HOUSE OVERSIGHT 026643 i important to appreciate, I think, because if one believed that the direction of causality is the opposite, that Trump causes other changes that would have been avoidable if Ms Clinton had won, one would come up with the wrong conclusions on what to do to stop the global shift in sentiment. (2) The Economist had a special edition last week on the rising nationalism in the developed West, as if it's an unfounded, random and sinister event that needs to be suppressed by all means necessary. For various reasons, the political left is in decline in the developed West. Look at the UK's Labour Party and the US' Democratic Party. In France, only 1 out of 20 people approves of Hollande's performance. (3) The Presidential race in France is now between the Centre Right (Mr Fillon from the Republican Party) and the Far Right (Ms Le Pen from National Front). The pendulum in Europe, in my view, will swing to the right, and possibly overshoot, as pendulums tend to do... which is not good, but an unavoidable consequence of the pendulum having overshot to the left in the past... In any case, with the Republican primary being out of the way, the campaign will start in earnest, with the first round of the Presidential elections to take place in April and the second round in May. FWIW, Mr Fillon looks like a stronger candidate than Mr Sarkozy to challenge Ms Le Pen. France, under Mr Fillon, could very well enter a period of economic reform and rejuvenation, I am guessing. In short, Mr Fillon's victory last weekend could be a major positive for France, I think. The trouble with macroeconomics. The rebellion against the establishment has also begun in the nerdy field of macro economics, led in part by Prof Paul Romer of the Stern School of Business. He, of course, has made enemies in the field with his view — a view I share: 'For more than three decades, macroeconomics has gone backwards. The treatment of identification now is no more