This is a brief post script to the debate.
Evening and morning accounts of the debate in Paris indicated that Royal was the clear winner. She had tremendous pressure on her; and she came through as strong; knowing the issues; and projecting her self very well.
I talked with FCP activists and they said that Royal took left of center positions on the Taxing of the Stock Market; but; also adding jobs to the education and health systems. Sarkozy avoided the issue but previously called for reductions. She called him on his duplicity.
At Bayrou headquarters after the debate; his activists were very angry at Sarkozy for calling Bayrou stupid; they said they would vote for Royal.
Reading the morning NY Times; on line; a different picture comes through. While the writer did catch the toughness of the debate, her characterization that it was a married couple arguing at the breakfast table was demeaning to Royal.
And the NY Times reporter did not report on the jobs additions being proposed by Royal and Sarkozy s refusal to own up to his previous job cut statements.
She was accurate on the debate over handicapped children; but; tended to treat Royal as a shrill and not a serious person. She failed to report that Royal sponsored legislation to protect these students; and Sarkozy suppressed the legislation.
Typical NY Times....shame on the NY Times international department and reporting.
Also; in the area health care, Royal challenged Sarkozy who had called for people to pay more for drugs and health care in general. He avoided the question and merely said he supports everyone being healthy. He sounded like Bush. Royal made it clear that she supporters more jobs in the health system.
The one fear remaining in progressive minds is that Royal may sound good, but she may end up like Mitterand. But, others say, having had that experience, will make it easier to deal with President Royal;
Mike Tolochko in Paris