Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Deceptive Mailings, False Billboards: Voting Disinformation Is Not Just Online

      by

      A survey by election researchers argues that efforts to confuse or scare away prospective voters disproportionately target minority groups in battleground states.When it comes to elections, disinformation is not just a problem online.Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin argue in a new report that disinformation targeting communities of color in three battleground states circulated as often through traditional sources of information, complicating efforts to fight it.The misleading information was included in mailings and campaign advertisements in newspapers, radio, television and even billboards. Those efforts are more likely to reach voters in those communities than targeted disinformation campaigns on the internet.“Online disinformation is just one small piece of the puzzle,” said Rachel Goodman of Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan organization that commissioned the report. “There are many other failures in the information ecosystem that allow disinformation about elections to thrive.”False or misleading information about registering and voting is so pervasive, the researchers said, that it amounts to what they call “structural disinformation.” It affects not only elections but also other issues, like health care, creating information gaps that those propagating disinformation can exploit.The report argued that poor dissemination of changes in voting rules “creates openings for targeted disinformation and innocent misunderstandings which will keep members of that community from exercising their rights.”The report, based on surveys of election activists in Arizona, Georgia and Wisconsin, also cited direct mailings sent to Black voters in Milwaukee containing false information about voting, though they were made to look like official documents.Billboards in Wisconsin wrongly warned that people with felony convictions could not vote after completing their sentences. In rural parts of Arizona, Native American voters had trouble providing proof of residence because they lived in places without United States Postal Service addresses.Changes to state election laws, like the one in Georgia that Republican lawmakers enacted after Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s presidential victory in 2020, are likely to compound the problem.“Structural disinformation, particularly structural disinformation related to the right to vote, has a disproportionate impact on communities of color and other historically marginalized communities,” the report said.The findings suggested that efforts to rebut disinformation should not be limited to online services. The researchers said the most effective measures involved direct contact with prospective voters — in person, at events or through direct mailings. Those efforts are expensive and labor intensive, however.The cumulative effect of disinformation and partisan controversy over elections has been to create distrust and demoralization, dampening turnout and eroding confidence in the government more broadly.“The low turnout rates and things that we see happening now in their states and their communities are at least in large part due to the ways in which over the course of time disinformation has made their communities skeptical of the American democratic system,” said one of the researchers, Samuel Woolley, the program director of propaganda research at the Center for Media Engagement at the University of Texas at Austin. More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Jair Bolsonaro plantea dudas sobre el proceso electoral de Brasil. El ejército lo respalda

      by

      Previo a las elecciones hay un escenario riesgoso: por un lado, el presidente y líderes militares sostienen que el voto se presta al fraude. Por otro, jueces, diplomáticos extranjeros y periodistas advierten que Bolsonaro prepara el terreno para intentar un golpe de Estado.RÍO DE JANEIRO — Durante meses, el presidente de Brasil, Jair Bolsonaro, ha estado constantemente a la zaga en las encuestas previas a la crucial elección presidencial brasileña. Y durante meses ha cuestionado constantemente los sistemas de votación de su país, advirtiendo que si pierde las elecciones de octubre, probablemente se debería al robo de votos.Esas afirmaciones fueron consideradas en gran medida como habladurías. Pero ahora Bolsonaro ha conseguido un nuevo aliado en su lucha contra el proceso electoral: los militares del país.Los líderes de las fuerzas armadas de Brasil han comenzado repentinamente a plantear dudas similares sobre la integridad de las elecciones, a pesar de las escasas pruebas de fraude en el pasado, lo que ha aumentado la tensión, ya elevada, sobre la estabilidad de la mayor democracia de América