Frenching

While U.S. Presidential politics is a passion of mine, I don't spend a lot of time following the battles to lead countries other than ours. However, I did read the recent New Yorker article about the French election that was determined today, so it is interesting to me that Nicolas Sarkozy won -- the supposed conservative candidate, although no where near by current U.S. definitions, i.e. he's not in lockstep with any ideology or checklist. In fact, in victory he's already chided the U.S. for lack of leadership to combat global warming.

Whereas his opponent, Segolene Royal, was commendable as a force of change within the calcified shackles of her own Socialist Party, Sarkozy positioned himself as a force for change in France overall, particularly with regard to reforming their labor system and tilting policy back toward markets, by chopping away red tape and penalties like extra corporate taxation on overtime.

While I never mind being first on line to criticize the excesses of capitalism and assaults on worker rights, I'm wishing all godspeed to President-Elect Sarkozy and five years of success. In the real world a 35-hour government workweek limit is not exactly competitive for an industrialized nation. And I heard from French friends themselves both how hard it is as an employer to fire someone for incompetence and how hard it is for the educated to find a job because hiring is so risky for employers. The job market just has so much less fluidity than in the U.S. -- I'm sure for better in many instances, but it seems for worse in more.

One distinct political lesson from this title bout is that Royal, while charismatic and driven, did not articulate a clear and consistent enough campaign message. With Sarkozy you knew where you stood (even not so pleasantly with his acid comments about the recent youth rioters) and, if he delivers, knew what you were voting for.

I don't think anyone is so clear with Sen. Clinton in her Presidential bid. Of the leading Dem candidates, I think Sen. Edwards is easily the clearest. Sen. Obama falls somewhere in between, setting a clear message regarding "hope" but precious few hardcore specifics. His campaign seems to be about who he is.

One Republican friend of mine has repeatedly said that he'd vote for Al Gore, "no question," if he runs this time around. He hasn't always agreed with him, but says that with Al, "I know where he stands."

While the liberal mind may earn liberal praise for accepting a heightened degree of fluidity (compared to, say, our dug in Decided-in-Chief and his coachmen), I'm feeling like times have changed. America knew where Franklin Delano Roosevelt stood, and they elected him, the most successful "liberal" politician in U.S. history, to the Presidency four (4) times.

I think that's what we need this time around. Give me someone tough and clear (and -- lord willing -- fresh) from the left.

Otherwise, give it up.