Of course you haven't.Seems I'm on my own here but I've not taken to him at all.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Love that he's got 2 step children older than he is.I knew France had picked a winner when I read his biography on Wikipedia.
No, but that's the whole point of a united Europe, which we've decided to leaveEasy to look tough though, but does France really have any power against the big 2?.
Corbyn = StevieG?Macron = the MBappe of world politics
Trudeau is on much weaker footing within canada than the other two. Most canadians who dont love him actually loathe him. Not the case with the other two.Merkel and Trudeau are right up there. It's a pity that the UK can join the party.
Because he was an investment banker? Like Georges Pompidou who has headed the Rothschild bank?It's a sad state of affairs when a former investment banker is supposedly the saviour of the world, if this was 9 years ago Macron wouldn't even have gotten close to power. Macron is just another villain battling other villains, there are no heroes.
You're not alone.Seems I'm on my own here but I've not taken to him at all.
I really believe investment banker at the height of the financial crisis in 2008 would not have been elected. I don't know enough about Georges Pompidou to comment on the argument you're making.Because he was an investment banker? Like Georges Pompidou who has headed the Rothschild bank?
You appear ignorant and close-minded (at least to myself) when you judge someone's character and intentions so unequivocally based solely on his choice of profession. I don't want to fight or insult you, just giving some feedback.It's a sad state of affairs when a former investment banker is supposedly the saviour of the world, if this was 9 years ago Macron wouldn't even have gotten close to power. Macron is just another villain battling other villains, there are no heroes.
So your argument is conjonctural and not linked to the actual profession? Because my point is that France already elected an investment banker as president.I really believe investment banker at the height of the financial crisis in 2008 would not have been elected. I don't know enough about Georges Pompidou to comment on the argument you're making.
It's hard to judge a politicians character as some are very good at marketing themselves. I think Macron will be another Tony Blair, a bold, fresh, young face that ultimately leaves a disappointing legacy. I think he represents the interests of big transnational banks and businesses over those of the common people.You appear ignorant and close-minded (at least to myself) when you judge someone's character and intentions so unequivocally based solely on his choice of profession. I don't want to fight or insult you, just giving some feedback.
Linked to his profession within the time I was referring to, at that time the investment bankers were the villains like Trump and Putin are right now. It's all within context, I just find it a little funny that we praise a man who just under a decade ago we would have lambasted. He just seems a lot more palatable because of who the alternatives are.So your argument is conjonctural and not linked to the actual profession? Because my point is that France already elected an investment banker as president.
I am pleasantly surprised. Some actual reality inserted amongst the nauseating sycophancy going on in here.It's a sad state of affairs when a former investment banker is supposedly the saviour of the world, if this was 9 years ago Macron wouldn't even have gotten close to power. Macron is just another villain battling other villains, there are no heroes.
Good post and eloquent responseIt's hard to judge a politicians character as some are very good at marketing themselves. I think Macron will be another Tony Blair, a bold, fresh, young face that ultimately leaves a disappointing legacy. I think he represents the interests of big transnational banks and businesses over those of the common people.
Linked to his profession within the time I was referring to, at that time the investment bankers were the villains like Trump and Putin are right now. It's all within context, I just find it a little funny that we praise a man who just under a decade ago we would have lambasted. He just seems a lot more palatable because of who the alternatives are.
What reality? The one factual element in the comment was that Macron used to be an investment banker. That's a very unsubstantial foundation to build anything on. You both have your opinions and they may very well be right but don't present them as reality without anything to back it up.I am pleasantly surprised. Some actual reality inserted amongst the nauseating sycophancy going on in here.
"Uha look, look he won thumb war with trump"
This is exactly why politics is nothing more than a meaningless perennial Vote for different heads with the same agenda
Which is exactly my problem, not only you put traders and investors in the same bag but for a reason that in my opinion can't be justified, you create an hyphotical that serves no purpose. Since 9 years ago none of the candidates he faced would have been elected either.Linked to his profession within the time I was referring to, at that time the investment bankers were the villains like Trump and Putin are right now. It's all within context, I just find it a little funny that we praise a man who just under a decade ago we would have lambasted. He just seems a lot more palatable because of who the alternatives are.
Nail on head.It's a sad state of affairs when a former investment banker is supposedly the saviour of the world, if this was 9 years ago Macron wouldn't even have gotten close to power. Macron is just another villain battling other villains, there are no heroes.
Why is his former profession remotely relevant here ?I really believe investment banker at the height of the financial crisis in 2008 would not have been elected. I don't know enough about Georges Pompidou to comment on the argument you're making.
Was just about to post this myself. Ridiculous comments in here.So as an investment banker myself, I should just presume that all that are not (so most of you) are more moral than me without knowing anything about their lives and vice-versa?
So as an investment banker myself, I should just presume that all that are not (so most of you) are more moral than me without knowing anything about their lives and vice-versa?
I always felt that there was something fishy about you two.Was just about to post this myself. Ridiculous comments in here.