Latina y ha sacudido a un país que sufrió una dictadura militar de 1964 a 1985.Los líderes militares han identificado para los funcionarios electorales lo que, según ellos, son algunas vulnerabilidades en los sistemas de votación. Se les dio un lugar en un comité de transparencia que los funcionarios electorales crearon para disminuir los temores que Bolsonaro había despertado sobre la votación. Y Bolsonaro, un capitán retirado del ejército que llenó su gabinete de generales, ha sugerido que el día de las elecciones, los militares deberían realizar su propio recuento paralelo de los votos.Bolsonaro, quien ha hablado bien de la dictadura militar, también ha querido dejar claro que los militares responden ante él.Los funcionarios electorales “invitaron a las fuerzas armadas a participar en el proceso electoral”, dijo Bolsonaro hace poco, en alusión al comité de transparencia. “¿Olvidaron que el jefe supremo de las fuerzas armadas se llama Jair Messias Bolsonaro?”.Almir Garnier Santos, el comandante de la Marina de Brasil, dijo a los periodistas el mes pasado que respaldaba la opinión de Bolsonaro. “El presidente de la república es mi jefe, es mi comandante, tiene derecho a decir lo que quiera”, dijo.A poco más de cuatro meses de una de las votaciones más importantes de América Latina en años, se está formando un conflicto muy riesgoso. Por un lado, el presidente, algunos líderes militares y muchos votantes de la derecha sostienen que las elecciones se prestan al fraude. Por otro, políticos, jueces, diplomáticos extranjeros y periodistas hacen sonar la alarma de que Bolsonaro está preparando el terreno para un intento de golpe de Estado.Bolsonaro ha aumentado la tensión, al decir que su preocupación por la integridad de las elecciones puede llevarlo a cuestionar el resultado. “Ha surgido una nueva clase de pillos que quieren robar nuestra libertad”, dijo en un discurso este mes. “Iremos a la guerra si es necesario”.Activistas con una manta que dice en portugués “Dictadura nunca más” en un mitin en Brasilia en marzo durante una protesta motivada por lo que los organizadores dijeron es un aumento de las violaciones a los derechos humanos en la presidencia de Jair Bolsonaro.Eraldo Peres/Associated PressEdson Fachin, un juez del Supremo Tribunal Federal y el principal funcionario electoral del país, dijo en una entrevista que las afirmaciones de que la elección sería insegura son infundadas y peligrosas. “Estos problemas son creados artificialmente por quienes quieren destruir la democracia brasileña”, dijo. “Lo que está en juego en Brasil no es solo una máquina de votación electrónica. Lo que está en juego es conservar la democracia”.Bolsonaro y los militares dicen que solamente intentan salvaguardar las elecciones. “Por el amor de Dios, nadie está realizando actos antidemocráticos”, dijo Bolsonaro recientemente. “Una elección limpia, transparente y segura es una cuestión de seguridad nacional. Nadie quiere tener dudas cuando las elecciones hayan terminado”.El Ministerio de Defensa de Brasil dijo en un comunicado que “las fuerzas armadas brasileñas actúan en estricta obediencia a la ley y la Constitución y se dirigen a defender la patria, garantizar los poderes constitucionales y, a través de cualquiera de ellos, de la ley y el orden”.Las tácticas de Bolsonaro parecen adaptadas del manual del expresidente Donald Trump, y tanto Trump como sus aliados han trabajado para apoyar las interpelaciones de fraude de Bolsonaro. Los dos hombres son reflejo de un retroceso democrático más amplio que se está produciendo en todo el mundo.Los disturbios del año pasado en el Capitolio de Estados Unidos han demostrado que los traspasos pacíficos de poder ya no están garantizados ni siquiera en las democracias maduras. En Brasil, donde las instituciones democráticas son mucho más jóvenes, las incursiones de los militares en las elecciones están agudizando los temores.Garnier Santos, el comandante de la Marina, declaró al periódico brasileño O Povo que “como comandante de la Marina, quiero que los brasileños estén seguros de que su voto contará”, y añadió: “Cuanta más transparencia, cuanta más auditoría, mejor para Brasil”.Un informe de la policía federal brasileña detalló cómo dos generales del gabinete de Bolsonaro, incluido su asesor de seguridad nacional, habían intentado durante años ayudar a Bolsonaro a descubrir pruebas de fraude electoral.Y el viernes, el ministro de Defensa de Brasil, Paulo Sérgio Nogueira, envió una misiva de 21 puntos a los funcionarios electorales, criticándolos por no tomar en serio las inquietudes de los militares sobre la seguridad electoral. “Las fuerzas armadas no se sienten debidamente reconocidas”, dijo.Hasta ahora, los comentarios de Bolsonaro han ido más allá que los de los militares. En abril, repitió la falsedad de que los funcionarios cuentan los votos en una “sala secreta”. Luego sugirió que