[update below] [2nd update below] [3rd update below]
It was a big ouf de soulagement at 8pm last night, when the two 2nd round qualifiers were projected on the TV screen, based on exit polls and the count from sample polling stations that had closed an hour earlier. I was confident through the day that Emmanuel Macron would make it but got a little nervous as 8pm approached. I will offer no deep analysis here—for that, see the hot takes by Arthur Goldhammer and John Judis—just a few takeaways and random thoughts. Voilà.
Random thought 1: The 2nd round will take place on May 7th and, in the interval, there will be a campaign and debate (on May 3rd), but the outcome is a foregone conclusion: Macron is going to win. Sure, there is a statistical possibility—10%, 20%, whatever—that Marine Le Pen could pull it off but, objectively speaking, she has no chance. The IPSOS exit poll last night has Macron beating Le Pen 62-38, i.e. by 24 points. The spread will likely narrow over the next two weeks—maybe even into the low teens—but not by enough to make it a horse race. As for the transfer of votes from the losing candidates, here are IPSOS’s numbers
Half of François Fillon’s voters, the majority of Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s, and the great majority of Benoît Hamon’s will vote for Macron—not because they are enamored with him but to block Marine. As Hamon put it in his concession speech last night, between a “political adversary” and an “enemy of the republic,” the choice is clear. A third of Fillon’s voters say they will vote for Marine but most Macron-allergic JLM and Hamon supporters will abstain or nullify their ballots.
Despite these hard numbers, there are sure to be click-bait articles in the Anglo-American media on a possible Le Pen surprise. On this, Princeton University political scientist Andrew Moravcsik had a pertinent comment on Facebook last night:
As predicted, the French held firm. This is an election that, barring death or calamity, Le Pen cannot win. This is not “within the margin of error” stuff like Trump or Brexit; she is down almost 2:1 in the second round. This supports my ranting over the past months about the incredible waste of journalistic time writing (and therefore spoon feeding us to read) about worst-case scenarios in France. If we had a Euro for every article globally talking about how well Le Pen was doing, with a sentence in paragraph 20 adding, “Oh, by the way, she cannot win the second round against any of the three others,” we could put a significant dent in global poverty. Typical of the press’s tendency to highlight the sensational, focus on irrelevancies, and, in the process, misleadingly talk down Europe.
As for the specious Trump/Brexit parallel, I have been pushing back against this for weeks. But if one doesn’t want to listen to me, take it from Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight, who informed his readers last night that “Marine Le Pen is in a much deeper hole than Trump ever was.” Je n’ai plus rien à dire sur ce sujet.
Random thought 2: Related to the above, French polling institutes got it right. So much for speculation on possible “herding“—and from the very same Nate Silver. There were no real surprises, except perhaps for Hamon’s lower than expected score. And the five to six point drop in MLP’s score over the past six weeks was real (for the official national results, go here). Several polling institutes, including IPSOS, had speculated on a drop in participation—with abstention possibly reaching, or even surpassing, 30%—but this finally did not happen. The participation rate was 77.7%—one-and-a-half points lower than 2012 but in the normal range for presidential 1st rounds.
Random thought 3: One of the many reasons why Marine LP has no chance of winning on May 7th is because she has no allies. The Front National has never had allies. And without allies, it is impossible for right-wing populist candidates to win national elections. One of the academic specialists of the subject—it was Cas Mudde or Jan-Werner Müller—wrote recently that populists or fascists have only been able to come to power electorally in a coalition—explicit or tacit—with a sizable mainstream conservative party, or by taking over, absorbing, or being the candidate of such a party (e.g. Trump in the US, Erdoğan in Turkey, Modi in India). If there’s a cordon sanitaire around a radical right-wing populist party, that party will remain in the political ghetto indefinitely (e.g. Geert Wilders in the Netherlands). Last night every tenor of the LR party without exception, and led by Fillon, endorsed Macron. LR will simply not deal with the FN and on any level. Nicolas Dupont-Aignan said that he would make his intentions known later but he represents only himself.
