Polls and Public Opinion

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      How Hated Is Macron? It Could Decide the French Election.

      by

      Given the choice between a president they suspect of despising ordinary people and a far-right candidate they detest, many French voters may stay home.LE HAVRE, France — As an ardent supporter of President Emmanuel Macron of France, Nicole Liot was all smiles after seeing him at a recent campaign stop. But she was also worried about the final round of the French election this Sunday. In her lifetime, she had never seen such intense dislike for a president among some French.“There are presidents who weren’t hated like this even though they weren’t saints,” Ms. Liot, 80, said, positing that what has become known as Mr. Macron’s “little phrases” fueled the aversion. “Like when he told someone, ‘You’re searching for a job? Just cross the street and you’ll find one.’”As anti-Macron protesters burned tires and blotted the sky with smoke over the northwestern city of Le Havre, Ms. Liot added, “Maybe people won’t forgive him for these mistakes of language and attitude.”No French president has been the object of such intense dislike among significant segments of the population as Mr. Macron — the result, experts say, of his image as an elitist out of touch with the ordinary French people whose pensions and work protections he has threatened in his efforts to make the economy more investor-friendly.Just how deep that loathing runs will be a critical factor — perhaps even the decisive one — in the election against his far-right rival, Marine Le Pen. Recent polls give Mr. Macron a lead of around 10 percentage points — wider than at some points in the campaign, but only a third of his winning margin five years ago.“Macron and the hatred he arouses is unprecedented,” said Nicolas Domenach, a veteran political journalist who has covered the past five French presidents and is the co-author of “Macron: Why So Much Hatred?,” a recently published book. “It stems from a particular alignment. He is the president of the rich and the president of disdain.”Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate, at a meeting in Avignon.Daniel Cole/Associated PressNo doubt Mr. Macron could end up winning re-election despite his unpopularity. Even if a groundswell of voters does not turn out to vote for him, what matters for him is that enough voters come out to vote against her — to build a “dam” against the far right.It is a long-established strategy to erect a so-called “Republican front” against a political force — her party, the National Rally, formerly the National Front — that is seen as a threat to France’s democratic foundations.But given the choice between a president they find disdainful and a far-right candidate they find detestable, many French voters may just stay home, or even vote for Ms. Le Pen, tipping the scales in a close election.Every chance she gets, Ms. Le Pen has done her best to remind voters of “these terrible words” — “these words of disdain” — that now stick to Mr. Macron, as she did at a big campaign rally in the southern city of Avignon last week.“They are the words of a power without empathy,” she said as the crowd booed.Both she and Mr. Macron are now vying in the campaign’s closing days for the voters who cast ballots for other candidates in the first round of the presidential election on April 10, on whom the election now hinges.Waiting for Mr. Macron, while smoke from from tires set on fire as part of a protest against the president rose in the distance.James Hill for The New York TimesThe most critical bloc voted for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the veteran leftist who came in a strong third. On the left, many feel betrayed by Mr. Macron’s rightward tilt over the course of his presidency.Ms. Le Pen is trying especially to appeal to voters who feel the same emotions of hate and disdain so often heard among Ms. Le Pen’s core backers — many in Mr. Mélenchon’s camp.Roland Lescure, a lawmaker and spokesman for Mr. Macron’s party, La République en Marche, said he was convinced that “rejection for Marine Le Pen” would prove more potent than the dislike for the president, which he recognized.The rejection was not just of the person of Ms. Le Pen, he said, “but above all of an ideology, of a political history and of a platform, which, when one reads it, is extremely harmful.”But Ms. Le Pen has grown so confident in her widening appeal after taking calculated steps to soften her image that she has even dared seize the term “dam” for herself — beseeching voters six times in her rally to build a “dam against Macron.”The calls for dams on both sides underscored how the final vote boils down to an unpopularity contest: The less-disliked candidate wins.It is especially true in this race, which features the same finalists as in 2017. But if Ms. Le Pen was seen as a bulldozer of far-right ideology back then, in the current campaign she has tried to present a softer, more personable side.Mr. Macron meeting with voters on his way to the Museum of Modern Art André Malraux in Le Havre.James Hill for The New York TimesAnd if Mr. Macron was once seen as a fresh face who inspired many with his promises to change an ossified France, this time he has been cast by his haters as a kind of malign king.A former investment banker, whose tax policies have favored the wealthy, Mr. Macron has been unable to shake off his image as the president of the rich, even after his government provided massive subsidies during the pandemic.His “little phrases” over the years to or about regular folk have cemented that unsympathetic image, creating the kind of political and cultural schism opened by Hillary Clinton’s description of Donald J. Trump’s supporters in 2016 as “deplorables.”It has also not helped Mr. Macron that he barely bothered to campaign initially, absorbed in diplomacy around Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but also as part of a strategy to hold himself out of reach of his opponents.For many French, the approach only reinforced the impression of aloofness from a president who has concentrated powers in his own hands and considered campaigning beneath him.Voting in the first round of the presidential election in the Paris suburb of Trappes. Polls give Mr. Macron around a 10 percentage point lead in the second round.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesAs Mr. Macron finally engages the race, he is now being confronted with the raw emotions that have shaped much of his presidency.What to Know About France’s Presidential ElectionCard 1 of 4Heading to a runoff. More

