DSK yet again

[NormanH]

This story in the Guardian is interesting, in that although he clearly had a dubious history with women, that in itself doesn't mean that he is in the wrong in claiming that there was an orchestrated campaign against him:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/27/dsk-sex-scandal-political-opponents

His interview is here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/27/strauss-kahn-affair

[NickP]

The man is a sleaze bag Norman, if he wasn't; there wouldn't have been a orchestrated campaign against him. So in my opinion he deserves all he gets.

[woolybanana]

Let he who is perfect throw the first stone!!

[Clair]

And he is one of the reasons I cannot bring myself to vote for Hollande next week.

There's no way any of the top gals and guys at the PS could not have known of his proclivities, and had it not been for him being caught up in NY, HE would be standing where Hollande is today and they would all be congratulating him and each other.

That alone is enough to make me spoil my vote.

[woolybanana]

yes, Clair, I have always thought the PS were involved in his downfall as much as Sarkozy.

[Clair]

[quote user="woolybanana"]yes, Clair, I have always thought the PS were involved in his downfall as much as Sarkozy.[/quote]

I don't think the PS or Sarkozy had anything to do with the Sofitel business.

As far as the PS is concerned, they had it in the bag as long as he was selected.

Hollande had to work for it. DSK was practically enthroned, even before he had declared his candidacy for selection.

DSK probably thought himself above the law (diplomatic immunity anyone?) and behaved the way he had behaved in the past. He wanted relief and got it where he thought he could.

I do believe Sarkozy took political advantage of his downfall. And why wouldn't he? That's the name of the game, isn't it?

[woolybanana]

To me, it stinks of in-house Socialist bloodletting to clear the way for Hollande.

[Clair]

[quote user="woolybanana"]To me, it stinks of in-house Socialist bloodletting to clear the way for Hollande.[/quote]

I don't think so.

I believe they were happy to look away and ignore his ways so long as he was going to deliver the presidency.

Remember all the "This is not the DSK I know and love!"; the "He can get any woman he wants; he doesn't need to..."

They were tripping over themselves, offering glowing character references. I remember the ones who didn't: Martine Aubry and Ségolène Royal.

[idun]

[quote user="woolybanana"]Let he who is perfect throw the first stone!![/quote]

I agree none of us are perfect, but our foibles are surely not on a par with the way DSK lives his life. I'm sure that he made enemies, upset people and he left himself open to being set up, or not, as I am not convinced about that. I am inclined to believe that he ended up setting himself up.

And surely there must have been worries about his behaviour becoming public knowledge if he had become president. I do understand that  the world is aware that french politicans have affairs and there is not a great fuss made about it in France, but this man's appetite appears to have been, well shall I say 'gourmand' add to that his life style and in these austere times, would any of it have gone down well, and relected badly on France.

[5-element]

[quote user="Clair"]And he is one of the reasons I cannot bring myself to vote for Hollande next week.
That alone is enough to make me spoil my vote.
[/quote]

But Clair, although I mostly agree with you, is it enough to let Sarkozy in AGAIN?

[Clair]

[quote user="5-element"][quote user="Clair"]And he is one of the reasons I cannot bring myself to vote for Hollande next week.

That alone is enough to make me spoil my vote.[/quote]

But Clair, although I mostly agree with you, is it enough to let Sarkozy in AGAIN?[/quote]

Let's look at the options...

Voting FOR Hollande simply to keep Sakozy out is as bad a voting blank, with the added stigma of knowing that my vote would be considered as a vote of support.

But I don't support Hollande.

And I don't support Sarkozy, so I will not vote for him either.

Voting blank MAY help re-elect Sarkozy - though I doubt he'll be re-elected - with the added knowledge I will not have contributed to support Hollande.

What other option am I missing?

[Rabbie]

[quote user="Clair"][quote user="5-element"][quote user="Clair"]And he is one of the reasons I cannot bring myself to vote for Hollande next week.
That alone is enough to make me spoil my vote.[/quote]
But Clair, although I mostly agree with you, is it enough to let Sarkozy in AGAIN?[/quote]
Let's look at the options...

Voting FOR Hollande simply to keep Sakozy out is as bad a voting blank, with the added stigma of knowing that my vote would be considered as a vote of support.
But I don't support Hollande.

And I don't support Sarkozy, so I will not vote for him either.

Voting blank MAY help re-elect Sarkozy - though I doubt he'll be re-elected - with the added knowledge I will not have contributed to support Hollande.

What other option am I missing?
[/quote]By voting blank you are showing a) you do not support either candidate and b) you are taking the trouble to show your lack of support for them. So given your views I agree that you are taking the best action

[5-element]

Yes, I can see. Up to now I had never given much thought to voting blank, as I thought it was the same as staying home! But clearly, not quite the case. Hmmmm....now what shall I do?

[Clair]

[quote user="5-element"]Yes, I can see. Up to now I had never given much thought to voting blank, as I thought it was the same as staying home! But clearly, not quite the case. Hmmmm....now what shall I do?[/quote]

Well, I see it as a vote of protest, rather than a no-vote.

See HERE (translation).

[5-element]

Very informative article, thanks Clair! Sweden seems to have the right idea, Francois Bayrou was close with his idea of really counting blank votes (even though he would like to make voting compulsory for all). But we are not in Sweden, and it seems that blank votes are seen the same as abstaining, insofar as not turning up counts the same as if I voted blank (unless I am misunderstanding something)

"Le vote nul est un vote non réglementaire, le vote blanc consiste à mettre un bulletin blanc dans l'enveloppe.
Dans les deux cas, le vote est comptabilisé dans l'abstention"

A practical point though: do you have to bring with you, your own blank paper, as no "bulletin blanc" is available in the voting office?[:)] since crossing out a name is a spoilt vote, i.e. the same as "vote nul"?

[Clair]

[quote user="5-element"]A practical point though: do you have to bring with you, your own blank paper, as no "bulletin blanc" is available in the voting office?[:)] since crossing out a name is a spoilt vote, i.e. the same as "vote nul"?[/quote]

THIS PARTY (translation) seems to meet my requirements...

[idun]

It still is like staying at home if you vote blanc..... because those that 'tick' their votes are the only ones who count in France.

 

Who and what is Hollande? I am  having difficulty saying anything about this man who looks anonymous, often robotic.

 

If I could vote, there would be no choice though. I would have to vote for Hollande, I was anti Sarkozy the first time round, but now he seems far worse and extreme. I could not, vote blanc, because I know it doesn't count.

[Clair]

[quote user="idun"]It still is like staying at home if you vote blanc....[/quote]

The fact that my vote will not be counted as a vote is neither here nor there.

I will have voted.

Sarko or Hollande... Bonnet blanc et blanc bonnet.

[just john]

I have nothing to add about DSK walking the tightrope he chose, but am moved to say that the future of the country is decided by the government chosen, less so the personalities that cloud the issue, ''Democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried '' Churchill.

Having seen what happened to the markets last week with the first whiff of the possibility of a socialist government getting in, I would have to vote tactically to ensure that it didn't, and if I need any further motivation I'd remind myself of what happened under a socialist government in UK and where that led.

[NormanH]

To this shower:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/27/labour-decide-government-useless-evil?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038