It looks like French President Nicolas Sarkozy is likely to win a second term. This isn't really because he's a great president, the French don't even think he's a good president but he's still better than the alternative:

Barring scandal or economic collapse, he seems likely to win. The forecast is premature, but it can be made because he faces no real opposition and he wields direct or indirect power over much of the media.

The Socialists, who ruled for much of the 1980s and 90s, have sunk into a coma. Despite Sarkozy's poor ratings, the polls show that the majority do not believe that the leftwing party would do a better job at running the country. According to Bernard Henri-Lévy, the grandee penseur, the party is already dead. Manuel Valls, one of its young Turks, wants to change its name. The party's most plausible présidentiable is Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a baron whom Sarkozy deftly exiled to Washington as head of the International Monetary Fund. Sarkozy's recruitment of leftwing luminaries to his government may turn out to have been the coup de grace for the Socialists.

Too bad Manuel Valls was caught on tape talking about how the city of Évry didn't have enough white people.

Anyway, this is interesting and lately the state of the G.O.P. has largely been forgotten with healthcare taking a front and center stage. I wonder if the reverse is what's happening here. Even if President Obama fails in healthcare is the G.O.P. in a mess similar to the leftwing in France? Probably. Obama fails on healthcare the G.O.P. still has an abyssmal record and Obama couldn't do what FDR, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Carter and Clinton couldn't do. That still doesn't look so bad.

Also, isn't it interesting that one of the most viable Republican candidates for president was promptly incorporated into the Obama Administraton like Strauss-Kahn and shipped off to China? Presidential minds may think alike sometimes.

I'm with this anonymous source in Chris Cilizza's Morning Fix post today. The Specter townhall debate that's been floating along the airwaves is great news for Specter. By taking heat from the protesters Specter looks like a Democrat (which is really important for his reelection campaign). It's not something Joe Sestak wants but instead of going critical Sestak could go positive and spin it in his favor. According to the source:

One Democratic consultant not affiliated with either candidate said that Sestak's silence regarding Specter's raucous town hall could undermine that argument, however.

"I think Sestak could've shown he is putting party ahead of politics by somehow coming to Specter's defense," said the source who has worked extensively in the state. "It seemed like a good opportunity to reinforce the Sestak message that he's for party and principle ahead of personal gain."

But Sestak didn't do that. Instead he responded in a watereddown email:

Dear Ds4,

I am a public servant. I work for the people of my District, and after next year's election look forward to working for the people of Pennsylvania.

I cherish Town Halls, I really do -- it's the fullest expression of our democracy at work. I hosted a Town Hall on health care reform in my District the day after the Congressional recess began, and another last night in Philadelphia.

This upcoming election really is about change ... about putting principle over politics and a reminder that public service is a noble cause ... in the service of others.

I disagree with Arlen Specter's statement at his Lebanon, PA Town Hall on health care reform, when he said "I could be somewhere else. I don't get any extra pay. I don't have any requirement to be here".

We do have a responsibility "to be here" ... for others, not ourselves, which is why Pennsylvania needs a change. Please support that change.

Please contribute now: Contribute

Warmly,

Joe Sestak

P.S. Please continue to spread the word about our growing campaign by forwarding this e-mail onto your family and friends asking them to get involved by making a contribution to bring needed change to Pennsylvania.

Weak sauce.

I think these are particularly strange results, no?

According to Rasmussen, "Among voters who favor the congressional health care plan, Specter leads 55% to 26%. However, among those who oppose the plan, Sestak leads 61% to 25%." It's unclear how this divide emerged, but since support for reform among Democrats in the state is around 70 percent, don't be surprised if you see both candidates try to stake out the reformer position on health care.

Strange because Sestak and Specter both support a public option (although I'm skeptical of whether Specter really supports it but for the moment lets take things at face value). My best guess is that these days Specter is perceived as a Washington-insider since he has the support of the White House and Sestak's rebellious campaign implies to some that he's radical in his policies and doesn't fall lock step with the regular White House Democratic circle. Or maybe it's just a bad poll.
Of course, the truth makes this all rather ironic since Specter is the real radical and Sestak is more the Obama Administration darling but I suppose it's ironic too that in this situation the White House is supporting Specter.