neutral within 5 years.

For this reason above all others, Macron is the candidate who is best for the world and France.

If right wingers think immigration problems are bad now, wait until sea rises and drought dislocate a billion of the poorest people in the world

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/climate-change-related-flooding-one-billion-people-risk-2060-warns-charity-a7031241.html

Yourself isit

https://twitter.com/afneil/status/856256139394252802

Yourself isit

Valord wrote: »

Interior Ministry currently has it at
23.3% for MLP,
23% for Macron
at 70% counted.

BBC reports Macron is still expected to come out on top due to the uncounted votes being demographically good for him though. That was as of 10:10pm GMT.

Hmm. You'd think the cities would be counted first.

Valord

Akrasia wrote: »

Society will collapse if countries keep electing isolationist right wing politicians who won't do what is required to tackle global warming.

Le pen was a global warming denier up until recently , while Macron wants to invest in a 21st century renewable energy and become carbon neutral within 5 years.

For this reason above all others, Macron is the candidate who is best for the world and France.

If right wingers think immigration problems are bad now, wait until sea rises and drought dislocate a billion of the poorest people in the world

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/climate-change-related-flooding-one-billion-people-risk-2060-warns-charity-a7031241.html

While I don't argue with the idea of environmental catastrophe leading to a larger breakdown of society, that's not what I was really considering in the previous post. My point was more that the election of MLP wouldn't trigger an immediate breakdown of French society and suddenly give a wakeup call to the entire population, any more than it did with Trump or Brexit. More likely, I would think, is things would just become worse for most people, as they would with any leader who implements bad policies.

Disasters related to climate change would come slowly, which is part of what makes them so dangerous. Despite its global seriousness, the human brain is unfortunately programmed to be far more concerned about small-scale acts of terror than something like climate change.

Valord

Yourself isit wrote: »

Hmm. You'd think the cities would be counted first.

I would have been inclined to think so, but it seems not. Apparently the city polls tended to stay open later. Macron has since passed her out according to the Interior Ministry: http://elections.interieur.gouv.fr/presidentielle-2017/FE.html

Christy42

Stheno wrote: »

I would have thought the same tbh

But if immigration is a big topic in France (not sure if it is) then it's a clear shoot out here between pro and anti.

A big point is that LePen is the only serious anti candidate and still only managed to get about 23% of the vote. The pro side was split between multiple candidates which won't happen in round 2. The issue is how does she get votes from people who voted for someone so opposed to her in round 1 (read any candidate who did not make round 2 essentially).

Rjd2

Christy42 wrote: »

A big point is that LePen is the only serious anti candidate and still only managed to get about 23% of the vote. The pro side was split between multiple candidates which won't happen in round 2. The issue is how does she get votes from people who voted for someone so opposed to her in round 1 (read any candidate who did not make round 2 essentially).

Yeah Le Pen hasn't actually bombed as much as some have said tonight, just under performed somewhat. Getting to the second round is a pretty decent achievement when you consider how toxic her brand of politics is. She did edge out the two establishment parties lets not forget.

She does share some traits with Melenchon and Fillon, but many of the Melenchon hard left base would hate MLP (5% was the number of the base who would consider voting her supposedly).

Fillon's economically is very different than Le Pen, he seemed genuinely horrified when Le Pen was talking about France's economic future if she was in charge.

We live in strange times, but to turn around a 20 point deficit in two weeks will take some work!

Yourself isit

Christy42 wrote: »

A big point is that LePen is the only serious anti candidate and still only managed to get about 23% of the vote. The pro side was split between multiple candidates which won't happen in round 2. The issue is how does she get votes from people who voted for someone so opposed to her in round 1 (read any candidate who did not make round 2 essentially).

MÉLENCHON is anti EU

Christy42

Yourself isit wrote: »

MÉLENCHON is anti EU

True but see post above yours (5% of his support seems to be going to her) which is largely the point even if there are a few similarities.

