We’ve had the vote for Brexit, and the election of Trump, and now the French election is the new center of attention in European politics. It may not be as widely covered as the politics of 2016, but it’s had a lot of international interest as the looming results seem to get less and less predictable.

 

When is the French election?

The election will begin on April 23^rd, and by May 7^th France will have elected its new President.

 

Who are the candidates for the French election?

The elections are usually a fight for presidency between the conservative Les Republicans and the left-wing Socialist party.

Currently, the leading candidates fighting for office include Emmanuel Macron, Marine Le Pen, Francois Fillon, Benoit Hamon, and Jean-Luc Melenchon.

Marine Le Pen

Le Pen has drawn a lot of attention to the French election as one of the more popular candidates, and potentially France’s first female president. There’s also the fact that she’s on the far right of the political spectrum, as the leader of the Front National party. Her policies and personality have so far acted in accordance with the increasingly right wing and nationalist politics that we’ve seen across the world over the last year.

She’s openly and strongly against the European Union, as it seems the majority of the UK were when they voted for Brexit. And like Trump, her policies revolve around immigration – which seems to be the go-to at the moment, when looking for solutions to social discontent.

The way the polls are going, it’s likely that Le Pen could make it into the second stage of the election (more on that later in this article).

Francois Fillon

Fillon is another right wing candidate, only this time from the Les Republicains party, so slightly less extreme than Le Pen. Interestingly, he’s also a former president of France, so a familiar face in French politics.

He started out as the favourite presidential candidate, but was soon overtaken by Le Pen. He’s still a fairly popular candidate though, and has the potential to make it to stage 2 of the election.

Like every western politician at the moment, his policies have a strong focus on terrorism, with mention of Islam. He aims to increase security and defense with €100bn that will come from reducing unemployment benefits. He also aims to sack 500,000 people who work for the government.

Fillon is much like Le Pen in his belief that the European Union is useless, but is more focused on reform than ‘Frexit’ or whatever else we might term France’s version of Brexit. He also aims to maintain good relations with the UK and interestingly, with Putin.

Emmanuel Macron

Macron is a character who, like Donald Trump was, is mistrusted by many due to him having less political experience than the other candidates.

Rather than being affiliated with a political party, Macron has his own political movement, ‘En Marche!’ which has been especially popular with the French youth.

He’s a political figure that is recognized by many as a sincere personality, who doesn’t align with either the left or right of the political spectrum. He has instead been labelled a centrist.

His focus is more on the problems at home, with policies to reform education and more positive when it comes to foreign policy. Macron isn’t a believer of Brexit, and nor is he concerned with France following suit.

Despite his lack of a deeply routed political profile, he’s a pretty popular candidate, the second most popular in fact at the moment.

Jean-Luc Melenchon

Despite an increase in right wing attitudes, there are still some lefties out there, and Jean-Luc Melenchon is one of them.

His policies are based on the people of France and their quality of life, hoping to increase minimum wage and set a retirement age of 60 he’s focusing more on the smaller social details than on blaming foreigners for social discontent.

It’s unlikely that he’ll reach the second stage of the election, as he’s one of the least popular candidates.

Benoit Hamon

Another lefty, but more central than Jean-Luc Melenchon.

Unlike the right wing candidates, he’s all for Europe and believes in a universal wage. Albeit it’s an unlikely goal, but at least his heart is in the right place. However, that’s clearly not what the people of France are looking right now, as he is currently one of the least popular candidates.

Who’s the most likely to win at the moment?

The 2017 French election is looking like one of the most unpredictable elections that France has had in decades, so it’s hard to predict the outcome.

France could have its first female president, Marine Le Pen, but there’s no solid prediction on whether Marine Le Pen could take it all the way home.

The latest polls display Marine Le Pen ahead of her other four competitors. However, it’s no landslide – there’s still a tight battle between the leading candidates. In 2002, Marie Le Pen managed to get through the second round, but she lost to Jacques Chirac.

 

So, how does the election work?

For most elections, the system is conducted in 2 stages. The first stage, kor round, will take place on April 23^rd. It consists of any candidate who meets the requirements. The requirements include enough funding for their campaign and the written support of five hundred elected representatives. In the second round, the competition lies between the top two leading candidates. The next president will be whoever gets the majority of votes in the second round.