    • 50 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      A Biden Blood Bath?

      by

      A recent poll truly shocked me.Quinnipiac University found that President Biden’s approval rating had sunk to just 33 percent. You might argue that this was just one poll, but Biden’s approval is down in multiple surveys.As CNN’s Harry Enten pointed out Friday, there were four major national polls released last week, and in three of them — including Quinnipiac — Biden had his lowest showing of his presidency. In the fourth, he was “one point off the lowest.”These are just devastating results on the heels of a historic Supreme Court confirmation and only seven months out from the midterms.When Politico’s Ryan Lizza last week asked Biden pollster John Anzalone how dire the situation had become for Democrats, Anzalone responded in blunt terms, saying that no Democratic consultant would say “that this is anything but a really sour environment for Democrats.”Anzalone, like many Democrats, seems to believe that a major part of the problem is messaging, saying in the interview, “We’re scared of our own shadow on taxes and it … makes no sense.”But what if the issue is not the messaging but the messenger?Poor messaging may contribute to the problem, but I think the problem is more on ground level, a gut level: How do people feel? They feel stuck and angry, they’re tired and overwhelmed, and that energy is being directed at Biden.Biden is a decent man. As a matter of course and tactic, he strikes me as not entirely built for hyperbole and hype, for beating his chest while he boasts. It’s not part of his character. He is sober and straightforward. Many Americans wanted him as an antidote to Donald Trump for precisely this reason.But America has changed its mind and its mood. It wants a show and a showman to distract from its misery. Biden is not that. And he is being punished for not being a huckster.There is an old saying that is some variation of, “People will forget what you said, but they won’t forget how you made them feel.” Biden isn’t constantly tweeting and hamming it up for the cameras — in fact, too often, he has shied away from interviews — and his reticence has left a void of emotional connection to him.I hate that emotional connection plays such an outsize role in our politics, but I also can’t deny that it does. If Americans can’t cheer you, they’ll chide you.Biden’s presidency is far from a failure, but it has been stymied on some big promises that Biden made during the campaign on issues like voting rights and police reform. Lately it feels like, on domestic policy, Biden has moved from the macro to the micro, taking steps that will indeed benefit many Americans, but are too narrowly focused to transform our society or fix the core problems that plague it — trying to recruit more American truckers, focusing on Black maternal health, announcing an emergency waiver to allow higher ethanol blend gasoline to be sold this summer.All the while, two major perennial issues are resurgent: crime and the economy. The fear of crime and the pinch of inflation aren’t abstractions, or complicated foreign policy, or perks for special interests. They creep into every door and lurk under every kitchen table.And on the other side, Republicans are playing heavily into culture war issues like challenging the teaching of Black history and the history of white supremacy in schools, as well as restricting discussions of L.G.B.T. issues and campaigning against trans women and girls competing in sports with other women and girls. And they are using parental rights as the Trojan horse to enact their agenda.Democrats, for their part, have almost ceded the parental rights argument, instead of fighting back and framing these efforts as oppressive and backward. They do not recognize that oppression by conservatives in this country is like an amoeba: simple, primitive, pervasive and highly adaptable. It simply shifts its shape to fit the environment and argument.Republicans are using white parental fear, particularly the fears of white moms, worried about harm coming to their children, to attract suburban white women and get them to the polls. The oppression is a bonus.There was another worrisome sign in the Quinnipiac poll: Biden’s approval rating among people identified as Hispanics was even lower than it was among those identified as white. Pundits have been discussing Biden’s declining numbers among Hispanics for months. In October, FiveThirtyEight pointed out that “there has been a drop in support for Biden among all three racial and ethnic groups we measured, but the drop among Hispanics — from the high 60s to slightly below 50 percent — marks Biden’s most precipitous decline.”The reasons for this drop appear to range from a response to the pandemic to the fact that Hispanics hew conservative on some social issues.But all this taken together — in addition to voter suppression and racial, political gerrymandering — may prove hugely problematic for Democrats and for the administration, unless they can turn things around before Election Day. If not, we could well be looking forward to a Biden blood bath.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion), and Instagram. More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Poses a Test Democracy Is Failing