los datos de las votaciones deberían suministrarse a una sala “donde las fuerzas armadas también tengan una computadora para contar los votos”. Los militares no han comentado públicamente esta idea.Dado que el apoyo de los militares podría ser crítico para un golpe de Estado, una pregunta popular en los círculos políticos es: si Bolsonaro cuestiona el resultado de las elecciones, ¿cómo reaccionarían los 340.000 miembros de las fuerzas armadas?Bolsonaro y Trump son aliados cercanos; ambos han cuestionado las elecciones de sus respectivos países. Cenaron en marzo de 2020 en Mar-a-Lago en Palm Beach, Florida.T.J. Kirkpatrick para The New York Times“En Estados Unidos, los militares y la policía respetaron la ley, defendieron la Constitución”, dijo Mauricio Santoro, profesor de relaciones internacionales en la Universidad Estatal de Río de Janeiro, refiriéndose a las afirmaciones de Trump de que le habían robado la elección. “No estoy seguro de que vaya a ocurrir lo mismo aquí”.Funcionarios militares y políticos refutan cualquier noción de que los militares respaldarían un golpe de Estado. “Caería. No tendría ningún apoyo”, dijo el general Maynard Santa Rosa, quien perteneció al ejército brasileño durante 49 años y sirvió en el gabinete de Bolsonaro. “Y creo que él lo sabe”.Sérgio Etchegoyen, un general retirado del ejército cercano a los actuales líderes militares, también calificó de alarmistas las preocupaciones sobre un golpe de Estado. “Podemos pensar que es malo que el presidente cuestione las boletas”, dijo. “Pero es mucho peor si cada cinco minutos pensamos que la democracia está en riesgo”.Algunos funcionarios estadounidenses están más preocupados por la reacción del aproximadamente medio millón de policías en todo Brasil porque generalmente son menos profesionales y apoyan más a Bolsonaro que los militares, según un funcionario estadounidense que habló con la condición de permanecer en el anonimato para discutir conversaciones privadas.Cualquier afirmación sobre una elección robada podría enfrentarse a un público escéptico, a menos de que la contienda se haga más competida. Una encuesta realizada a finales de mayo entre 2556 brasileños indicó que el 48 por ciento apoyaba al expresidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, frente al 27 por ciento de Bolsonaro. (Si ningún candidato obtiene la mitad de los votos, los dos primeros clasificados irán a una segunda vuelta el 30 de octubre).Esa misma encuesta mostró que el 24 por ciento de los encuestados no confía en las máquinas de votación de Brasil, frente al 17 por ciento en marzo. El 55 por ciento de los encuestados dijo que creía que la elección era vulnerable al fraude, incluyendo el 81 por ciento de los partidarios de Bolsonaro.En los 37 años de democracia moderna en Brasil, ningún presidente ha estado tan cerca de los militares como Bolsonaro, quien fue paracaidista del ejército.Como diputado, colgó en su despacho retratos de los líderes de la dictadura militar brasileña. Como presidente, triplicó el número de militares en puestos civiles en el gobierno federal hasta casi 1100. Su vicepresidente también es un general retirado.El año pasado, mientras intensificaba sus críticas al sistema electoral del país, destituyó al ministro de Defensa y a los tres principales comandantes militares, colocando a partidarios en su lugar.El nuevo ministro de Defensa no tardó en opinar sobre el proceso electoral, apoyando la propuesta de Bolsonaro de utilizar boletas impresas, además de máquinas de votación, lo que facilitaría los recuentos. Brasil es uno de los pocos países que depende totalmente en las máquinas de votación electrónicas: 577.125.Aunque Bolsonaro y sus aliados admiten que carecen de pruebas de fraude en el pasado, señalan una serie de problemas: algunas irregularidades percibidas en los resultados de la votación, un hackeo en 2018 de las computadoras del tribunal electoral, que no tiene conexión con las máquinas de votación, y la desestimación general de las preocupaciones por parte de los funcionarios electorales.Una urna electrónica en la sede del tribunal electoral de Brasil el mes pasado, mientras los analistas probaban el sistema. Eraldo Peres/Associated PressDiego Aranha, un experto en computación brasileño que ha intentado hackear las máquinas con fines de investigación, dijo que la falta de copias de seguridad en papel dificulta la verificación de los resultados, pero que el sistema en general era seguro.El Supremo Tribunal Federal de Brasil rechazó finalmente el uso de boletas impresas, alegando problemas de privacidad.El año pasado, cuando los funcionarios electorales crearon la “comisión de transparencia electoral”, invitaron a formar parte de ella a un almirante con un título en computación. En su lugar, el ministro de Defensa de Brasil envió a un general que dirige el comando de defensa cibernética del ejército.El