Random thought 4. Emmanuel Macron’s imminent propulsion to the summit of the French state is quite amazing when one thinks about it. As one likely knows by now, almost no one had heard of him before he was appointed minister of the economy in 2014. Serious presidential candidates in France are not supposed to come out of nowhere. This is the kind of thing that happens in America, e.g. Jimmy Carter in 1976, not France. In 1992 a leading French political scientist—who had taught in the US and spoke perfect English—scoffed to me about Bill Clinton’s nomination, thinking it ridiculous that a governor from an obscure state like Arkansas could go straight to the White House; he snorted that it would be like the president of the Conseil Régional of the Limousin or Poitou-Charentes trying to be Président de la République. C’est pas possible! In the past, the upper tier of the French political class rejuvenated at a glacial pace, or so it seemed. The stable of credible presidential candidates in the 1990s was about the same as in the 1980s, or even the ’70s. Things evolved with Ségolène Royal in 2007 but even she was a known personality then, who had been around for a while. How France has changed. It’s becoming even more Americanized than America…
American University of Paris professor Oleg Kobtzeff had a Facebook comment last night on Macron that I like:
Rien de nouveau dans le phénomène Macron. C’est un remake de Lecanuet en 1965 ou de Giscard en 1974, mais avec l’air intello (légèrement) de gauche et à la fois cadre dynamique comme… JJSS — un Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber mais qui va réussir. Mélenchon à 19%? C’est le retour des communistes à la tête de la gauche comme du temps de Maurice Thorez, Waldek-Rochet ou Jacques Duclos.
Mélenchon is, in point of fact, not a communist but one gets the analogy.
Random thought 5: As for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, he revealed his abject ignominiousness in his surly address last night at 10:00, in implicitly equating Le Pen and Macron, and refusing to endorse the latter. He claimed that he had no right to take a position without consulting with the 450,000 members of La France Insoumise, as he is merely their obedient servant and it is up to them. So this Fidel-Chávez wannabe will submit to the masses, who will reveal their choice via internet tomorrow. What leadership. Even JLM’s allies in the comatose Front de Gauche, e.g. the PCF’s Pierre Laurent and Clémentine Autain of Ensemble, have, in calling for a massive vote to bar the route to Le Pen, backhandedly endorsed Macron. Quel connard, Mélenchon.
Random thought 6: The last three legislative elections, which immediately followed the presidential, have been afterthoughts, as it was a foregone conclusion that the party of the victor in May would win a majority in the national assembly in June. Not this time. There will be five/six-way races in most constituencies, with candidates of En Marche!, FN, LR-UDI, PS-EELV, and FI/FDG (running together or separately). The number of triangulaires is sure to be high and with the outcome up in the air. EM! should, in principle, have the momentum in the wake in Macron’s victory but many of its candidates will be rank unknowns and the historic parties of government—LR-UDI and the PS—will throw everything they have into electing a sizable bloc of deputies, to oblige President Macron to deal with him—even enter into a coalition government—and for their own survival. In other words, the legislative elections—on June 11th and 18th—will be as important as the presidential. And they’ll be wide open. More on this at a later date.
À la prochaine.
UPDATE: Demographer Hervé Le Bras and France Info (via Art Goldhammer) have provided excellent electoral maps here and here. Le Bras’s analysis is, as usual, most interesting.
2nd UPDATE: The following academic specialists of France have postmortem analyses of the 1st round: Hugo Drochon (Cambridge), Emile Chabal (Edinburgh), Mabel Berezin (Cornell), Yascha Mounk (Harvard), David A. Bell (Princeton), and Harold James (Princeton). The latter three focus in particular on Emmanuel Macron. See also the interview with Gaël Brustier—who issues from the left/republican wing of the PS—on Macron.
3rd UPDATE: The Financial Times’s Janan Ganesh has an intriguing column, “Macron shows how political talent can trump the zeitgeist.” The lede: “For liberals the way back to power can happen in a flash with a class act.”
Nate Silver was absolutely right: there was massive herding towards the actual results which polling institutes predicted perfectly. Yet us polling institutes methods are superior. The reason: they don’t have the money or the technical means to do quotas.
