Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

5 major candidates, top 2 in tomorrow's election have runoff on May 7.

Round 1: Brexit
Round 2: Trump
Round 3: Le Pen?

I hear she's mightier than La Sword.

kalm wrote:I hear she's mightier than La Sword.

I see what you did there!

LePen will make the runoff, and the scandal and chaos among the other candidates this time (both left and right) might well give her the Presidency. Usually, the Frogs can count on at least one "sensible" candidate.

History repeating itself. The rise of Rightie 'Nationalism' on Earth was predicted in 2007/2008.

Yah see, it takes 20+ years to fully recover from the likes of the global financial crisis hoisted upon the World by The Bush Crime Cabal. History has shown that during the midpoint of recovery from such a disaster, those "left behind" economically blame everyone but themselves.

kalm wrote:I hear she's mightier than La Sword.

Marine *Pepé Le Pew* et plein de merde.

French Presidential Election: What to Know, Why it Matters
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/fren ... w-matters/

So do we have the early vote from St. Pierre & Miquelon yet?

Ivytalk wrote:

kalm wrote:I hear she's mightier than La Sword.

I see what you did there!

LePen will make the runoff, and the scandal and chaos among the other candidates this time (both left and right) might well give her the Presidency. Usually, the Frogs can count on at least one "sensible" candidate.

I doubt she'll win if she gets into the next round. She'll unify a lot of the left and right, the same way her father did. The only problem is that there really isn't a Chirac for them to turn to. It's going to be interesting, but my best guess is that France will follow the Netherlands on this.

Will be LePen against squishy centrist Macron in the runoff.

Aho Old Guy wrote:
History repeating itself. The rise of Rightie 'Nationalism' on Earth was predicted in 2007/2008.

Yah see, it takes 20+ years to fully recover from the likes of the global financial crisis hoisted upon the World by The Bush Crime Cabal. History has shown that during the midpoint of recovery from such a disaster, those "left behind" economically blame everyone but themselves.

kalm wrote:I hear she's mightier than La Sword.

Marine *Pepé Le Pew* et plein de merde.

Wow didn't know the "but Bush" excuse is valid across the pond in a non-US election.

I guess desperate times call for desperate measures for the flailing leftists.

Ivytalk wrote:Will be LePen against squishy centrist Macron in the runoff.

I was wrong about Trump, but Im still going to say a large coalition will form behind Macron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, the polls missed Brexit. But, the polls were relatively close before each of those votes.

Macron is ahead of LePen by over 20 points.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Yeah, the polls missed Brexit. But, the polls were relatively close before each of those votes.

Macron is ahead of LePen by over 20 points.

The polls - trust me on this one - are going to start getting a VERY close scrutinization over the next few years... there is a lot of anecdotal evidence out there that there's some bias- or fingers on the scale- polls before Brexit and Trump involved a lot of wishful thinking. And maybe a little ignoring of outlier results.

That said, the French media is FULLY invested in Le Pen losing- and theyll do their part

Sad!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CID1990 wrote:there is a lot of anecdotal evidence out there

Oh, now you want to gobble that shit up?

Bet Macron is asking all the Muslins in Paris to be on their very, very, very best behavior for the next few weeks.

CID1990 wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:Will be LePen against squishy centrist Macron in the runoff.

I was wrong about Trump, but Im still going to say a large coalition will form behind Macron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's been the way of the French throughout the Fifth Republic. Flaccid though the electorate may be.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

CID1990 wrote:there is a lot of anecdotal evidence out there

Oh, now you want to gobble that **** up?

Only when it confirms what I see with my own eyes

Or maybe you have different take on lefty outlets showing a Clinton landslide and everybody else a little less so

Which polls were showing a Clinton landslide?

Most of the national polls were around a 3 point Clinton lead. She won by a little over 2 points.

Even a Republican-leaning pollster like Rasmussen had Clinton up.