Unlike countries such as the United States, the French election is decided by the people rather than representatives or elected officials. In fact, France is a representative democracy – so the popular vote will decide the next president. So any French citizen age 18 or older will be able to vote for their candidate.

In the first round, if a candidate ends up with the absolute majority, he or she will immediately be elected as the next president. This has actually never happened in French history, but in 1995 – candidate Charles de Gualle came close with 44%.

The elections are always held on Sundays, and the campaigns usually finish at Friday midnight. Voting stations open at 8am and close at 6pm. In a way, it’s a fairly simple system – and it’s worked for years. The only exception to this system can be referred to as the Alternative Vote or Instant-Runoff Voting. So, instead of voting for one single candidate – the citizens of France can rank the candidates in order of preference. If a candidate receives more than half of these votes, then he or she is declared the winner.

However, the Alternative Vote only occurs when neither candidate secures the majority vote in the second round. In the Instant-Runoff Voting (or Alternative), if none of the candidates receive 50% of the popular vote, then the worst-performing or least popular candidate will be eliminated. Therefore, supporters will have to switch to their second candidate choice.

 

So to sum up…

As mentioned before, Marine Le Pen seems to be stacking up approval ratings from France. Then there’s the runner-up to consider. Perhaps Emmanuel Macron or Benoit Hamon will face Le Pen in the second round.

Presently, it doesn’t look like Republican candidate Francois Fillon will receive many votes from the French. A corruption scandal involving his wife and children. Apparently, they earned 1 million euros for jobs they were never doing. For now, there hasn’t been any chargers but presidential candidate Fillon doesn’t look under the formal investigation.

But, who’s to deny a surprising outcome? Sometimes, an allegation or evidence of a past affair isn’t enough to throw away candidates’ campaigns. I mean, look at U.S. President Donald Trump. Throughout his campaign, he suffered claims from over a dozen women for rape or sexual assault. The comeback? Although, he didn’t win the popular vote – he still managed to defeat his political opponent and become president.

 

So, thankfully the French election isn’t that complicated. It’s a simple voting system that’s as democratic as you could hope for, unlike the American electoral college system. And what’s more, it’s worked for years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 2016 US election was one of the most controversial elections in modern American history. The two candidates, Trump and Clinton, were perhaps the most unpopular candidates that American politics has ever seen.

Trump’s win, despite Hillary winning the majority votes, didn’t exactly go down well with the millions of American’s who didn’t vote for him. It was the second time the Democrats have suffered at the hand of the electoral college system. The first time being Al Gore’s loss to George W. Bush, despite (like Hillary) him winning the majority vote.

The election between Al Gore and George W. Bush definitely brought some light to the flaws of America’s voting system, but the 2016 election had a much wilder reaction as emotions ran high.

Many people, Democrats and Republicans alike, are now questioning the purpose and legitimacy of the American voting system. The Electoral College may date back to the 18^th century, but quite frankly, it’s not surprising that people are now questioning the whole system.

After all, isn’t it a government for the people, by the people? So, why aren’t the people in whole deciding? Why isn’t the popular vote rather than the Electoral College deciding our president? Well, for starters – it’s complicated.

How does the Electoral College work?

The process used in America to elect a President is called the electoral college. The idea behind it is that the President is decided by both the popular vote and a vote in Congress.

Everyone qualified to vote can do so, but ultimately, it’s the overall state vote that matters.

Each state has electors, who are decided before the general election by their parties. The number of electors each state gets is the same as the number of representatives (Congressmen and Senators) that they have in the House of Representatives. The number of representatives is determined by the size of the state’s population, and so the number of electors each state has is also dependent on the state’s population.

You’re now probably wondering why the number of electors matters so much. It matters because for a President to be elected, they need at least 271 of 538 electoral votes, otherwise the House of Representatives decide the winner.

So to put it simply, the biggest states have the most impact on the vote (which is why Trump focused his campaigns at the more populated states like Texas and Florida).

How it Started

Back in 1787, the Constitutional Convention – a group of delegates that met to discuss the flaws of the central government, considered several methods of choosing the next president.

Should the Congress select the next president? The state governors? Or should it be a direct popular election?

These were all options considered, but finally the matter was handled with a method called the ‘electoral college.’ It was widely approved by the delegates and political leaders. Therefore, after adding the system to the Constitution, each state was given a number of electors due to the combined membership of the Senate.