representante del ejército envió entonces cuatro cartas a los funcionarios electorales con preguntas detalladas sobre el proceso de votación, así como algunos cambios recomendados.Preguntó sobre los sellos de seguridad de las máquinas, el código informático que las sustenta y la tecnología biométrica utilizada para verificar a los votantes. Los funcionarios electorales dijeron el sábado que aceptarían algunas de las pequeñas recomendaciones técnicas y estudiarían otras para las próximas elecciones, pero que otras sugerencias no entendían el sistema.En medio de las idas y venidas, el expresidente del Tribunal Superior Electoral, Luís Roberto Barroso, dijo a los periodistas que los líderes militares estaban “siendo guiados para atacar el proceso electoral brasileño”, una afirmación que Nogueira, el ministro de Defensa, calificó de “irresponsable”.El tribunal electoral también invitó a funcionarios europeos a observar la elección, pero rescindió la invitación después de que el gobierno de Bolsonaro se opusiera. En su lugar, el partido político de Bolsonaro está tratando de que una empresa externa audite los sistemas de votación antes de las elecciones.Bolsonaro y Paulo Sérgio Nogueira, el ministro de Defensa, en una ceremonia el pasado agosto en Brasilia.Andressa Anholete/Getty ImagesFachin, quien ahora preside el tribunal electoral, dijo que Bolsonaro era bienvenido a realizar su propia revisión, pero añadió que los funcionarios ya han probado las máquinas. “Esto es más o menos como forzar la cerradura de una puerta abierta”, dijo.El gobierno de Joe Biden ha advertido a Bolsonaro que debe respetar el proceso democrático. El jueves, en la Cumbre de las Américas en Los Ángeles, el presidente Biden se reunió con Bolsonaro por primera vez. Sentado junto a Biden, Bolsonaro dijo que eventualmente dejaría el cargo de “una manera democrática”, añadiendo que las elecciones de octubre deben ser “limpias, confiables y auditables”.Scott Hamilton, el principal diplomático de Estados Unidos en Río de Janeiro hasta el año pasado, escribió en el periódico brasileño O Globo que la “intención de Bolsonaro es clara y peligrosa: socavar la fe del público y preparar el terreno para negarse a aceptar los resultados”.Bolsonaro insiste en que no está tratando de erosionar los cimientos democráticos de su país, sino que simplemente está asegurando una votación precisa.“¿Cómo quiero un golpe si ya soy presidente?”, dijo este mes. “En las repúblicas bananeras, vemos a los líderes conspirando para mantenerse en el poder, cooptando partes del gobierno para defraudar las elecciones. Aquí es exactamente lo contrario”.André Spigariol More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Efforts to Form a New Government in Iraq Descend Into Chaos

      by

      The powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who controls the largest bloc in Parliament, has directed dozens of lawmakers loyal to him to resign.Seven months of efforts to form a new government in Iraq were in turmoil on Monday, a day after the powerful Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr directed members of Parliament who are loyal to him to resign from the seats they won in an October election.Mr. Sadr, who has become one of the biggest political forces in Iraq since emerging in 2003, has no formal role but commands the allegiance of the single largest bloc in the 329-seat Parliament. The 73 lawmakers of his movement submitted their resignations on Sunday after the collapse of months of negotiations by Mr. Sadr to form a coalition government with Sunni and Kurdish partners.On Monday, Mr. Sadr’s candidate for prime minister, Jaafar al-Sadr, a cousin of the Shiite cleric and currently the Iraqi ambassador to London, said in a post on Twitter that he was withdrawing his candidacy.The talks on forming a government broke down amid disagreements over who would be president. Under Iraq’s parliamentary system, established after a U.S.-led coalition toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003, the president nominates a prime minister and cabinet ministers who must then be approved by Parliament to take up their posts. The mercurial Muqtada al-Sadr suggested that in abandoning the negotiations, he was sacrificing his bloc’s hard-won gains in the elections last year so that a government could be formed.