I still have in my mind a conversation with a French diplomat in early 2016 when I was arguing that brexit and trump had excellent chances of winning and why we should not pay much attention to british or us polling institutes because their techniques were quite poor and fraught with huge uncertainty.
Yes indeed, all this is true. But today’s editorial in Le Monde made me shiver. In 2002, there were demonstrations in the street, we were horrified to discover JMLP facing Chirac. Unacceptable ! Shameful ! The repulsive vote was spectacular : 82,21% vs 17,79%.
Today everybody seems reassured and rather satisfied. Back to business as usual. Macron is a sure win. “Circulez il n’y a rien à voir”. It’ll be a piece of cake. 60% vs 40%. Well, that ain’t cool ! I won’t be satisfied with a 60-40 verdict.
Today, too many people toy with the idea of “ni-ni”. The various Ciottistes and the “happy family” cathos of “Sens commun” and even worse or the worst, the obscene attitude of JLM, seen as a naked looser, the fiery orator “de gauche” makes me wanna puke !
One last thing, @bernard, regarding the FN and MLP, too many references to the NSDAP or to the “Nuit des longs couteaux” (do you seriously expect Marion to physically liquidate Philippot in 2018 ?), imo confuse the issue. They appear over dramatic, they can’t be taken seriously because they are not accurate. History must be learned for sure but it doesn’t repeat itself mechanistically, beware of deceptive similarities. The situation in France in 2017 has NOTHING in common with the situation of Germany in 1933, nor Italy in 1925. We must not confuse the modern populism(s) born from the negative effects of the globalization with the “old” fascism. This weakens our arguments dealing with people subject to the influence of MLP or JLM and if we don’t understand why they are under the influence, if we don’t deal properly with them, if we don’t oppose convincing arguments and not just hurl anathemas against them, we let them sink deeper and deeper towards the extremes.
I don’t wan’t to be happy in 2022 because whoever shall be elected “dans un fauteuil” against Marion Marechal Le Pen 55-45.
Massilian: You are absolutely correct that France in 2017 has nothing in common with 1933 Germany/1925 Italy etc, and that we must not mix up today’s populism with yesterday’s fascism. But still… had you been with me at Marine LP’s Paris rally on the 17th and heard her 1 hour 40 minute diatribe, it would have sent a chill through your spine and perhaps other parts of your body. Her father circa 1972 couldn’t have said it better.
Borrowing from Roger Daltrey, meet the new FN, same as the old FN…
massilian, the rise of fascist barbie is my greatest fear of the future in france. i hope more people will come around to your justifiable outrage. the far left refuseniks are part of why we have trump. i fear in the age of social media, whose algorithms push people to the extremes because that’s where the engagement is, we should be lucky to get 60-40.
@Alexandra. I fully understand what you mean talking about fascist Barbie, just as I speak of the blonde witch, but at the same time, I know this is a mistake we make, a comfortable elitist tongue in cheek habit, a socialy coded way of speaking of serious matters in an easy second degree but derogatory way.
In the socialy safe small world of downtown Macronian Paris, MLP barely reaches 5% but just 5 miles away from the bobos and their expensive electric bicycles, she reaches and exceeds 30%. We ignore these people. We treat them all as one unpleasant flock of dumb fucking fascists. Which they aren’t. I have no figure to back me up, but I reasonably doubt that the 7,4 millions MLP voters were lured and seduced by social media algorithms….
In Marseille (second largest city in France)… Melenchon came first with 24,84%, MLP second with : 23,62%, next Macron, 20,45% (Fillon : 19,8%).
So, if this was the national result, Macron wouldn’t make it to the second round.
Please note that in Marseille MLP+JLM = 48,46% of voters, i.e. against Europe, against globalization, against, the “elites” etc. Add Dupont-Aignan, Poutou, Lassalle and Artaud and you reach 53,7 %.
massilian, the rare times i’m outside of my urban bobo bubble IRL, you can be sure i am not calling any le pen the blonde anything. but in present company i reserve my right to snark on that fatuous cretin all the live long day!
