Socialist Hollande defeats Sarkozy to win French election: Is this what we can expect in the USA in November?
win French election
François Hollande won the French
presidential election on Sunday, capturing more than 51 percent of the vote to
defeat incumbent Nicholas Sarkozy and become France's new president, according
French television.
Sarkozy, who has held the French presidency
since 2007, grabbed 48.1 percent, according to the polls.
Hollande, the 57-year-old socialist
challenger, narrowly edged Sarkozy in a preliminary election two weeks ago, but
since he did not win with an absolute majority, France law required a runoff
between the top two candidates.
Sunday's victory means France will have its
first Socialist president since since Francois Mitterrand, the country's
president from 1981 to 1995. In voting Sarkozy out of office, French voters
expressed their discontent over Europe's debt crisis.
French television declared the election for
Hollande immediately after the polls closed Sunday. Moments later, Sarkozy told
his supporters that he called Holland to congratulate him, and to concede
victory.
"I take the responsibility for this loss,"
Sarkozy said. "I'm ready to become a French person among French people, and more
than ever I have the love for my country deeply ingrained in my heart."
Hollande's victory could have far-reaching
implications on Europe's debt woes. According to the Associated Press, Hollande has promised a
75-percent income tax on the rich and "wants to re-negotiate a European treaty
on trimming budgets to avoid more debt crises of the kind facing Greece."
"It's going to be a long day," Hollande
told reporters as he left a polling station earlier in the day. Sarkozy, with
his wife, Carla Bruni-Sarkozy, by his side, voted in Paris, but did not speak to
television reporters.
"There will be a handover of power,"
Sarkozy said Friday when asked if what would happen if he lost. "The nation is
stronger than the destiny of the men who serve it."
The French election was reactionary to Sarkozy. Our election can go the same way but I doubt it. We all the know the party of no too well.
dic·ta·tor
[dik-tey-ter, dik-tey-ter] Show IPA
noun
1.
a person exercising absolute power, especially a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.
I think that sums up 0dimwit pretty well. Bypassing Congress, making law via Executive order, gearing up an army(TSA, DHS), threatening the SCOTUS to rule in his favor to avoid further punishment of the people, bailing out corrupt CEO's and Unions, seeking and getting favor(financial or otherwise) from big banks, accepting an award and reward with absolutely no justification, taking credit for acts of heroism that he had no part of to gain favor with mindless minions.
What exactly are you missing? I see it as a perfect description of an unchecked fraud usurping an office he is not qualified to hold.
"I think that sums up 0dimwit pretty well"
Then you're a paranoid idiot.
"Bypassing Congress"
In what way?
"making law via Executive order"
How so?
"gearing up an army(TSA, DHS)"
Paranoid BS.
"threatening the SCOTUS to rule in his favor to avoid further punishment of the people"
Warning against judicial activism is not the same thing as threatening them.
"bailing out corrupt CEO's and Unions"
You mean the rich people that supposedly make jobs? Make up your mind... either capitalists are worth supporting or they're not.
"accepting an award and reward with absolutely no justification"
I assume you're talking about the Nobel Peace Prize. They obviously felt it was justified or they wouldn't have awarded it to him.
"taking credit for acts of heroism that he had no part of to gain favor with mindless minions. "
He didn't take credit for the acts of heroism. He gave that credit to the SEALs and to the intelligence community. All he said was that he gave the go ahead for the mission. Which he did.
"What exactly are you missing?"
The part where he has absolute, unrestricted po...
"I think that sums up 0dimwit pretty well"
Then you're a paranoid idiot.
"Bypassing Congress"
In what way?
"making law via Executive order"
How so?
"gearing up an army(TSA, DHS)"
Paranoid BS.
"threatening the SCOTUS to rule in his favor to avoid further punishment of the people"
Warning against judicial activism is not the same thing as threatening them.
"bailing out corrupt CEO's and Unions"
You mean the rich people that supposedly make jobs? Make up your mind... either capitalists are worth supporting or they're not.
"accepting an award and reward with absolutely no justification"
I assume you're talking about the Nobel Peace Prize. They obviously felt it was justified or they wouldn't have awarded it to him.
"taking credit for acts of heroism that he had no part of to gain favor with mindless minions. "
He didn't take credit for the acts of heroism. He gave that credit to the SEALs and to the intelligence community. All he said was that he gave the go ahead for the mission. Which he did.
"What exactly are you missing?"
The part where he has absolute, unrestricted power. He clearly does not, else he would've gotten a lot more done in the last four years instead of being bound by a completely ineffective Congress.