I wish, but not a chance... Somehow, I think his father would have been better in a debate in 2002.
I even doubt it'll have notable results, in fact. People supporting her will have found her full of energy or anything, and good. she wouldn't have earned so much support already, I haven't found her speech different from basically any other time. Remember that a lot of people are supporting Trump against media lies...
I don't think so for her father. While he is a better "tribun", he would have done a lot more faux-pas, he's not politically correct like her daughter.
Second paragraph is a good point, people who were going to vote for her still will. It was really a debate to convince non-voters.
Yeah sure but Macron gained probably more electors than MLP for sure and he was already wining by a long marge but we never know...
Winning at 60/40 in the polls is not a large margin sadly. But yeah, agreed, he managed to convince a lot of non-voters from what I can see in my circles.
They were awfully off in both primaries, though. It's not an exact science, there's not enough elections to make the whole mechanism trustable.
Though I agree on the most important thing: it's nowhere near Trump or Brexit (In fact, I was convinced that Trump would win when I saw him in the primaries, and that Brexit was a big random draw...)
For the primaries, it's a weird one. They were obviously right for each second round, but while they were wrong for most of the time, they were right in each final week before the first round (not for the score, but for the final 2 candidates).
Speaking of the primaries, this year has definitely shown that while primaries can be a good idea, opening them to any voter instead of just party supporters only make it unpredictable and bring punishment votes that are not necessarily representative of the party's own opinion.
For Brexit, since I lived that in the UK, it seems it mostly came down to people not going to vote (sadly...), and others thinking it would just be a protest vote. Pretty sad.