4068ac1elhodqr

95+ % of votes now counted in this first round. Results refining, Macron adding a few 2nd place decimals to his lead:

Macron 23.85%
Le Pen 21.58%
Fillon 19.96%
Melenchon 19.49%

This data is freely and easily available from any int'l news-wire or rss feed within the public domain, for those concerned.
Suspect the next two weeks will turn ugly, from a close four horse country race, into a sweaty boxing match.

Christy42

One point which should be mentioned after the largely inaccurate giving out about polls recently is that the polls in the French election were fairly dead on.

There is a big issue with binary effects that people can't see that a 2% error is not overly worse if the whole result changes (though many aggregators have butchered polls over the last year which has led to the reduced faith it must be said). The end fact is that in the major votes the polls have been within 2%-3% and this is another example. The issue has been that this can have a major impact in the winner in most of these votes (hopefully not in this case though).

In fact if the polls say the same in two weeks time (and that is the big if, if something happens over the next two weeks) Le Pen could beat her polls by the polling error of Trump and Brexit combined and still lose by 20 points.

CelticRambler

Mason Sparse Topping wrote: »

95+ % of votes now counted in this first round. Results refining, Macron adding a few 2nd place decimals to his lead:

Macron 23.85%
Le Pen 21.58%
Fillon 19.96%
Melenchon 19.49%

In other words, back to where we were when Ipsos provided their estimation on the basis of envelopes open, and upon which basis the result was announced and the candidates accepted their fate!

Still, hopefully your hour-by-hour posting of inaccurate partial results has demonstrated that the polling companies' proper scientific analysis of a representative sample is more reliable and we'll see the end of this "yeah but they got it wrong with Brexit/Trump" nonsense.

Chuchote

I don't know that it's correct to say sweepingly "Mélenchon is anti-EU". He is against what the EU has become in recent years, an association that benefits the rich, to some extent to the detriment of the poor and working people. That doesn't mean he wants to dismantle the EU; what he wants is to rebalance it.

His campaign has a cartoon series explaining his policies: https://avenirencommun.fr/bd/

iroced

CelticRambler wrote: »

[...] polling companies' proper scientific analysis of a representative sample is more reliable and we'll see the end of this "yeah but they got it wrong with Brexit/Trump" nonsense.[...]

French polling companies are the real winners of this first round. Not our fault if UK & US ones are rubbish :pac:...

Jokes aside, this is quite an historical result. The two main French parties got massively (and rightfully) rejected for different reasons. Though it remains to be seen how different Macron will turn out to be. FN got a deceptive score IMO. Being in the second round overshadows what could be considered as a somehow disappointing result for them, considering the very particular situation of this election (with (different) chaos on both main parties and uncertainties about and around Macron). Anyway, I think FN will never manage anything major as long as they don't wipe out clearly their past and both part of the way and the people who founded it).

Zubeneschamali

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

it clears the way for future generations of humans to create a society which functions better than what we have now

¡Viva la Revolución!

Because that always results in a sensible group of smart people who represent the people's best interests in charge, and never in death squads and thuggery.

Zubeneschamali

Christy42 wrote: »

The issue is how does she get votes from people who voted for someone so opposed to her in round 1

In 2002, her Dad got 16.8% in round 1, 17.8% in round 2.

red ears

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In 2002, her Dad got 16.8% in round 1, 17.8% in round 2.

What would france be like now had her father got in in 2002.

Chips Lovell

It's been a fascinating election so far. Back when this thread started, it looked like an unpopular Hollande would come third to Juppe and Le Pen and then Juppe would trounce Le Pen in the second round. How thing's have change in the past few months.

I think the Socialists and the Republicans will wonder if primaries really were a good idea. Both ended up picking candidates that appealed more to the base rather than the middle ground (although Fillon may still have stood a decent chance if he hadn't become immediately mired in scandal).

Bob24

Yourself isit wrote: »

Hmm. You'd think the cities would be counted first.

Polling stations close one hour later in large cities.

Bob24

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

In 2002, her Dad got 16.8% in round 1, 17.8% in round 2.

Times have changed and she will be able to capture many more "other" votes than he did. But probably not enough to hit 50% (or I shall say not this time, in 5 years from now I don't know).

