And you are arguing with fallacies and emotion. Asking broad question to bring emotion without actually backing that up factually. Straw manning the others argument by reducing it to dislike of physical appearance, or simply directed stupidity. And then making vague assertions that they are "missing the big picture".
Please, friend, instead of attacking the man you should attack the argument. Give us the why to all of these assertions. What is the bigger picture? What actually could go wrong? Argue with facts please. Let's not turn this into a flame war
I agree my tone is inappropriate. I just can't help it, when it's about completely missing the big picture, blaming the wrong persons, and falling into fascist-like tactics and traps.
Here's a copy paste of my other comments, I hope it gives some elements of answer:
1. Just google Melenchon and Bolivarian alliance. Melenchon dreams of making France be part of an alliance with Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, to name a few, with Iran and Russia as observer members. Sounds like he loves "democracy". He also had some crazy outbursts, screaming things like, "I AM THE REPUBLIC", on camera, that would have ended any other politician career. But he gets a pass, somehow.
2. In February 2022, Zemour, MLP and Mélenchon were all supporting Putin, his stance against the "evil US", saying that Putin would never invade Ukraine, that it was all US propaganda being spoon-fed to Europe. Then the invasion happened. Then they blamed the invasion on US, of course, and questioned the reports of war crimes, and justified Russia invasion by saying it was defending against "NATO aggression". But then, when Russia started to loose, they became "pacifists", saying NATO was prolonging the war by helping Ukraine...
If they were Russian assets, they wouldn't behave much differently, would they?
Same smell on both sides of the political spectrum. Who would have thought? Crazy, right? Like, imagine if far-right Hitler made a secret pact with the communist Soviet Union. Sounds familiar?
Please, friend, instead of attacking the man you should attack the argument. Give us the why to all of these assertions. What is the bigger picture? What actually could go wrong? Argue with facts please. Let's not turn this into a flame war