Eric Zemmour has put issues of immigration and Islam at the center of his campaign, has showed support of Vladimir Putin and, after having promoted an economic program with rather liberal undertones, has tried to advance social measures. He has adopted a radical and ideological stance, whose violence has, on the one hand, allowed him to shape an electorate based on ideas. On the other hand, however, this has prevented him from attracting a voter base beyond the 17% of former voters for Fillon, and 11% for Marine Le Pen, respectively in 2017. Paradoxically, while many of the National Rally’s voters chose to support Zemmour, his presence reinforced Marine Le Pen’s campaign of "dediabolisation", which encouraged voters from the Republican right and former abstainers from 2017. She showed a remarkable ability to re-brand herself, particularly in the context of the Ukraine war, making the public forget her closeness to Vladimir Putin by focusing her speeches on the issues of purchasing power and the consequences of anti-Russian sanctions for the daily lives of the French. This is, however, a mask. Marine Le Pen’s program is still anti-immigration and against the EU, despite claiming to no longer want to leave the eurozone. If she became President of the Republic, a crisis would emerge in Brussels that would destabilize the entire European Union.
There has been a lot of discussion about the "useful vote". How relevant is this concept, and did it actually play a role in the outcome of the election? Will the "barrage vote" in the second round, called for by four candidates who were rejected in the first round, suffice in slowing down the progression of the extreme right?
There has been a clear presence of the "useful vote". Left-wing voters went to Mélenchon to try and avoid a "Macron-Le Pen" rematch. Voters of the extreme right wanted to have at least one of their representatives rival Macron. With Zemmour’s decline in the polls, Marine Le Pen remained the only reliable option. Finally, a certain number of Macron’s voters may have thought that he managed the war in Ukraine well (34% of voters cited this as the reason for voting, according to Elabe) and that, because of him, France has maintained a place in the world (which motivated 32% of his voters).
The second round promises to be a close competition. The calls of the candidates’ are not automatically heeded by their voters. Emmanuel Macron will have to fight, though we know that he enjoys this kind of challenge. He will have to convince Mélenchon’s voter base to give him their support. According to various surveys, this voter base is divided into three thirds: one third for Macron, one third for Marine Le Pen (while Mélenchon has asked that no votes be cast for her), and one third for abstention. Macron will undoubtedly make declarations in favor of the left and turn his program more "green". Yet will this be enough? Nothing is less certain, as there is a part of the radical left that strongly dislikes him. Emmanuel Macron will also try to appeal to abstentionists, especially young people, though they often have a low voting turnout. On the other hand, the anti-far-right response remains strong in France. Meanwhile, as Marine Le Pen seems softer on the surface, she continues to suffer from a lack of credibility that would be essential to overcome in order to win the presidency. Finally, Emmanuel Macron will undoubtedly put Europe at the center of his campaign, hammering home the point that France can only be great in and with Europe, and hereby putting his anti-Europe opponent in a difficult position.
Copyright: Eric Feferberg / POOL / AFP
Skip to main content
Add new comment