Tomorrow is the second round of the French Presidential election, the run off between the top two candidates, Nicolas Sarkozy and Francois Hollande. YouGov have once again done a pre-election poll, which has figures of Hollande 53%, Sarkozy 47%. Tabs are here.

Looking at all the final French polls there is very little variation – all nine companies that have carried out polls in the last couple of days are showing a Hollande lead between 5 and 7 points. Unless the polls are horribly wrong it looks extremely unlikely that Sarkozy can win.


72 Responses to “French Presidential election polling”

1 2
  1. @ Smukesh

    I actually want Hollande to win, even though in normal times if i were french i would vote Sarkozy.

    I want to see how his plan shapes up against the way we are doing it.If his way turns out to be great then i will voice my opinion that we should change course.

    See unlike some ( not you btw ) i want the best for this country and its economy and if there is indeed a better way to get us through this mess then lets go for it.

    I maybe a lifelong Conservative but i wont blindly nod if what the goverment are doing is shown to be wrong.

    So lets hope he wins then we can see.

  2. Bluebob summed up my position perfectly.

    I actually want Hollande to win, even though in normal times if i were french i would vote Sarkozy.

    I want to see how his plan shapes up against the way we are doing it.If his way turns out to be great then i will voice my opinion that we should change course.

    See unlike some ( not you btw ) i want the best for this country and its economy and if there is indeed a better way to get us through this mess then lets go for it.

    I maybe a lifelong Conservative but i wont blindly nod if what the goverment are doing is shown to be wrong.
    So lets hope he wins then we can see.

  3. I’m mildly surprised Labour did so well in the local elections & mildly surprised Livingstone did so well as well.

    Perhaps it may be a curse – but it gives Ed Milliband clear space…what he choose to do with it is entirely another matter. I guess the polls may blip towards Labour in the following wind.

    UKIP and the LIbDems may end up fighting it out for third and fourth place if this trend goes on – and that will not help the coalition.

    Whatever mountain Labour has to climb Mr Cameron has to find 2-3% more votes if the Conservatives are to win an outright majority. And that too looks like a mountain – maybe not Ed’s Everest but in the Himalayas all-right.

  4. @BLUEBOB
    @MAX

    I agree…What`s important is the best way forward emerges…If Hollande cocks up badly,I may become Osborne`s biggest fan…I hope not

  5. Totally agree, I believe in defecit reduction and trying to get manufacturing and exports going, but if spending stimulus does it in France then we should try it. you can’t say their banks are not debt ridden and suffering from the eurozone crisis – osbornes reason why we have not grown. so if it works for them then we should change course and stimulate some construction or research based investment to get more patents and thus more manafacturing going. or at least just not cut any further yet.

  6. @ Max

    Why not look at America? Labour isn’t suggesting no cuts, but more of a focus on growth. That is the current situation in America and it seems to be working relatively well, even with the Republicans blocking everything they possibly can.

  7. @David

    Me, Bluebob, and Smukesh have a nice unity moment, so unpartisan and friendly, then you go and spoil it.

    I do have an answer for you, but im not going to get caught in the partisan trap again

  8. @bluebob – “I want to see how his plan shapes up against the way we are doing.”

    Is the situation in the US relevant?

    Here is an 18 month old article on the austerity fad:

    h
    ttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=2&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

  9. billybob, that explains thinks pretty succinctly.

    “What happens now? Maybe Britain will get lucky, and something will come along to rescue the economy. But the best guess is that Britain in 2011 will look like Britain in 1931, or the United States in 1937, or Japan in 1997. That is, premature fiscal austerity will lead to a renewed economic slump. As always, those who refuse to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. “

  10. @NickP

    “t the best guess is that Britain in 2011 will look like Britain in 1931, ”

    But if Hollande wins, and his policies are the success you think they will be (bear in mind your prediction, no proclamation even, that Ken had won) and the coalition policies fail, then Labour will get a majority in 2015 and take the different path apparently.

  11. Hi All,

    This is my first post to the site despite enjoying the political discussion since the last GE. Looking at France I find myself strangly in two minds, whilst my natural political inclination would be to hope for a Hollande victory I worry that Hollandes desire to renegotiate the “fiscal compact” with Germany will reignite the Euro crises at a time when Spain and Greece are looking vulnerable again.

    I wonder if the recent bad data from Spain will chime in voters minds with Sarkozy’s warnings and lead to even natural left of centre voters “playin it safe”. Economic uncertainty tends to benefit the right, maybe this is why there has been a slight tightening in the poll numbers?

  12. The US example of promoting growth rather than austerity is certainly relevant as an alternative model, but it should be remembered that the US is a far larger market than France. It’s easier for the US to act in isolation.

    Much of the economic benefits any economic stimulus stimulus in France would be enjoyed by other European neighbours (including of course the UK) in terms of boosting their exports, while at the same time making such policies harder to sustain in France in isolation. Hollande seems savvy enough to realise this, because he seems focused on changing the path of Europe as a whole away from the disasterous coordinated austerity promoted by Merkel and Sarkozy.

  13. I think the 3 hour TV debate has probably clinched it for Hollande. The conventional wisdom was that it was Sarkozy’s last chance to turn the race his way and, in the 2007 contest with Royal (formerly Mrs Hollande), it was felt that Sarkozy had stitched her up like the proverbial kipper in the TV debate of that year. It was deemed to be a decisive moment in the campaign. I think his supporters had high hopes he would do the same with Hollande but most impartial observers felt that his hectoring and aggressive approach actually made the calmer and more dignified Hollande seem more presidential. Some polling conducted immediately after the debate confirmed this perception.