How it’s changed

The voting system has been modified a bit over the centuries. Originally, states chose electors equal in number to the representatives and the senators. The electors voted for two candidates, and the person with the majority of votes became President. The runner-up became Vice President.

So, essentially – there was no clear presidential or vice-presidential candidate.

Today, to become president – the candidate has to win an absolute majority of 270 electoral votes. Now, if neither candidate receives enough delegates, the House of Representatives will decide the winner from the top 3 candidates with the most electoral votes. Presently, the number of electors per state ranges from three to 54, giving a total of 538. But again, you can see how the bigger states have the most say.

Misinterpretation of Democracy

Protests and general uproar have accompanied an increased lack of faith in America’s voting system. People have begun questioning how a system that allows the most unpopular candidate to become President can be called a democracy.

So is it fair? Well, it depends. We have been attached to the idea that ‘we the people’ are deciding our own president, but it’s more of an indirect voting.

Many Americans believed they were voting directly for the candidate of their choice. But, technically – it’s the representatives of their local government that will actually decide for them. Voters in Broward County may cast the majority of ballots for Hillary Clinton, but the elector can decide to vote for Donald Trump instead.

When you think of democracy you probably think of the people electing parties and Presidents based on what the majority want. But the thing to remember is that we also misinterpret the country as a democracy. America isn’t a democracy, it’s a republic. The general public may refer to it as a democracy but even the constitution declares the nation a ‘republic for which we stand.’

 

It may not be exactly democratic, but the electoral college has its advantages

So, besides the fact that the U.S. is a Republic – why can’t they use the popular vote to decide the president? To put it simply – there would be chaos without the electoral college.

The system may cause controversy around democracy, but it actually plays an important part in the stability of the country. If the voting system worked in a way where Presidents were decided purely by popular vote, the chances are that a whole load of people would run for President.

For instance, in the recent election, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 48%. The other 52% belonged to Donald Trump and third party candidates. If we merely chose a president because of the popular vote, we would be swamped with candidates. The electoral college encourages a system of two parties, making it a simple choice, and a choice that will always please a large amount of people, whether they are the majority or not.

 

For those who are upset with the outcomes of the recent presidential  election, or even the Al Gore vs George W. Bush, you have to understand the chaos that would erupt from getting rid of the electoral college. It may not be the best system, but it’s the system left to America by its Founding Fathers. Over the next century, perhaps the voting system will be modified but it’s going to be a long time before we get rid of the age-old system.

Gone are the days when acting dumb was cool. Smart really is the new sexy. Intelligence is one of the most highly valued and sought after qualities anyone can have. From having a clearer understanding of the world, to acing pub quizzes, there are so many advantages to being intelligent.

We’re all encouraged to pursue intelligence, and be the best we can be. There’s never any question that knowledge is anything other than good. There’s no list of consequences handed over with your A* grades in high school.

But then, thinking about the old saying, ‘every rose has its thorns’, there must surely be some downsides to having a high IQ. So here are 8 disadvantages you might be familiar with if your IQ is way above average.

1. Your level of patience probably isn’t as high as your IQ 

Think about those times when you’re trying to tell someone something, but they don’t hear you. They don’t hear the first time, or the second time, and after the third time you throw your hands up in despair and give up. It’s exactly that kind of frustration that those of higher intelligence experience when people just don’t understand.

We all get frustrated every now and then, but when you’ve got a valid and interesting line of conversation, and people just don’t get it, it drives you insane, right?

Having a high IQ means that every now and then, you’ll find yourself in conversation with others who perhaps aren’t as gifted in the intelligence department. You might be desperate to offload your thoughts about some new philosophical question that’s arisen, or give your opinion on the latest state of political affairs, but everyone you try and talk to just doesn’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

The chances are that whilst your IQ is sky high, your level of patience probably isn’t quite as impressive. Explaining concepts and issues in layman’s terms, when you have a deeper understanding, is a good skill to have, but when it’s a constant requirement of every conversation, it can be infuriating.

2. Little achievements go unnoticed

Think back to when you went to school, were your classes split into higher and lower sets? If they were, and if you ever found yourself in the higher set, you might have noticed those in lower sets were rewarded for things that were just expected of you.

Maybe someone got an award in assembly for finally memorising their times tables, something you did months, maybe years, before. It can feel pretty unfair, and it’s not something that necessarily stops when you leave education either.

