Well I’m not going to disagree with your second point.
But there’s 37% of the people who still want them to rule, and pushing them under the rug doesn’t make those people just go away.
It makes those people more determined if anything, and it honestly doesn’t look like they’re far from the tipping point where a far right problem becomes a far right leadership.
But there’s 37% of the people who still want them to rule, and pushing them under the rug doesn’t make those people just go away.
Which means there are 60%+ who do not. That’s 37% of the far right coming together; why is it suddenly not okay when the NFP and their allies come together?
Except for second rounds a lot of voters could only chose between the RN and the left or the centre, so obviously there would be less votes for those overall. There was a first round before that and the percentage of votes was way closer
You don’t see anything wrong with getting the highest percentage of votes, but the lowest share of seats?
That’s perfectly democratic to you? Or is it OK when it happens to people we don’t like?
What is undemocratic about a runoff between two, which resulted in the ones with more votes getting power?
Also, people we don’t like = fucking racist Nazi cunts.
Well I’m not going to disagree with your second point.
But there’s 37% of the people who still want them to rule, and pushing them under the rug doesn’t make those people just go away.
It makes those people more determined if anything, and it honestly doesn’t look like they’re far from the tipping point where a far right problem becomes a far right leadership.
Which means there are 60%+ who do not. That’s 37% of the far right coming together; why is it suddenly not okay when the NFP and their allies come together?
Except for second rounds a lot of voters could only chose between the RN and the left or the centre, so obviously there would be less votes for those overall. There was a first round before that and the percentage of votes was way closer