Chips Lovell

Le Pen will definitely pick up some votes. There's some policy crossover with Fillon and Melenchon. And some of the protest votes that went to Melenchon will go to Le Pen in the second round.

Zubeneschamali

Bob24 wrote: »

Times have changed and she will be able to capture many more "other" votes than he did. But probably not enough to hit 50%

She won't see 40%, either. 30%, maybe.

Bob24

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

She won't see 40%, either. 30%, maybe.

Yeah my first guess would be between 30 and 40, but lets see what polls look like in a few days now that people will really consider the choice seriously.

Fillon's voters will be split between going for Le Pen, going or Macron, or not voting and Mélanchon' electorate will also be split in 3 groups: those who can from Le Pen and will go back to here, those who hate Le Pen and will reluctantly vote for Macron to stop her, and those, and those who hate Macron at least as much and will abstain from voting. The proportion of that split will be very important for her final score and I am really unsure about it.

ambro25

FWIW, I think MLP will do better with the extra share of the vote, out of voter absenteeism rather than out of vote reassignment.

As in, in proportion, she'll get a higher percentage more through maintaining her 1st round voting base (and gaining the odd brebis galeuse here and there) within a smaller total voting base in the 2nd round, less through gaining extra votes from anti-Macrons and undecided.

I have her pegged at 32% or less, but that's my "out of thin air, adding the age of the captain and the windspeed, doubling it and dividing by Pi" back-of-fag-packet formula

I'm unaware of Macron having any degree of crookery established against his name, so the "vote for the crook not the fascist" slogan appears to be out this time. It'll be interesting to see what it gets replaced with.

Bob24

First second round poll I see be published after the first round vote
(for what it is worth as the people who answered this probably didn't know the result of the first round at the time):

Rjd2

I think getting over 40% would be a pretty good effort for her and would give her some momentum for 2022 which has always been her main target.

A score in the low thirties or even worse under 30 (unlikely) would make her position as leader somewhat vulnerable. Her niece has been eyeing the crown and I am sure they are people in the FN who would like to see a non Le Pen have a go also.

Bob24

Rjd2 wrote: »

I think getting over 40% would be a pretty good effort for her and would give her some momentum for 2022 which has always been her main target.

And even before that, for the parliamentary elections in June (currently Front National only has 2 MPs) as in many constituencies there will be 3 or even 4 candidates in the second round meaning the threshold to win will be in the 30-40% bracket) .

I am really unsure how the electorate will behave though.

4068ac1elhodqr

CelticRambler wrote: »

In other words, back to where we were when Ipsos provided their estimation on the basis of envelopes open, and upon which basis the result was announced and the candidates accepted their fate!

Still, hopefully your hour-by-hour posting of inaccurate partial results has demonstrated that the polling companies' proper scientific analysis of a representative sample is more reliable and we'll see the end of this "yeah but they got it wrong with Brexit/Trump" nonsense.

Yes the polls (slightly surprisingly) got it very right indeed. But so too, did the (live) betting exchanges as very early voting got underway as mentioned earlier. With a sharp and sudden accurate change to both of their implied chances.

Those interested in no-risk stakes using arb (offsetting) would have picked Pen before final results were announced @8+ and set-point Macron to reach @1.2

Partial result percentages posted where official and correct. Did also clearly mention that Macron's numbers were likely to increase as urban results come out later so wasn't trying to misguide anyone just provide an update.

The election isn't over, but it is now indeed a foregone conclusion (bar extreme events). Mentioned at the start of this thread LePen hasn't the charisma to win, but suspected her protest vote percent would have been larger for 1st round.

The candidate that performed the best, and could have been the most interesting would have been Mel, but that's not happening now. Interesting, but impractical perhaps.

There is the odd glimmer of hope for France (such as STATION F, the world's largest startup hub), but it also facing 'enormous challenges' now, and going forward.

For those interested in the next big political-news event, there could be something rather peculiar about to happen with the UK's GE results in June.

Rjd2

Yeah from a betting POV the main market is dead. I suppose you could argue Macron at 1/8 is serious value when you consider his opponent has to make up a 20+ deficit in less than 2 weeks. He should be closer to 1/20 tbh.

