Nice-Premium: Was it a good debate?
Patrick Allemand: I think we witnessed a very high-level debate. For the first time, Sarkozy found himself unprotected, unfiltered, and we clearly saw the two societal visions they propose to us.
On one hand, that of Ségolène, the desire to build a new, reconciled, peaceful France, faithful to its universal values and confident in its future. A France that guarantees progress for all and respect for each individual, that modernizes its social model without breaking it, that renovations the republic, ensures an impartial state, and protects public freedoms.
On the other, that of Nicolas Sarkozy, this time, we understood well. He is the candidate of a right even more brutal than the one we have endured since 2002, who wants to subject France to an ultra-liberal purge to adapt it at all costs to Anglo-Saxon rule-less globalization.
NP: In your view, between Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal, who convinced more undecided voters?
PA: The stakes of this debate were more significant for S. Royal than for N. Sarkozy. She is the one trailing, and this lag was largely due to French people’s questions about her legitimacy to be there.
Ségolène Royal’s response was brilliant last night. Not everything was perfect, but as soon as we leave the non-objective circles (pro “Sarko” and pro “Ségo”), the general feeling is that she was not expected to perform at this level and she gained the upper hand over Sarkozy.
No one at least contests this in terms of form. He was caught off guard several times, looking for Patrick Poivre d’Arvor or Arlette Chabaud. She never let him go.
Those who doubted her competence, her capacity, discovered the real Ségolène Royal, the one we, the Socialists, know. Those undecided now have no reason to be so today.
NP: How do you explain that both candidates made mistakes about nuclear power?
PA: Society is so complex that one cannot know everything about everything.
NP: In a few adjectives, how would you describe the performances of both candidates?
PA: For Sarkozy, I would say he played defensively, a bit like a title holder. He tried not to make mistakes. His performance is correct, but he was certainly surprised by how Ségolène Royal conducted this debate. Because it was she who led it.
For Ségolène, I would say tenacity above all, and will. She quickly gained psychological advantage, shaking him on security (not enough to my liking), on the environment, on education, on Europe. On all these subjects, she dominated him as well as on the economy and fiscal policy, and that’s more surprising.
I found her less convincing on pensions and the 35-hour workweek. But the overall performance remains at a very high level.
NP: Let’s talk about the notable point of this debate, the one that will be remembered. Do you find Ségolène Royal’s righteous anger legitimate?
PA: Absolutely legitimate. She caught a presidential candidate in a lie, attempting intellectual fraud on the plight of disabled people. Everyone knows that Nicolas Sarkozy lied. It’s deplorable.
NP: Finally, what can happen in the campaign leading up to Sunday, election day?
PA: Either nothing happens and Sarkozy will win.
Or a new dynamic is unleashed, this debate serving as a shock, revealing the strength and skill of Ségolène Royal, and the election might turn around, and Sunday night at 8 PM, it will be Ségolène Royal’s face appearing.
All activists must know this is possible and “tear themselves apart” to convince.
