A chara – Stephen Collins writes that, "populists can be defeated by determined mainstream politicians advocating coherent policies" ("FF will pay a heavy price if it decides to ally itself with SF", Opinion & Analysis, February 12th).
In saying this, he points to the examples of France and the United States.
However, he betrays a dated and fundamental misunderstanding of contemporary electoral politics.
The strongest determinant factor in the results of the elections he alludes to is the candidates who offered a difference.
In 2017, Emmanuel Macron did not run for president as a representative of one of the two historically dominant forces in French politics; instead he formed his own party encompassing “both right and left” and swept to victory. The traditional parties of the socialists and the republicans who essentially governed the entirety of the Fifth Republic did not even progress to the second round.
In 2016 in the US, the continuity candidate in Hillary Clinton lost to an insurgent promising difference. In 2020, this same insurgent promising continuity lost to a candidate promising the largest tilt left since the New Deal, and who then gathered the most presidential votes in the history of US elections.
In his advocating for continuity politics, your columnist is advancing the greatest risk of succumbing to populism, a refusal to listen to what the electorate is saying. – Is mise,
PHILIP CROWE,
Donnybrook,
Dublin 4.
Sir, – Stephen Collins is mystified by the willingness of Fianna Fáil TDs to entertain the idea of coalition with Sinn Féin.
The alternative is life-long commitment to coalition with Fine Gael. Not exactly an optimal negotiating strategy in future government formation talks. Fine Gael has become far too “confident” about Fianna Fáil’s “supply” over the past 10 years. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL DEASY,
Carrigart,
Co Donegal.