Marine Le Pen’s political future is cloudy for now, but Sunday’s rally in support of her took place under an impeccably sunny spring sky in an upscale neighborhood of central Paris, with temperatures nearing 20 degrees Celsius.

But despite ideal weather, the crowd didn’t show up.

https://archive.ph/LqE8j

  • absquatulate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    ·
    2 days ago

    According to organizers of Sunday’s rally, some 5,000 to 8,000 people were expected to attend the event, soberly titled “Save Democracy,” with a fleet of 20 buses and nine mini-buses to bring in more supporters. During his speech, National Rally President Jordan Bardella claimed 10,000 people were present.

    Same MO as when they took out kremlin’s candidate in Romania. Because nothing says “save democracy” like a manufactured protest with paid party members and acolytes.

  • huppakee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    2 days ago

    According to organizers of Sunday’s rally, some 5,000 to 8,000 people were expected to attend the event, soberly titled “Save Democracy,” …

    During his speech, National Rally President Jordan Bardella claimed 10,000 people were present. Yet the Place Vauban, … was sparsely filled, and the true attendance figure was likely much lower. …

    But for Laurent Jacobelli, a party spokesperson and parliamentarian, the event’s organization was spurred by “a very strong demand from people to voice their doubts about the judgment” in the Le Pen case.

    O the very strong demand /s

    • MaggiWuerze@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      She herself said, that people who embezzle funds or are convicted of fraud should have their passive voting rights stripped. She just didn’t think it would hit her

    • LuckingFurker (Any/All)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      There are actual laws that Marine LePen broke and the consequence of that is that she now isn’t allowed to run, what part of that do you not get? Don’t bother answering, it’ll be typical Russian bot gibberish and I really don’t care

      • CaptObvious
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Russian, Chinese, or US. They’re all spouting the same garbage these days

        • luciferofastora@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The detailed and nuanced answer would take into account the exact crime, but the short answer: No.

          A democracy must guard itself against usurpation by demagogues that rally people through deceitful rhetorics and appeals to passion with the intent to break the order of that democracy. That order, among other things, contains laws restraining what politicians are and aren’t allowed to do. A candidate with clear disregard for these laws is a threat to that order, such that this democracy must protect itself by not allowing them to hold powers they are likely to use irresponsibly.

          Put differently, someone who shows clear contempt for democratic rules is no longer entitled to democratic rights either. Note the distinction: democratic rights doesn’t mean human rights.

        • belastend@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Someone who embezzled funds should not be able to be in any position to embezzle even more funds.

        • Kekzkrieger@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Convicted felons should not rule.

          Or should we just get people out of prison and let them make the rules ?

          If you want to have a convicted felon as a ruler, go to America.

        • madjo@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s as if you have forgotten that actions have consequences.

          She broke the law, she could’ve chosen not to break the law, and she would still be eligible to run. But Marine Le Pen was not really popular. So don’t kid yourself there either.

        • matte@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Sure, but then they will first have to elect representatives to parliament who will make it legal to become president even if you are corrupt. It is of course not possible to first choose representatives in parliament that make it illegal to become president if you are corrupt and then choose a corrupt president.

        • k0e3@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          It looks to me like enough people want you to shut up, yet you won’t.

    • latenightnoir@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      That’s a fallacy, Democracy doesn’t mean “let any elected moron lead,” it means “leaders should encourage and further the democratic process,” to represent the best interests of the people. A Manchurian candidate is pretty much the antithesis of Democracy.

      I’m not gonna say anything about Le Pen because I do my best to detach from shitheads beyond checking their legal status, but as a Romanian, I can say that Georgescu’s removal was a win for that very Democracy you’re talking about.

        • latenightnoir@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          1 day ago

          And that’s an obtuse and edgy fallacy. You do realise this wasn’t about the people “voting wrong,” but about the candidates themselves being demonstrated to have functioned based on false pretenses and hidden agendas while having Putin’s hand up their arses, right? Convincing people to vote based on lies and mass manipulation is about as far from anything to have ever been considered even marginally democratic. The result itself, thus, is undemocratic.

          What you’re proposing is that Democracy should be as a herd of sheep throwing themselves off a cliff because, hey! The first one did it!

          Cheap bait, m8. Like, really cheap, those worms are flaky…

    • murd0x@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      The favourite candidate is Macron. Twice! So your innuendo has a false premise.

    • cron@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      2 days ago

      Letting corrupt and convicted leaders doesn’t really sound like the better option.

        • cron@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 day ago

          Most of europe’s democracys don’t have an option to elect leaders. We elect political parties, and the french can still vote for the party of Le Pen.

          I don’t see a real political issue there, as long as the courts can be trusted.