Massilian,
I was joking, but only just. The niece will purge the party in 2018. On a more serious note, the moment we stop treating the FN like the fascist party it is will be the moment where part of the conservatives ally with it – some are already openly yearning for this, sens commun and the right wingers. Of course the LR party will split as a result, but then the FN will truly be the dominant party on the right. Further the issue of “immigration” – this is of course a false flag for racism plain and simple – is, in every survey, the key issue of FN voters. This is an issue that is key to democracy.
Joke understood. The moment we know what to do, how to talk and what to say to those who visceraly and emotionally (but not yet violently) despise and reject “the system”, we shall get rid of both extremes. This is a long debate. Far too long for a comment on Arun’s blog.
“…the issue of “immigration” – this is of course a false flag for racism plain and simple”, well yes, but not just that, it is also and mostly the scapegoat for some justified fears (not all fears) and many too real miseries. Believe me, we have no idea how to address the issue. I am fighting against my uncontrolled racist reactions and islamophobia every day. When I lived in Meudon (92) it never entered my mind that I would live such experiences.
“Believe me, we have no idea how to address the issue. I am fighting against my uncontrolled racist reactions and islamophobia every day.”
massilian, you just showed with this line that you are already finding ways to address the issue. and i am quite sure you’re not alone.
But what accounts for the US vs. France difference if we make the equation of Trump and Le Pen? Here Trump coopted the Republican Party in a highly polarized strong two-party system. What more would you add?
BTW, before anyone brings up the whole Macron is a Rothschilds banker thing it should be pointed out that UKIP leader and MLP ally Nigel Farage was also a banker at one time in fact working for none other than the London branches of Credit Lyonnais(around the time it went belly up) and later French bank Natexis(more popularly known by its parent company Banque Populaire).
Also remember that the late Henri Emmanuelli, who was one of the chefs de file of the PS’s left wing, was a banker at Rothschilds before getting into politics. I don’t recall that having been held against him.
but that was before 2008, when bankers who suffered very little in the crisis most deservedly became PNG.
@rich k
one very important difference is that Hollande is not a black man, contrary to Obama. Arun disagrees with me on this, but I remain convinced that the single most important determinant of vote in the US election was race.
A second very important difference is that the European Union matters very much to the French, and in fact many of them are nostalgic of the times when France directed Europe politically (it was the EEC then and it was the 1960s and 70s). So now some are dissatisfied with France not being the überboss of the EU any more of course, a bit like the Brits miss their empire, but that does not go to the extreme of wanting to leave the EU. That’s why you hear many, even on the hard left, telling you “we’ll just tell the Germans where to pee”, but in actual fact it’s not just that they are daydreaming and have visions of French diktats, it’s also that they know perfectly well that it’s complete bullshit. We have an expression for this kind of crazy talk, it’s “conversation d’après boire” (poorly translated as drunken talk).
race and gender, bernard. let’s not forget the outsized role that misogyny played in the US election and continues to in the aftermath.
You are right, sorry
Brexit was driven more by insular “Little Englander” isolationism than by any kind of nostalgia for the Empire.
Places heavily touched by the Empire: the metropole of London, the port cities of Liverpool and Bristol, the Scotland which provided the brains of the Empire, and the industrial capital of Manchester, all voted quite strongly to remain in the EU.
Britons don’t pine for empire — they just want to be left alone.
the single most determinant force in the US election was clearly party. 90% of voters cast their ballot for their party’s candidate. Not sure how you factor race into that on a single-election basis.
Farage wasn’t a banker. He was a commodities trader on the metals exchange. His City background is an important reason why he also wasn’t an MLP ally. They had a couple of awkward courtship dances, but the socialism part of her national socialism was never part of his makeup (she always had far more time for Geert Wilders). She recently spoke positively about Brexit, for obvious reasons. But Farage was far from the most important part of the Brexit equation. He was only ever an MEP, which in terms of political seriousness ranks way below even Congressman. He stood several times for Parliament over the years, losing each time. UKIP currently has its natural number of MPs at Westminster: zero.
Brexit is now a Tory party project, God help us.