If you’ve grown up with more being expected of you than most, because you have the ability to excel more than most then the chances are that throughout your life, it won’t just be others expecting more from you, but rather you expecting more of yourself.

You’ll push yourself, and sure, at times that will be a good thing, the more you push yourself the further you’ll go. But if you don’t reach your goals, and you don’t get to wherever it was that you thought you were going, you might feel like you’ve let yourself down more than anyone else. And despite however many achievements you may have made along the way, you might not even recognise them as notable.

3. Complacency – the intellect’s downfall

On the other hand, rather than pushing yourself too hard, you might find yourself not putting any effort in at all, because you might not need to!

Things that others need to work hard for, and put time and effort into, you might be able to do without a moment of preparation. Think again of your school days, and how there’s always some who can put in minimal effort, perhaps only revising a few hours before an exam, and do better than those that had been revising for months.

It’s great to be able to breeze through life without much work, worry or stress, but that’s when you become complacent. You’ll be pleased with your achievements, and probably quite smug. Obviously there’s no real harm in that, but the likelihood is that everything you attempt, you’ll approach with the same lack of effort that got you the results of your previous achievements.

Eventually though, you might come across something that’s not as easy to breeze. And if you’ve already got into the habit of not needing to do much work, you might struggle more than those that are used to challenges.

4. Ignorance is bliss

Most of us, if not all, can probably think of a time when we became aware of something that it would’ve been easier to remain unaware of. Whether it was something that hurt to find out, or just some grim detail about your mate’s personal life that wish you’d never heard. Sometimes the truth can be hard to swallow, and we long for ignorance. As the saying goes, ignorance is bliss.

But when you’re gifted with a higher than average intelligence, ignorance can be hard to come by. Others might be fooled by the well worded speeches and false promises of politicians, whilst you instead let the economy talk for itself. Sure, it would be nice to believe that things will change for the better, taxes might go down, and standard of living might go up, but generally, the more intelligent of us are also realists.

When you know more than most, there’s not really any way you can blindly believe promises of change and improvement without first turning to the facts of history, and the stats of today.

5. The more you know, the more you realise you don’t know

With everything you learn, you’ll be constantly realising how much more there is to learn that you haven’t even looked at yet. No one person will ever have complete understanding of anything, and as soon as you realise that, the pursuit of knowledge begins.

You’ll pursue as much knowledge as you can, but ultimately there’ll always be an underlying frustration at the fact that there’s just not enough time in the world for you to grasp everything.

Despite your relatively high intelligence, you might feel overwhelmed by the amount you don’t know, and disheartened by how little you know in comparison. To be humble isn’t a bad trait, but you have a right to feel proud of your level of intellect.

6. Being smart can actually lead to sleepless nights

We’ve all had nights were we’ve sat awake till the early hours, going over and over something that’s already happened, or dwelling on something that might never happen.

But if you’ve got a higher IQ, you probably overthink things more than those without your level of intelligence. From analysing each word of a past conversation, to assessing the possible outcomes of future situations, to panicking about politics, your overly active mind can actually stop you from getting a good nights sleep.

The trouble with a great mind, is that it’s pretty hard to stop it whirring thoughts round and round, all hours of the day.

7. You tend to ignore your heart, and follow your head

We all know someone who’s taken huge risks, ignoring their head and following their heart, even if it leads them into trouble. Those of extreme intelligence though are more likely to do the opposite – ignore their heart.

You can’t really go wrong with allowing logic to dictate your choices ,but when it means your heart goes ignored, at point do you allow yourself to feel?

Feeling and loving is what makes us human. There are obvious, well reasoned and clever choices, and then there are impulsive decisions that ignore what we should do, and take advantage of what we can do. Letting yourself be vulnerable is sometimes just as important as protecting yourself. That’s what living is.

8. You might become what they call a ‘Grammar Nazi’

Think about times you’ve heard people talking about something you’re particularly clued up on, and they’ve got the facts wrong, you were probably dying to correct them. It’s natural.

With social media on the rise, this is particularly relevant in grammar. Every day you see misspelt statuses and comments full of grammar mistakes. And then you see other comments, by the perhaps more intelligent, correcting the mistakes.

You might have heard the term ‘grammar nazi’ thrown around at those who are sticklers for perfect spelling and sentence constructions.  And its exactly those that find themselves subject to the phrase ‘grammar Nazi’. The more you understand the rules of grammar, the closer you get to becoming the living and walking demonstration of the term.