https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/jun/09/eu-europe-elections-2024-results-news-updates-live-latest
I'm absolutely shocked
Melenchon supported the Russian annexation of Crimea, so be careful what you wish for.
The French system is designed to let people decide between minor differences of opinion in the first round without splitting the vote between them as they have a final round for people to then decide what their effective next preference is from the most popular options. It doesn't stop extremes so much as it stops the center from splitting their vote and being forced into a single party to be effective.
Vote share is irrelevant because both the center and the left withdrew candidates from the final round. Coalition is more important than party as well.
People did this in the UK as well to overestimate the importance of the far right. They split the stats into ways the system simply discourages. If France had a different system that relied more on parties then many of those parties would join together, if they were more about vote share across the country then many of those candidates would not have dropped out. All parties targeted seats by group and RN was 3rd far below expectations.
I think you are best off sticking to the facts than creating definitions of what popular means to suit your way of thinking.
The results of the first round of voting are a fact but the results of the second round are not? Please, I don't think you're in a position to sneer at others for creating definitions to suit their way of thinking.
It's abundantly clear that RN is a polarising force, attracting both strong likes and strong dislikes. If you want to ignore the inconvenient facts about RN so that you can simplistically label it the "most popular" party, by all means go ahead — it simply confirms the impression that support for the far right is based on absurd and unrealistic simplism.
No, you aren't.
Nah, I'm stubborn that way about fake news.
probably best to just tell him he is right so the thread can move on
If Macron is the most disliked, why did another party block form an electoral pact with it against the RN?
If they are the most disliked, how did parties of that electoral pact then go onto win more than twice as many seats as RN?
Will we get an answer or will we get more semantic nonsense about 'popular'?
Nobody else is talking about 'most popular party'. Nowhere else on this thread have you shown any concern for the number of seats e.g. of Renaissance.
If the shoe was on the other foot, and Renaissance had most seats as a party, but the RN 'block' had more seats overall, there's no chance you'd be saying oh but Renaissance are the most popular party. None whatsoever and don't pretend otherwise.
Even the image you provided totals the seats up by the blocks of parties.
And the RN are themselves part of a block, it is not some conspiracy to 'gerrymander' against them as you misrepresented earlier. National Rally presented themselves to the electorate as part of a block.
It appears to be a desperate form of 'copium', as noted in other posts, because they came 3rd in the election.
You see, the French system was essentially brought in as a way of preventing the communists from getting into power in the 50's. They were similar to RN in popularity but in the second round everyone clubbed together to not allow it.
Quite ironic that this time it actually allowed the communists in. In Europe some established parties have been around for centuries and it is very difficult for new ones to break into, but if they attract a message that resonates with voters concerns it is possible, look at Macron.
It is very difficult to organise things when shock elections are announced with very little notice like both France and the Uk did. However the left in France did very well after looking to be in chaos so now the centre has been rejected by 77.7% of the voters despite getting assistance. To me it looks like Macron is the most unpopular and disliked group.
Firstly, he's not pro leaving the EU. Secondly, most people aren't single issue. Personally for me, I view Le Pen to be a sanitized version of her father. I would suspect she still shares plenty of his views, simply isn't as vocal. Then there's the racism and her relationship with Russia. The latter position completely endangers all of Europe and the EU doesn't need another Russian puppet in a position of power.
It depends on your definition of "popular". RN is the first choice of more voters than any other party. On the other hand, the majority of voters dislike RN, and people who dislike RN seem to dislike it much more strongly than people who dislike other parties — that's why it does so badly on the second round.
So a more accurate summary of the situation might be that RN is a polarising party — both more liked and more disliked than other parties.
Number of seats won by the parties and share of the vote overall against blocks of parties. So they are far and way the most popular party.
Reform with 5 and FN in 3rd, you've had a bad week so it's fair to warn people of the large amounts of copium you'll be huffing.
I know that but it seems like they don't know what they are referring to.
This doesn't make any sense if interpreted that way… "seats out of 7 parties."
So it doesn't make sense even as a reference to the anti far right pact of the New Popular front and Ensemble \ Macron's Centrist alliance, which is made up of more parties than that.
And nowhere else on the thread are discussions down to that level, comparing the number of seats of specifically the National Rally with say Renaissance rather than the Centrist alliance, or La France Insoumise versus New Popular Front.
There is no meaningful sense in which they got the "most seats", given how French elections are run.
It is like someone who has lost the game complaining about the rules… oh no the other side ganged up on me!
This is how it is actually reported by reputable news organisations such as France24:
France's New Popular Front has won the largest number of seats in the final round of snap parliamentary elections
You do realise the New Popular Front is an alliance and not a party. The poster above is referring to a party.