      by

      Ordinary citizens play a critical role in maintaining democracy. They refuse to re-elect — at least in theory — politicians who abuse their power, break the rules and reject the outcome of elections they lose. How is it, then, that Donald Trump, who has defied these basic presumptions, stands a reasonable chance of winning a second term in 2024?Milan W. Svolik, a political scientist at Yale, anticipated this question in his 2019 paper “Polarization versus Democracy”: “Voters in democracies have at their disposal an essential instrument of democratic self-defense: elections. They can stop politicians with authoritarian ambitions by simply voting them out of office.”What might account for their failure to do so?In sharply polarized electorates, even voters who value democracy will be willing to sacrifice fair democratic competition for the sake of electing politicians who champion their interests. When punishing a leader’s authoritarian tendencies requires voting for a platform, party, or person that his supporters detest, many will find this too high a price to pay.In other words, exacerbated partisan competition “presents aspiring authoritarians with a structural opportunity: They can undermine democracy and get away with it.”Svolik and Matthew H. Graham, a postdoctoral researcher at George Washington University, expand on Svolik’s argument and its applicability to the United States. Supporters of democracy, they contend in their 2020 paper “Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States,” can no longer rely on voters to serve as a roadblock against authoritarianism:We find the U.S. public’s viability as a democratic check to be strikingly limited: only a small fraction of Americans prioritize democratic principles in their electoral choices, and their tendency to do so is decreasing in several measures of polarization, including the strength of partisanship, policy extremism, and candidate platform divergence.Graham and Svolik cite survey data demonstrating that “Americans have a solid understanding of what democracy is and what it is not” and can “correctly distinguish real-world undemocratic practices from those that are consistent with democratic principles.”Despite this awareness, Graham and Svolik continue,only a small fraction of Americans prioritize democratic principles in their electoral choices when doing so goes against their partisan identification or favorite policies. We proposed that this is the consequence of two mechanisms: first, voters are willing to trade off democratic principles for partisan ends and second, voters employ a partisan ‘double standard’ when punishing candidates who violate democratic principles. These tendencies were exacerbated by several types of polarization, including intense partisanship, extreme policy preferences, and divergence in candidate platforms.The authors have calculated that “only 3.5 percent of voters realistically punish violations of democratic principles in one of the world’s oldest democracies.”Graham and Svolik go on:To get a sense of the real-world relevance of this implication, consider that in 2016 only 5.1 percent of U.S. House districts were won by a margin of less than 6.9 percent — the smallest margin that is necessary for violations of democratic principles to be electorally self-defeating. That share of districts was still only 15.2 percent in 2018. Put bluntly, our estimates suggest that in the vast majority of U.S. House districts, a majority-party candidate could openly violate one of the democratic principles we examined and nonetheless get away with it.Graham and Svolik tested adherence to democratic principles by asking respondents whether they would vote for a candidate who “supported a redistricting plan that gives own party 10 extra seats despite a decline in the polls”; whether a governor of one’s own party should “rule by executive order if legislators don’t cooperate”; whether a governor should “ignore unfavorable court rulings by opposite-party-appointed judges”; and whether a governor should “prosecute journalists who accuse him of misconduct without revealing sources.”“Put simply,” Graham and Svolik write, “polarization undermines the public’s ability to serve as a democratic check.”Graham and Svolik’s analysis challenges the canonical view of the role of the average voter as the enforcer of adherence to democratic principles. In their 1963 classic, “The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations,” Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba, political scientists at Stanford and Harvard, wrote:The inactivity of the ordinary man and his inability to influence decisions help provide the power that governmental elites need if they are to make decisions. But this maximizes only one of the contradictory goals of a democratic system. The power of elites must be kept in check. The citizen’s opposite role, as an active and influential enforcer of the responsiveness of elites, is maintained by his strong commitment to the norm of active citizenship, as well as by his perception that he can be an influential citizen.The democratic citizen, Almond and Verba continue, “is called on to pursue contradictory goals: he must be active, yet passive; involved, yet not too involved; influential, yet deferential.”Trump and his allies in the Republican Party have correctly been the focus of those seeking to identify the instigators of political disruption. As Barton Gellman wrote in his December 2021 article in The Atlantic, “Trump’s Next Coup Has Already Begun”:For more than a year now, with tacit and explicit support from their party’s national leaders, state Republican operatives have been building an apparatus of election theft. Elected officials in Arizona, Texas, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and other states have studied Donald Trump’s crusade to overturn the 2020 election. They have noted the points of failure and have taken concrete steps to avoid failure next time.In the most recent issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, five political scientists, Suzanne Mettler, Robert C. Lieberman, Jamila