France vs. US elections for dummies: Sarkozy 2007 compared to Bush 2004 and Bush 2000

[MattMarriott]

Sarkozy / Royal 2007 compared to Bush / Kerry 2004 and Bush / Gore 2000

How difficult was it to fulfill the agenda for these three key elections? Comparing how Sarkozy was elected President of France in the french presidential elections 2007 with each of the Bush victories, gives the answer...

Same as Bush vs. Kerry 2004 - acceptance of voting machines
The introduction of voting machines in the French Presidential elections 2007, served one of two main purposes of its introduction in the US elections 2004:
- have the candidate who was supposed to lose, acknowledge that the elections were fair, i.e.pave the way to have next time votes counted exclusively by machines.

Difference to Bush 2004 - president not decided by the software
But in France 2007, even if in the first round the machines served to count less votes for the anti-EU platform, unlike in the US 2004 elections, the machines were not necessary to elect the candidate who had to win.
That's why its introduction was limited to count only 5 pct of the votes in France. (1)

Same as Bush 2000 - packaged as "nationalist", no need to fraud
The illuminati didn't need voting machines to elect the right candidate because they knew they could use in France 2007 the same trick used with Bush in the 2000 elections: selling the only "alternative" to face the most important problem, the loss of national identity with the "natives" facing the prospect of becoming the minority of the active population in the near future, due to the "open borders" policies.
A couple of sentences was all the packaging the illuminati needed to sell Sarkozy as the man who would solve the problem of the french "banlieue", or in other words, the fact that in 2011 the muslims will be the majority of the population under 30 years age.
An example of a sheep's reaction to this illuminati theater:

Nicolas Sarkozy in quotes
"'I want an integrated Europe, in other words, a Europe that has borders ... Turkey is in Asia Minor."
Turkey will never join the EU....

Like Bush 2004, Sarkozy was the candidate who had to win
Bush was the candidate who had to win in 2004, since Kerry was not the right actor for the role required by the tasks ahead: continuing the war in Iraq, completing the transition to the terror state and continue to reduce the population to "working poor".

If the muslim population in France would be already large enough to prevent Sarkozy from winning, then the software would do the job for him, like it did for Bush in 2004.
In fact for Sarkozy's first task, Segolene Royal would fit more the profile: completing the destruction of what is left from national independence in France (not much...). But since this task is nearly done, it's not decisive for the profile of the right candidate.

His profile fits much better than Royal the second task, the KEY task he has ahead, the reason why Sarkozy was the candidate who had to win 2007 like Bush was 2004: to complete the destruction of the social benefits and of the salaries of the french, by brutally increasing the pace.
A subject for which he was not even forced to play completely theater, like in the "open borders" issue...

Notes
(1)France 2007 elections: Voting machines decide French President first time ever
http://voting-machines.blogspot.com/...-machines.html

[Kaiser]

Originally Posted by MattMarriott

His profile fits much better than Royal the second task, the KEY task he has ahead, the reason why Sarkozy was the candidate who had to win 2007 like Bush was 2004: to complete the destruction of the social benefits and of the salaries of the french, by brutally increasing the pace.
A subject for which he was not even forced to play completely theater, like in the "open borders" issue...

Right. But he told it his voters that he would finish the job. The French accepted it. Otherwise Germans would already emigrate to France...