Hello, visit my sites:

Hello, visit my sites:

Hello, visit my home page:
=buy wood alcohol

If the far left had had a SINGLE candidate in 2002 instead of 3 or 4 splinter candidates they could have gotten 15 percent of the vote, perhaps even 20 percent if they had improved their campaigning a bit. Having a single left candidate with more of a fighting chance, that might have attracted even more voters to abandon Jospin.

Imagine what would have happened if the final round for president had been extreme left vs extreme right???

Of the three candidates who stood in the Socialist Party primary, I personally think that Strauss-Kahn would have made a better president than Royal, but it's been clear for some time that Royal was the better candidate. She has a reasonable chance to become president if she isn't sabotaged by the "antiliberal" (anticapitalist) French left in the first round of the election. The far left is a minority in France, but one that was big enough to pull in 15% of the vote in the first round of 2002. If the egomaniacs at the head of those spliter parties actually settled their differences and united around a telegenic antiliberal candidate, it could syphon enough left-of-center votes away from Royal to bring about a repeat of 2002, where the right was pitted against the extreme right in the second round. If, on the other hand, some of the minor left wing parties decide that it's better not to present a candidate, for precisely this reason (and it's a hot issue in some of them), and if the rest compete against one another to be more-leftist-than-thou, Royal should be able to make it though to the second round. Polls consitently show her beating the probable right-wing candidate Sarkozy then, and while early polls are not to be trusted, Sarkozy has much higher negatives than Royal.

Let Royal be president! Set an example for US! HOW ABOUT THAT?