Élire un 'bully' à la tête de l'état: La manière avec laquelle 31% des français, avec JMC, voient le 'changement'

''He (Sarkozy) is energetic, publicity-hungry, manipulative, outspoken and, yes, abrasive. In fact, an even better term than abrasive might be that he is a bully: he is well known for getting his way through threats and tantrums.

That reputation might, of course, be an exaggeration by the media and by his opponents. But it is a firm part of his image. And there are enough stories about it to make it feel credible. I have one such small story of my own. A couple of years ago The Economist arranged a debate in Paris, in front of about 300 subscribers, between Sarkozy and me, around the question of whether France is reformable. The terms and procedures for the debate were negotiated painstakingly with his chef de cabinet. Then Sarkozy turned up five minutes before the event was due to begin and threw a tantrum: he had just discovered he was in a debate, he claimed, moreover a debate with a journalist, of all things. This was outrageous, impossible! The great Sarko debates only with politicians! He had to be calmed down. The procedures had to be talked through once more. He was reminded that in the adjoining room 300 French voters were waiting for the event to begin. He had to be given the time to call his chef de cabinet on the phone and give him a rather theatrical bollocking. And then the debate went ahead, as planned, with Sarkozy the epitome of charm. In his view, he had shown us who was boss.

The question for France is: do you want such a person as boss, ie, president? He will be a bully, a thrower of tantrums. My guess, and it can only be that, is that a majority will decide to take the risk. The French system contains enough checks and balances to prevent a bullying president from turning into an elected dictator, especially with the national assembly elections due in June and offering an immediate chance to quell the new president's power.''

JMC est pour Jean-Marie Colombani, éditeur en chef du Monde, vendu au néoconisme américain et à l'argent facile (pas l'argent gagné en se levant tôt) qui, honteusement, éditorial après éditorial, article après article, titre biaisé après titre biaisé, fausse information après fausse information, intimidation après intimidation, et épouvantail après épouvantail (sous la forme d'un faux sondage de dernière minute avant le premier tour donnant Le Pen devant Bayrou), a essayé de décrédibiliser Bayrou et ses électeurs et d'influencer l'opinion publique en faveur d'un duel Ségolène-Sarkozy alors que tous les sondages donnaient et donnent Ségolène perdante face à Sarkozy au deuxième tour.