Perhaps you can share the source of your 'fact' so we judge that for ourselves?
You claim they won the most seats. You are the only one doing so.
I dont know where you get your 'facts' from but in the absence of a citation when declared like that they are not a reliable guide to the truth.
According to France24 and every other major news outlet the National Rally are projected to be 3rd in number of seats:
"France's New Popular Front has won the largest number of seats in the final round of snap parliamentary elections, leaving behind the remnants of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist camp and the far-right National Rally trailing in third place."
https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240707-france-s-leftist-new-popular-front-wins-a-shock-victory-%E2%80%93-but-now-the-hard-part-begins
Fact is they received the most votes and seats out of 7 parties so all the other parties were less popular than them. Granted though that they were not as popular as those parties combined and were less popular.
Bit of a gish gallop there.
Noticeable on the one hand you talk of hate on one side yet remaining in the EU on the other.
Does Le Pen hate the EU? It is the standard you have set in your posts.
Melancon isnt calling for France to leave the EU. He may 'hate' the EU but in practice he is part of a coalition of the new popular front.
The concern with Le Pen on the other hand was the far right with a majority in parliament.
Can you point out what policies of the popular front are anti EU or out of step with the majority French opinion on the EU?
The immediate matter is always 'anyone but Hitler'. The rest is secondary.
Besides, even a majority within the New Popular Front don't want Melanchon in charge of anything.
Course it won't.
Macron will spend the next few days picking off the old Socialist Party and the Greens from the New Popular Front, and along with Les Republicains they can build a centrist coalition that will keep Le Pen stewing until the end of the decade. Not too dissimilar from FG/FF/Green in this State.
A deal of the sort I describe will command a majority of 307 out of 577. And it will give them time to mould a unity candidate for President in '27.
Indeed, Marine Tondelier, leader of environmental party 'Les Écologistes', is already been talked about in those terms.
A lot of people despise Le Pen for her ties with the Putin regime.
Has she made any comment about the atrocity committed today? I doubt she has.
Fact - thats not the definition of gerrymandering. So thats your post discrediting itself at the first fence.
An election pact is not gerrymandering. No boundaries were redrawn.
An election pact formed because of the unpopularity of the far right.
An election pact that received more votes and more than twice as many seats as the far right.
So in the contest between how popular the far right is, versus how unpopular the far right is - unpopular won out in votes and seats. They are not merely unpopular, they are repulsively unpopular.
Interesting that all the Pro EU people in UK and Ireland who hate Brexit despise Le Pen who wants to remain in the EU but are now supporting Melancon who hates the EU.
Just shows you for a lot of people if someone is described as left wing they must be good and if they are described as right wing they must be bad.For some people it seems like politics is like supporting a sports team.
The right party was the only party to increase its vote from the first round 37% from 33.3% and came second in dozens of seats with 47%+ of the vote in those seats.
Fact is without gerrymandering between the other group of 7 parties they would be far and away the most popular party in France yet still ended up receiving the most votes of any party. To suggest they are unpopular as a party is a wrong when up against 7 others.
That is the way it is though and now they can sit back and chill while the mess gets sorted or becomes a crisis. We will all see in time.
Its not up to me. It was up to the French electorate and they were so repulsed by the far right they shifted their voting preference accordingly. So "not the most popular" is an understatement of their toxic lack of popularity with the majority of the electorate.
The most number of votes went to the pact of parties opposed to the far right.
The consequence of that shift and pact is that they didnt get the most seats - it appears they are on track for third place on that score.
So your post is wrong on multiple points.
Hey, if you think the party that gets the most votes and seats in an election is not the most popular that is up to you. Just pointing it out that for 99% of the world it does.
The didnt vote "against" him though did they? They just didnt vote for him. Big difference. Probably if Labour hadnt gotten enough seats for a majority the Lib Dems would have gone into coalition with them. So clearly not necessarily a vote against.
So are you posting from an alternative universe where the electorate were so repulsed by him the Lib Dems and Conservatives formed a voting pact and stood down candidates in constituencies to give the anti Labour candidate a clear run?
Because otherwise the premise of your loaded question makes no sense.
So what does that make Keir Starmer who got 34% of the vote and 66% voted against him, does that make him unpopular and repulsive ?
Just my idea, but i think it is far better to accept that the party who gets the most votes and seats is the most popular party than trying to deny it.
If you are twice as unpopular as you are popular and are unpopular with a majority of the country - are you popular? Thats overall a net negative level of popularity.
Seems like it is the National Rally who have been checkmated by their unpopularity and the French runoff system.
In a word they are repulsive.
That is a comment both on their values and the effect they have on voting preference.
More like checkmate.
