Registered user login:

Le Blog

Le Blog Homepage

Election surprises

  • Posted by Chris Stacey
  • 24 April 2007

Chris Stacey describes what the media didn't see coming as he continues to join in chants of "Segolène, Presidente"

Months of campaigning, speculations and opinion polls and… the obvious happened! The two big candidates, Segolène Royal and Nicholas Sarkozy, qualified for the second round. In some ways, this is a victory for the pollsters and the media, who predicted this outcome many months ago. However, they failed to predict the two really surprising things about the election results.

After the failure to predict his rise in 2002, no commentators or pollsters dared to predict the fall of Jean-Marie Le Pen. Without going into lots and lots of detail about polling methods, this is mainly to do with how opinion polls calculate Le Pen’s score. As Colin Randell said in his last post “Lying to the pollsters” people don’t tend to tell pollsters that they’re voting Le Pen. To compensate for this, each polling institute has a technique to ‘redress’ Le Pen’s score. This normally means that they look at the difference between how many people said they’d vote Le Pen in 2002 and how many did, and then add the same number to his poll score for 2007. A crude technique to say the least and it meant that no-one had a clue what his score would be until the results came in.

The other major thing that no one predicted was the massive turnout. I’ve lost count of the number of political science classes I’ve had this year where the tutor or lecturer has talked about a crisis of representation and how people don’t vote because they don’t feel represented by any politician. After Le Pen’s high score in 2002, most people expected fewer abstentions this time around, but no one expected a record score. The record level of indecision beforehand (30 percent undecided a few days before the election) led to expectations that people who were undecided were less likely to vote. Instead, it was a sign that people were engaging more with the process.

I spent the election night outside the Socialist Party HQ in Paris, celebrating with thousands of supporters of Segolène Royal. Although I may have misgivings about some of her policies, there’s no doubt I prefer her vision of France. She speaks of the importance of people and of the need for rebuilding France in a way that benefits all of society. That emphasis on all of France was very evident in the crowd on Sunday night. I haven’t seen that much ethnic and social diversity anywhere in central Paris, let alone at political gatherings of the right-wing candidates. It’s impossible to verify the extent of the ethnic diversity supporting each candidate (due to republican laws that forbid any surveying on ethnicity), so it’s only through anecdotal evidence that you get any sense of it.

In some ways, with the role of a President being more about the overall direction of policy, with the day-to-day things left to the Prime Minister, the rhetoric and overall vision of France is more important than the details of policy. There are more than enough talented people in the Socialist Party, notably Dominic Straus-Kahn the former Finance Minister, to form a capable government around Royal. So after my initial misgivings I was proud to be chanting “Segolène, Presidente.”

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit

2 comments from readers

JohnChwth
24 April 2007 at 16:11

I am impressed with the turnout but I am still confused about what the difference is between the two candidates. Who is for change to the status quo and who is the conservative (in attitudes that is)?

Nevertheless good luck to the voters and hopefully the high turnout will set an example to the UK.

B.LEVY
30 April 2007 at 16:03

The good news is indeed

1. The exceptional turnout

2. The fact that Le Pen has come a cropper,and a serious one at that.

Having said that,I'm going to vote for Ségolène by default,not being particularly convinced by her consistency (or lack of it,rather).Sarko's authoritarian leanings scare me,and a woman president would be a welcome change,provided she's competent (the same would apply to a man,mind you.).It's the first time in forty years I have been so undecided and unenthusiastic about the horse I'm going to back.Good luck to her,though,but it's an uphill battle !

Bertrand LEVY Nevers

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Chris Stacey is 21 and studying at the Institute of Political Studies, Paris (Sciences-Po). Next year he will return to the University of Sheffield to complete his BA in French and Politics.

Recent Posts

Bad idea v No idea

  • By Darren Straker
  • 08 May 2007

Could there be one delicious last twist?

  • By Colin Randall
  • 04 May 2007

The Rumble in the Jungle

  • By Darren Straker
  • 04 May 2007

Et le verdict?

  • By Shirley Curran
  • 03 May 2007

Tête à Tête

  • By Jean-Jacques Bascoul
  • 02 May 2007

When the third man comes first

  • By Frederic Niel
  • 27 April 2007

La deuxième étape

  • By Darren Straker
  • 26 April 2007

Also by Chris Stacey