And Macron’s background as a banker is relevant, in the effect it will have on his programme, on the staffing of his government and on the opposition that will inevitably gather on his left flank following his victory in May.
@bert
I am not sure the average person would understand the difference between being a “metal trader” for a bank and a “banker” for a bank.
Here’s some reporting about Macron’s time in finance. It’s really a story about a successful exercise in pantouflage at a young age.
Farage joined the City straight from school. He did an undemanding job without distinction. He spent most afternoons in the pub. He left with the manner, worldview and wardrobe of a bent bookie.
I’m sure you’re right that there are people who can’t tell them apart.
People who hear the word ‘bank’ and stop thinking.
And that’s fine. Not a crime to be poorly informed.
@bert
So your implying that Farage was a more successful banker? You want a banker “without” distinction for President or a banker “with” distinction for President?
I will add though that Farage just endorsed Le Pen on Fox News so the idea that ALL bankers support Macron is false as Farage clearly supports Le Pen.
BTW, I worked in banking myself so I know people like Macron AND Farage. According to what I found out about Farage he got fired a few times in the city and part of me imagines the person firing him to be someone like Macron.
I will also add there is a successful example of a banker politician and that is John Key of New Zealand who won election three times. Key is probably like 75% Macron and 25% Faragian as the picture below show in terms of the Farage element.
Although I don’t know, I can see Farage with the beer bottle but wearing a cooking apron with a dress shirt underneast is shall we say very Macronian. I believe someone I read that John Key’s daughter lives in Paris will have to see if she has crossed paths with the Macron folks.
chez art, our merry band of commenters are beginning to discuss WTF MLP was thinking by stepping away from the FN for this election. arun, if you have any thoughts on this i know we’d all love to read them.
Alexandra: I don’t think MLP’s temporary congé from the FN presidency means a thing. I attach no importance to it. Cf. Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev in the 2008-12 period. The FN is a Le Pen family enterprise and will remain so as long it continues to be called the FN.
The voting map of round one screams ! It is blinding and real scary because it’ll take decades to reverse that trend and this is not a top priority in the Kid’s program, keeping the big reasonably healthy-wealthy cities happy is number one because they are allready more or less working allright. Too bad for the loosers (“les crevards”) of the periphery.
center vs periphery is THE fight of the 21st century under globalism. macron is deficient in the common touch. he’s going to have to make some of this up with his cabinet and he’s going to have to learn fast on the job if we don’t want MLP 2022 with a vengeance. if the economy turns around, great, but if those gains aren’t felt in emptying out villages and former industrial zones, he’s toast.
The economy has actually already turned around during late 2016 and unemployment is now likely to decline in both 2017 and 2018. This actually Hollande’s tragedy: he needed 7 years, not 5.
yes indeed, bernard. and if it holds, macron will get to take credit, should he in fact be elected. but how the economy’s uptick is spread around… it takes more than just generalized growth to do something with the bereft periphery. he’s going to have to have some good plans outside of uber and digital economy startups, which naturally favor cities.
I believe he will be elected, but he cannot botch his Whirlpool /Amiens visit.This is his hometown and people were already rankled /hurt he didn’t visit at all not did he concern himself with them. This was supposedly be what happened when workers were reasonable, took pay cuts and ‘sacrificed ‘, their factory stayed open and they were shown as an example (vs. People from Goodyear who were radical and violent ‘which led to the factory closing’ ). Now the narrative has become a symbol of ‘brutal globalization ‘, the term MLP has been using since Sunday evening: whether they’re radical or sacrifice, all workers are screwed by globalization.
MLP saw the opening and arrived ‘by surprise ‘, promising to protect workers whom EM hadn’t planned to see. She portrayed ‘eating petite fours ‘ at the chamber of commerce.
So, of course EM had to go meet the picketing workers, and of course he was not greeted warmly. I have nothing else but I’m hoping he’ll have more than bromide for the workers or it’ll play disastrously on the news and in popular opinion.
I had left home (and the radio) as EM was meeting the workers and the last I’d heard was the booing. So I was rather tense at the thought the second round may be slipping due to this precise moment.
This article captures the tension well, but it contains the ending to the story.