    I’m greatly looking forward to a Hollande Presidency, if indeed it transpires, and I think it’s possible that it could change the whole direction of Europe for the good, freeing the continent’s economies from the Merkozy led and encouraged austerity shackles. I also think it will unleash an energy and optimism in one of Europe’s great nations and that can only be good for us all. There is a pall of pessimism stalking Europe, and some of it is coming from having most of its political leaders in thrall to markets and high finance. Hollande will have enormous difficulties and like all leaders of the Left will be destined to disappoint, but his election will signal a much needed change of direction in one of Europe’s economic powerhouses.

    A little postscript on City Mayors, if I may. Can I inform the little gaggle of Mayoral enthusiasts on this site that you have another luminary to add to your ranks; none other than Peter Waterman of Scott, Waterman and Aitken fame. Yes, the man who gave us Kylie and Jason was extolling the virtues of elected City Mayors on breakfast TV this morning. He was doing ever so well, saying how they could be transformational local figures and how tragic it was that most cities had rejected the idea in yesterday’s referenda. Why, he carried on, look at Manchester and how inspired leadership had transformed the city over the last 10 years. Then a strange and fretful look came over his face as he had to stop in his tracks and say, well, actually, Manchester didn’t have, and never had had, a Mayor. The inspirational figure that was being referred to had been the leader of the controlling group on Manchester council, supported by a host of locally elected representatives!

    Nice one Pete. You could be so lucky, so lucky, so lucky….

  14. America is a bit too different to us to make comparisons i think.

  15. I don’t like an elected mayor, but I’m glad everyone else said no, it keeps London special and domniating the national news. if every city had a mayor vote at once then we wouldnt dominate the headlines as much.

    Boris win is still the top news story on BBC, trumping all the local election losses. If there were tons of mayors, we likely wouldnt have the top spot.

  16. Works both ways, Max.

  17. However, Osborne did compare US stimulus policy with UK austerity, claiming that the UK economy was growing faster than the US, and it seems he got his facts wrong:

    h
    ttp://www.primeeconomics.org/?p=785

  18. andyo – there’s a poll tonight (it’s bank holiday Friday’s that prevent them). There won’t be one on bank holiday Monday though.

  19. AW — Super !!

    Could you remind us when the fieldwork for the Saturday night polls is carried out ?
    thanks
    :-)

  20. Phil
    You may have missed my post immediately after the election results but I will repeat it anyway! All I said before the Scottish elections was proved right and was almost certain to be proved right.
    Even without any polling evidence and accepting that a lot was unknown, it was obvious to anyone campaigning that the Lib Dems were in collapse outside the very wealthiest areas, that the polarisation between the two main parties was increasing and that thehostility to independence of the non-nationalist vote was increasing. It this circumstances, Labour could only lose seats overall if there was a gigantic, historic move to the SNP, a change for which there was no evidence.
    I also made my own tip (though I am not a betting man) that the nearest thing to a certainty was that Labour would win its first ever seat on Aberdeenshire Council. You would have earned money on that one. In fact we won two. In Aberdeen we did very well and Johann came to see us today in the light of that.
    A high point in Aberdeen was a seat won on Aberdeen Lower Deeside ward, one of the wealthiest wards in the UK. We also won two out of three seats in each of the poorest wards in the city.
    Those of us in Scotland have been livmg with SNP hype for 40 years and most of us are used to it. Those furth of Scotland will have to factor it in, especially if the dearth of polls in Scotland continues

  21. On the US and deficits: let’s remember that the US has very much been working on a “private sector recovering programme”-

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ps45Lvi1AAQ/Tc3O359RyrI/AAAAAAAAHpo/kyRePWhDxnw/s1600/Private%2Bvs%2BPublic%2BJobsMa62011BurLaborStatScottGrannisBlogspotJobSitviaGWP51211.jpg

    I assume that those holding up the US as a model also think that it’s a good idea to cut the equivalent of 2 million public sector jobs and let the private sector pick up the slack.

    Anyway, why take the US as a model, especially since the dollar’s status as a reserve currency gives their deficits special characteristics, especially when there’s a flight to “safe assets” like right now? We have a textbook example of what to do in this kind of situation: balance the budget and have strong aggregate demand via monetary easing. This produced some of the fastest annual growth in the country’s history. What strange foreign country was this? The UK in the 1930s. 6.8% GDP growth in 1934. Can Obama match that?

    The main problem right now, though, is that a further rise in demand would create a lot of pressure on the Bank of England to raise interest rates. So reforming our monetary policy regime is the first step to a lasting recovery.

    The Coalition were right that cuts were needed. Labour were right that strong demand was needed. Both were wrong in thinking that these goals are mutually exclusive.

    Nick Crafts has done some very good work on this recently-

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CGAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.warwick.ac.uk%2Ffac%2Fsoc%2Feconomics%2Fresearch%2Fcentres%2Fcage%2Fresrecovery.ppt&ei=xd2lT4uGCMiq8QPO5oTfBA&usg=AFQjCNH-9Gm7c_eBBg8OIekBupz47sI_eQ&sig2=9lQla7nl1-hEUJmlQ4seNQ

    The 1930s recovery would have been even better had the US economy not been undergoing such an implosion and if international trade hadn’t seized up (partly due to the Tories) and if the UK didn’t have structural unemployment problems.

    Time for Ballsbornomics?

  22. I remember the great Keynesian economist and general chancer of economics, Nicholas Kaldor, once blowing a fuse when he was forced into tacitly admitting that Neville Chamerlain was a great chancellor-

    http://www.johnashcroft.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/The-Saturday-Economist-UK-recoveries-compared.-.png

    – looking at the comparative statistics and recalling the international situation in the 1930s, I’m inclined to say that Nicky was right!

1 2