On the eve of the thirtieth anniversary of the first presidential election
won by a Socialist in France, followed by the first real political change,
Socialist leaders are over the moon, seemingly assured of victory in the
forthcoming presidential elections and the legislative election that will
follow. They have even been dividing the posts: Who will be President?
Ministers? Principal Private Secretaries? CEOs? Media owners? Directors of
cultural institutions? Beneficiaries of public works? And so many other
benefits to come, after such a long time of penitence.

They have some good reasons to be optimistic as well: Given the polls, it
appears that any socialist can beat the incumbent president, even the
right-wing voters no longer want this man, they say he is unable to
represent and defend their interests. De facto, his record is very far from
his promises on all subjects, in particular on employment, purchasing power,
competitiveness, public debt, and even security. The French blame him for a
general feeling of being unwell, for them and more so for the generations to
come, which they suspect at risk of being downgraded.

And yet, despite all this, at the time of this writing, the most probable
result of the next presidential elections is, in my opinion, the re-election
of the incumbent president. First, because he will be able, in order to
justify his economic and social record, to make the excuse of the
international financial crisis, which he apparently managed very well. Then
because he can claim an international activism of good quality on most major
issues where the voice of Europe deserved to be heard. Finally, because
never the ideas of the Right and far Right have been so dominant in the
minds of the French: we are only debating about order, security, national
identity, immigration. The Left fails to force a debate on unemployment,
school or precariousness. And when they make some suggestions, the French do
not listen or oppose them: they no longer want to be on welfare, but a job
and security. And the left has abandoned these concerns to the right.

Moreover, as countless candidates for nomination in the multiple Left will
be competing for another six months on issues of people, not programs, they
will obviously wear out prematurely. Also because the socialist leaders of
local authorities will not fight for one of them to be elected in the
highest office, because they know it would make their re-election more
difficult two years later, in their territories. Finally, and this is not
without importance, because the incumbent President, much better candidate
than president, is the only one of all the contenders, both from the right
and the left, who is ready to do anything to be elected, because whatever he
says, he cannot, he himself, imagine other lives.

And yet it would suffice for the left to choose its candidate as soon as
possible, to focus its campaign on justice and security, economic and
social, to make the fight against precariousness its main fight, in order to
prevail in the minds and votes. It will probably not do so; and if, in the
years to come, the theses of the far right are imposing themselves, through
a re-election of the current president, the Socialists will only have
themselves to blame.