“This step is considered a sacrifice for the homeland and the people to save them from an unknown fate,” Mr. Sadr said in a statement. “If the survival of the Sadrist bloc is an obstacle to the formation of the government, then all representatives of the bloc are ready to resign from Parliament.”His announcement culminated months of political paralysis that underscored the dysfunction of Iraq’s political system and the fragmentation of the multiple Shiite Muslim political blocs. Those inter-Shiite divisions have supplanted sectarian tensions between Sunni and Shiite groups in past years as a main source of Iraqi instability.Lawmakers from the Sadr political bloc attending the first session of the new Parliament in Baghdad in January. The resignations came after the collapse of months of talks to form a new government.Ali Abdul Hassan/Associated PressMr. Sadr, the son of a revered Shiite cleric assassinated during Saddam Hussein’s regime, formed a militia in 2003 to fight American forces after the U.S. invasion of Iraq turned into an occupation. He also battled Iraqi government forces in Baghdad and in the southern city of Basra before disbanding his militia, called the Mahdi Army.It was not immediately clear whether the resignations were merely a negotiating tactic on Mr. Sadr’s part or a real break with parliamentary politics. But his withdrawal and a related announcement that he was closing most Sadrist offices around the country raised fears that he could replace political negotiations with destabilizing street protests — something he has used before as a lever of pressure.“With the Sadrists apparently out of the actual political process, their history is that when they are not engaged in politics, they’re out in the streets,” said Feisal al-Istrabadi, director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East at Indiana University. “The question is — are they in the formal electoral politics or are they out in the street with their guns?”Mr. Sadr, who presents himself as an Iraqi nationalist, is considered the Shiite political leader least tied to Iran. His withdrawal opens the door for other, Iran-backed parties, to make headway in forming a government.Analysts described the political turmoil kindled by Mr. Sadr’s move as one of the most significant and potentially destabilizing developments since Iraq’s Shiite-led governments were elected after Saddam Hussein was toppled. Although Shiite Muslims are a majority in Iraq, Mr. Hussein, who was executed in 2006, relied predominantly on Sunni Arabs to maintain his power.Mr. Sadr’s main Shiite rivals are tied to Iran-backed militias that were formed in 2014 to fight the Islamic State and are now officially part of Iraqi security forces — though they are only nominally under government control.“This is a major challenge to the post-2003 Shiite order because this is primarily an intra-Shiite political fight,” said Randa Slim, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Middle East Institute. “Both sides are heavily armed now and both sides have shown in the past willingness to do whatever it takes to preserve the system.Another analyst, Zaid al-Ali, author of “The Struggle for Iraq’s Future,” said the divisions were a sign of Iran’s weakening influence on Iraqi politics. Tehran has tried to prevent splits among Iraqi Shiite groups that could dilute Shiite influence in a multisectarian, multiethnic Iraq or that could allow any one Shiite group to become too powerful.“There is a huge amount of division in the Shiite political spectrum, and Iran hasn’t been able to resolve that at all,” he said.Abbas Kadhim, a Washington-based senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said that even if the move by Mr. Sadr led to fresh elections, that would not fundamentally change the persistent problems in a political system that, since 2003, has relied on dividing up power among the various ethnic and sectarian groupings.The resignations themselves will not prompt elections. Instead, the candidates who received the next-highest number of votes in October would replace the Sadr loyalists in Parliament, according to legal scholars.Constitutional experts said that the parliamentary resignations were effective after being accepted by the speaker, the Sunni politician Mohammed al-Halboosi, and did not require parliamentary approval.A pro-Sadr media organization, Al Jidar, warned Mr. Sadr’s rivals on Monday that they should not consider the resignations something that renders the Sadrist movement ineffectual.“They forget that the gates of hell will be open in front of them and that the Sadrist movement is able to bring down any government they form within only a few hours,” it said in a Telegram post. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Pro-Macron Forces Expected to Prevail but Face Left-Wing Challenge

      by