Even the Trump team's internal polling had Clinton up.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/660682/ev ... dnt-coming

State polling was worse. And, it was largely due to not enough polling done in states like Michigan and Wisconsin. Here's one of the only polls done in Wisconsin just before the election. It was done by a Republican pollster. It had Clinton +8.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/docs/2 ... vember.pdf

I'm not saying the polls were 100% right.

But, you're not arguing that the polls were simply wrong. You're arguing that they were intentionally "stepping on the scale." And, there is no evidence for that.

Skjellyfetti wrote:Which polls were showing a Clinton landslide?

Most of the national polls were around a 3 point Clinton lead. She won by a little over 2 points.

Even a Republican-leaning pollster like Rasmussen had Clinton up.

Even the Trump team's internal polling had Clinton up.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/660682/ev ... dnt-coming

State polling was worse. And, it was largely due to not enough polling done in states like Michigan and Wisconsin.

I'm not saying the polls were 100% right.

But, you're not arguing that the polls were simply wrong. You're arguing that they were intentionally "stepping on the scale." And, there is no evidence for that.

Keep on desperately seekin a win, SK

The landslide was in the electoral college. The conventional wisdom was she would carry all the swing states that Trump won

That equals a landslide - unless you're trying to parse the definition of the word (not unusual for you)

The polls were WAY off - nobody is disputing this (except when I say it and get stalked by you)

I'm not saying the polls weren't off.

I'm saying your belief that the polls were intentionally skewed (by Republican pollsters as well) is based on nothing. And, it's pretty hilarious.

CID1990 wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:Which polls were showing a Clinton landslide?

Most of the national polls were around a 3 point Clinton lead. She won by a little over 2 points.

Even a Republican-leaning pollster like Rasmussen had Clinton up.

Even the Trump team's internal polling had Clinton up.
http://theweek.com/speedreads/660682/ev ... dnt-coming

State polling was worse. And, it was largely due to not enough polling done in states like Michigan and Wisconsin.

I'm not saying the polls were 100% right.

But, you're not arguing that the polls were simply wrong. You're arguing that they were intentionally "stepping on the scale." And, there is no evidence for that.

Keep on desperately seekin a win, SK

The landslide was in the electoral college. The conventional wisdom was she would carry all the swing states that Trump won

That equals a landslide - unless you're trying to parse the definition of the word (not unusual for you)

The polls were WAY off - nobody is disputing this (except when I say it and get stalked by you)

LA Times poll was spot on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Skjellyfetti wrote:I'm not saying the polls weren't off.

I'm saying your belief that the polls were intentionally skewed (by Republican pollsters as well) is based on nothing. And, it's pretty hilarious.

I didn't say they were intentionally skewed, but you interpreting what I said in that way is the same thing I'm talking about- good job!

if there are flaws in the polls that reflect results that are agreeable to the pollsters, the causes might well be unintentional. Methodologies that don't reflect demographics correctly, for example, and don't get a critical look because pollsters don't recognize outliers, because the results they get are what they would like to see

As I said originally- expect to see these polls scrutinized much more closely in the future.

If Macron wins, it will be like having a Goldman Sachs guy in the Elysee Palace: investment banking creds, fashionably leftish politics, expensive suits, elitist airs...

In other words, Klam will love this guy!

Ivytalk wrote:If Macron wins, it will be like having a Goldman Sachs guy in the Elysee Palace: investment banking creds, fashionably leftish politics, expensive suits, elitist airs...

In other words, Klam will love this guy!

Sort of like a Barack Obama but with economic understanding

Ivytalk wrote:If Macron wins, it will be like having a Goldman Sachs guy in the Elysee Palace: investment banking creds, fashionably leftish politics, expensive suits, elitist airs...

In other words, Klam will love this guy!

I read a book on French cuisine years ago called "A Year in Provence". It was written by an English couple who moved there to experience country culture. Evidently everyone else in France hates the Parisians too. They're responsible for the negative rep.

There are some fairly hot matures in French porn. You should check it out.

That's all I know about France.

DJI pops +200 at the open on French election news. Death to globalism!