… And seen with indiffrence or some nuance outside of it, except the english speaking world. They just love their boogeyman :)

On the plus side, we’re sure this way the Economist doesn’t run out of witty covers.

The calling by the full name is an annoying media shtick. A mix between ostentatious respect of the interlocutor, flattering, demanding his attention (and the auditor’s attention too as a consequence) on-this-very-point, Patrick Poivre d’Arvor, and again all a kind of other different, disgusting, things.

Sarkozy does it a lot, but I first saw this horror in second grade news-shows on cable tvs, functionning as mutual grooming among tv people. I think the technique could work in english too, try it if you can pass the queasy phase.

I’m not surprised to see some racist french on CNN - the antisemitic french was covered already I suppose. I think I stopped hoping even a semblance of sanity on France coverage at the riots.

I’m beggining to think the black horse has some good chance. Nobody likes Sarkozy except his 27 percents, and Royal campaign has been a clunky mess, trying at moments to out-Poujade Sarkozy’s. The old scrooges at the top of the party won’t help, they apparently think they won’t be harmed by another PS failure.

The system is rather weird, but I could not see much fuss about it last time a poll gave Bayrou winning against both Sego and Sarko in the secound stage.

Given that possibility, however slight, we’re seeing the attempt to get at least one of the two (i.e. Royal) into the second round.

The thing is, Napoléon is still largely seen as a positive “founder of the state” figure in France. Therefore, no one would dare compare Sarkozy to him, unless in an obvious satirical move.

Speaking of angry man comparisons, Sarkozy was google bombed for a few months so that Sarkozy would redirect to Iznogoud, a famous comics character who is small, very angry and above all consumed by an always frustrated desire to become “caliph in place of the caliph”. I see that a google search on Nicolas Sarkozy still has Iznogoud on the first page.

The PS is terrified of another run-off in which it’s a spectator. I wouldn’t be surprised if they created the tale about the secret RG poll that raised the nightmare scenario of a Sarko-LePen second round. If that were to happen, I’m thinking ‘hello Sixth Republic’.

(A piece in the Indy was interesting, citing Normandy farmers who’d benefit most from Royal’s policies if implemented, but who’d never vote for a woman, let along a woman on the left.)

And Sarko does have the little-angry-man thing going, doesn’t he? Has anyone in France made the obvious comparison?

That is all.

If I strive to be as fair as I can to anyone involved, I would say that almost everyone is holding out against this alliance. Royal dismissed it, Bayrou dismissed it, even Strauss-Kahn (the leader of the right wing of the socialist party) thought it was prematured before the second round. One must also say that while some centrists have asked for an abstract alliance, none that I know has proposed a clear definite plan.

The FT article is relatively good, but in my opinion slightly too quick to channel the right-wing point of view. There is no “acrimonious dispute” among the Parti Socialiste on the subject of the pact: everyone rejected it. And it is certainly not true that Sarkozy runs a “streamlined, slick operation”: two days before the pact became an issue between the left and the centre, Brice Hortefeux, one of Sarkozy’s closest ally and one of France’s most rightist politician outside of the far-right parties, proposed a constitutional reform that Sarkozy has long opposed and that has long been asked for by the Front National. The move was seen by many as a gesture towards the far-right, and according to Le Monde, Sarkozy was furious.

I haven’t heard anyone talking about it here

That is still a point of view: nobody cares.