      The French president’s party and its centrist allies were neck and neck with a left-wing alliance in France’s first round of parliamentary elections.PARIS — After a first round of voting in French parliamentary elections marked by the lowest turnout on record, President Emmanuel Macron’s party and its allies looked likely on Sunday to retain a majority even as a newly formed coalition of left-wing parties mounted a strong challenge, according to preliminary projections.Just 47.5 percent of the electorate voted, according to the projections based on initial results, a reflection of widespread disillusionment with politics and a feeling that nothing will change whatever the country’s political alignment.The projections, which are generally accurate, showed pro-Macron parties and the left each getting around 25 to 26 percent of the vote. However, the projections also suggested that after the second round of voting Mr. Macron’s centrist alliance would win between 255 and 310 seats in the 577-member National Assembly.The left-wing alliance known by the acronym NUPES, for Nouvelle Union Populaire Écologique et Sociale, would have 150 to 210 seats.The second round of the elections — for candidates who did not win outright this time — will be held next Sunday.Unlike many of its European neighbors, France awards seats to candidates who get the most ballots in each district, rather than by proportion of the total vote across the country, meaning that percentage vote shares are an imperfect measure of what the National Assembly will ultimately look like.President Emmanuel Macron of France after casting his ballot in parliamentary elections on Sunday in the seaside town of Le Touquet, in northern France. Ludovic Marin/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesIf Mr. Macron’s party and its allies muster an absolute majority of seats — 289 — he will have relatively free rein to enact his legislative agenda. That seemed plausible but by no means certain after the first round.There has been no honeymoon for Mr. Macron, who was decisively re-elected in April. In the end, he won more because enough voters were determined to keep his extreme-right opponent, Marine Le Pen, out than because there was any wave of enthusiasm for him. Energy and food bills have been rising, and the president has at times seemed curiously disengaged from France’s citizens and their concerns.The result in Sunday’s elections represented a remarkable achievement for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the fiery leftist leader who has benefited from the broad anxiety in French society over inflation. He managed to forge a movement uniting his own France Unbowed Party with the Socialists, Greens and Communists, after the left proved hopelessly divided during the presidential election and was largely sidelined.Emmanuel Macron’s Second Term as President of FranceWith the reelection of Emmanuel Macron, French voters favored his promise of stability  over the temptation of an extremist lurch.Cabinet: President Macron’s new government combines continuity with change, as newcomers at the foreign and education ministries join first-term veterans.New Prime Minister: Élisabeth Borne, the minister of labor who previously was in charge of the environment, will be the second woman to hold the post in France.Overcoming Tragedy: Ms. Borne’s father, a World War II resistance member and a Holocaust survivor, killed himself when she was 11, an experience she has rarely discussed in public.Rape Allegations: Two women have accused Damien Abad, the newly appointed minister for solidarity and for disabled people, of raping them. Mr. Abad has denied the allegations.However, Mr. Mélenchon, who had wanted to turn the vote into a plebiscite that would force Mr. Macron to make him prime minister, appeared to have failed in that aim.Among other measures, Mr. Mélenchon wants to reduce the retirement age to 60 from 62, raise the minimum wage, phase out the nuclear plants that provide most of France’s energy and bend European Union rules to allow higher debt and deficits.A poster for the NUPES coalition, led by Jean-Luc Mélenchon, in Paris, on Sunday. Mr. Mélenchon is pictured on the left in the poster. Christophe Petit Tesson/EPA, via ShutterstockMr. Mélenchon, in a televised address on Sunday, said that the left-wing alliance had “magnificently” succeeded in its first test, “campaigning together, shoulder to shoulder, and convincing.” He insisted, against the evidence, that Mr. Macron’s party had lost its dominance.“For the first time in the Fifth Republic, a newly elected president has been unable to muster a majority in the following legislative election,” he said, an apparent reference to the equal vote shares on Sunday.The final composition of the National Assembly will become clear only after the second round of voting. Runoffs are usually held when no candidate gets more than half of the vote in the first round. They are contested between the top two vote-getters in a district, although under certain conditions they can feature three or even four candidates. Whoever wins the most votes in the runoff wins the race.If Mr. Macron’s party and its allies lose their absolute majority next Sunday, he will be forced to reach out to lawmakers from opposing parties, most probably the center-right Republicans, for support on certain bills. The projection showed the Republicans and their allies claiming 40 to 60 seats.The president, whose party and its allies currently hold 345 seats, named a government only last month, led by Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne. Her impact up to now seems to have been minimal.Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne of France voting on Sunday in Calvados, in the country’s north.Sameer Al-Doumy/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSeveral of Mr. Macron’s cabinet members are running in the elections, including Ms. Borne. On Sunday none appeared to have been knocked out of the election. Their races were being closely watched, as a loss by one or several of them next week would be a rebuke of Mr. Macron, who has warned that those who are not elected will be obliged to leave his cabinet.Ms. Borne said in a televised address on Sunday that Mr. Macron’s party and its allies were the “only political force capable of obtaining a majority.”“Faced with the situation in the world, and war on Europe’s doorstep, we cannot take the risk of instability and of approximations,” she said. “Faced with extremes, we will yield nothing, not on one side nor the other.”If the turnout — the lowest on record for the first round of legislative elections — was linked to broad dissatisfaction with politics, it might also have reflected Mr. Macron’s highly personalized top-down style during his first term, which has often made France’s Parliament seem marginal or even irrelevant. He has now promised to govern in a more consultative way — but then he promised that in 2017, only to embrace the enormous powers of the presidency with apparent relish.Mr. Macron is the first incumbent to be re-elected since Jacques Chirac in 2002. After stumbling during the presidential campaign, he recovered to defeat Ms. Le Pen by a margin of 17 percentage points.Since then, Ms. Le Pen’s anti-immigrant National Rally party has had trouble connecting with voters and, after the first round of voting, appeared likely to end up with no more than a few dozen seats.On Sunday, Ms. Le Pen, who was poised to keep her seat in Parliament, called on her supporters to abstain from voting in the event of a runoff between a candidate from the left-wing alliance and one from Mr. Macron’s coalition, to prevent Mr. Macron from gaining an absolute majority.“It’s important to not let Mr. Macron get an absolute majority,” she said. “If you let him, we risk entering a tunnel over the next five years, a lightless tunnel.”Éric Zemmour, a far-right pundit who briefly shook up the presidential election with anti-immigrant stances even more extreme than Ms. Le Pen’s, had entered the parliamentary race in the southern Var area of France, but on Sunday he was knocked out.Marine Le Pen after voting in Henin Beaumont, in northern France.Stephanie Lecocq/EPA, via ShutterstockForeign policy is largely determined by the president, but Mr. Macron needs Parliament for his domestic agenda. This includes his contentious vow to raise the legal age of retirement progressively to 65 from 62. He would like to see a bill enacted within 12 months to that effect.More pressing is a government bill to prop up French purchasing power, which has taken a hit from rising inflation. The government wants Parliament to vote over the summer on the bill, which includes subsidies for poorer households to buy essential food products.The National Assembly is the more powerful house of Parliament, with greater leeway to legislate and challenge the executive than the Senate. It usually has the final word if the two houses disagree on a bill, and it is the only house that can topple a French cabinet with a no-confidence vote.The party that Mr. Macron founded, La République en Marche, swept to victory in 2017 with a wave of political newcomers as candidates. For these elections, La République en Marche is the largest force in a coalition called Ensemble, which includes some of Mr. Macron’s longtime centrist allies and some newer ones.The left-wing alliance ran a vigorous campaign that saturated airwaves and that focused heavily on Mr. Mélenchon. With typical bravado, and equally typical hyperbole, he promised that French voters could “elect” him prime minister by sweeping in a left-wing majority in Parliament for the first time in a decade. The prime minister is in fact appointed by the president.But Mr. Macron is a formidable opponent, as several elections have now shown. He has proved masterful in occupying the entire middle ground in French politics, eclipsing both the center-left Socialists and the center-right Republicans.Whatever the temptation of the extremes for French voters angered over the economic situation and immigration, the center retains a strong appeal, and the country has resisted the kind of blow-up-the-system political lurch evident in America’s election of Donald J. Trump and Britain’s choice of Brexit.Constant Méheut More