The Le Pen percentage vote could be somewhat interesting though.

hatrickpatrick

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

¡Viva la Revolución!

Because that always results in a sensible group of smart people who represent the people's best interests in charge, and never in death squads and thuggery.

I don't want to go too far off the topic of specifically the French election but you do realise that I'm talking about tearing down the European establishment along with the banking establishment and not each country's entire system of democracy, right? Like, I'm not talking about disbanding the French police, abolishing criminal trials for murder, theft, rape etc or any such sensationalist ridiculousness. I'm talking about Merkel and her "ordinary Europeans should pay banking debts because we refuse to allow the ECB to do the ordinary work of a normal central bank and bail them out" idiot brigade. I'm talking about the faceless bureaucracy of the EU which issues binding rules without fully democratic approval being needed before they are implemented. I'm talking about the "open borders are sacrosanct and even questioning them makes you an automatic racist" muppets (and I myself am in favour of open borders!!! I just don't like seeing people shamed for their legitimately held political beliefs).


I'm essentially talking about the EU as a political behemoth which ignores the voices of ordinary Europeans. I'd like to see the single currency dissolve and for the EU to be downsized back to what the EEC was - an economic organisation which did not seek to impose a political ideology on the entire continent.

What I'm saying is, that as people have alluded to by suggesting that "society will crumble" if the EU fails in such a manner, that the architects of the system have rather cleverly tied our everyday wellbeing together with the success of their vision - they have created the Eurozone and the EU as a "too big to fail" entity. And what I'm saying is that I, personally, value our freedom above comfort - that I, as one individual, am willing to put up with at least a certain amount of suffering if that is required to get us out of the nightmare setup that is the current incarnation of the EU. I'm simply pointing out that I fully accept others may not be willing to do so - everybody has a line beyond which it stops being worth it. But to suggest that I want to see anarchy in the streets is absolutely ridiculous. If the Eurozone and the European Commission fell apart tomorrow because of too many countries fundamental to their continued operation turned against them, we'd still have Gardaí, we'd still have jails, we'd still have courts, we'd still have an Irish election once every five years, etc etc etc.

To sum up, I want to see more anti-EU leaders being elected in order to redress the balance which is currently far, far too biased towards EU power over national sovereignty, and I'm saying that while I'm obviously a far left individual, I still value the EU establishment getting a bloody nose over the continuation of the intolerable status quo, so therefore I'm willing to stomach the far right getting elected if the far left is not an option - as long as more and more governments tell Merkel and her neoliberal cohorts to f*ck off.

And again ironically I'm not actually anti-EU, I just don't like what the EU has become. When I was a kid it represented something different - or perhaps the boom times simply shielded us from the fact that it was never a partnership of equals but a back door to allowing the financial class and one or two large governments in mainland Europe to actively fight against the democratic will of other European people when it didn't suit them?

4068ac1elhodqr

1/14 probably for Macron. But apathy could be a big factor too with two opposing choices.
Mel could have given him a much better run if he was more pro-eu.
Different case to the UK, with it's 1 land border, France has 7 or 8 close neighbours.

Expect an ugly 2weeks, followed by the fromage normality of that euro-institution: Eurovision.

pumpkin4life

So they elected the open borders granny banger.

As expected. I'm richer as a result of it. Thank you currency markets.

Feels like I'm living in a insane asylum in all honesty. The next five years are just going to see the same events play out, again and again, if not worse so, with more suffering and death and mass violence. But pumpkin is a racist! The far right, etc...Fùck it, poolside time.

What happened to you France? You used to be cool!

Zubeneschamali

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

When I was a kid it represented something different

When I was a kid, we weren't in the EEC.

We were gloriously free.

And things were craptastic.

whatstherush

pumpkin4life wrote: »

So they elected the open borders granny banger.

As expected. I'm richer as a result of it. Thank you currency markets.

Feels like I'm living in a insane asylum in all honesty. The next five years are just going to see the same events play out, again and again, if not worse so, with more suffering and death and mass violence. But pumpkin is a racist! The far right, etc...Fùck it, poolside time.

What happened to you France? You used to be cool!

Well you definitely quack like one.