Michener, Thomas B. Pepinsky and Kenneth M. Roberts, write:For decades, political scientists have observed key threats to democracy that have been on the rise: political polarization; conflict — incited by racism and nativism — over the boundaries of American citizenship and the civic status of those in different social groups; soaring economic inequality; and executive aggrandizement. The confluence of these threats fueled the candidacy of Donald Trump, whose election was a symptom, not a cause, of American democratic dysfunction.As president, the authors continue, “Trump exacerbated all four threats, imperiling the pillars of democracy, including free and fair elections, the rule of law, the legitimacy of opposition, and the integrity of rights.”In an earlier article, in the September 2020 issue of Foreign Affairs, “The Fragile Republic: American Democracy Has Never Faced So Many Threats All at Once,” Lieberman and Mettler argue thatfor the first time in its history, the United States faces all four threats at the same time. It is this unprecedented confluence — more than the rise to power of any particular leader — that lies behind the contemporary crisis of American democracy. The threats have grown deeply entrenched, and they will likely persist and wreak havoc for some time to come.Trump, the authors argue,has ruthlessly exploited these widening divisions to deflect attention from his administration’s poor response to the pandemic and to attack those he perceives as his personal or political enemies. Chaotic elections that have occurred during the pandemic, in Wisconsin and Georgia, for example, have underscored the heightened risk to U.S. democracy that the threats pose today. The situation is dire.How much of a danger do Trump and his allies continue to represent? I asked Pepinsky how likely anti-democratic politicians are to use democratic elections to achieve their ends. He replied by email:It is very possible — not sure how likely, but entirely possible. The G.O.P.’s rhetoric is clear about what it believes a G.O.P.-led government should be able to implement, and the party has proven repeatedly unwilling to sanction its most visible political figure for plainly illegal and undemocratic behavior. And the G.O.P. machine at the state level is mobilizing to stack electoral bureaucracies with conspiracy-curious lickspittles who would love nothing more than to refuse to certify elections won by Democrats. The threat is real.Lieberman, in turn, stressed in an email the key role of white discontent as a factor in the crisis American democracy faces:The perception among many white Americans that their status at the top of the political hierarchy is eroding is certainly a critical factor fueling the crisis of American democracy today. This is a recurring pattern in American history: when proponents of expanded and more diverse democracy gain power, those who have a stake in old hierarchies and patterns of exclusion are often willing to defy democratic norms and practices in order to stay in power.But, Lieberman continued,It’s not necessarily inevitable that those defenders of old hierarchies will find refuge in the mainstream of a major political party, which gives their aims credibility and political force. When that has happened, as with the Democrats in the 1880s and 1890s, the result has been disastrous democratic backsliding. But in the 1960s, by contrast, a coalition of northern Democrats and Republicans was able to overcome those antidemocratic forces, at least for a short time.The efforts by Republicans to take over control of elections through state laws giving local legislatures the power to overturn election results — as well as by running candidates for secretary of state who espouse the view that the 2020 election was stolen — are troubling, to say the least.Donald Moynihan, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University — and the author of “Delegitimization, Deconstruction and Control: Undermining the Administrative State” in the current issue of The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science — wrote by email that he is “more worried about declines in democracy driven by formal changes in the law than by events like January 6th.”Moynihan pointed out that at 3:32 a.m. on Jan. 7 — hours after protesters incited by Trump swarmed the U.S. Capitol — a majority of House Republicansvoted not to accept the results of the last election. This represents an astonishing signal by a group of elected officials of their willingness to play procedural hardball to upend democratic outcomes. State legislatures are passing laws that constrain individual rights via democratic means, and also shifting powers in a way that can ensure Republican victories. It’s very possible to envision how newly elected state and local election officials who believe Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election would make decisions where they refuse to certify free and fair elections.It is now possible, Moynihan continued,to envisage some state legislatures using fraudulent fraud claims as an excuse to select a slate of electors consistent with their partisan interests rather than with the actual outcome of their election. This is not the most likely outcome, but it is significantly more likely than it was just a couple of years ago. The confluence of events — a close election in swing states, allegations of fraud, state legislatures stepping in to choose the winner and a Republican majority in Congress endorsing this — is an entirely plausible democratic process to nullify democracy.Partisan polarization has pushed Americans not only into mutually exclusive political parties, but also into two warring civic cultures.In a March 2022 paper, “‘Good Citizens’ in Democratic Hard Times,” Sara Wallace Goodman of the University of California, Irvine, examined the growing disagreement among voters over what the obligations of a good citizen are.Goodman compared voter attitudes on what constitutes “good citizen” norms in 2004 and in 2019. A strikingly high level of agreement between Republicans and Democrats in 2004 had nearly disappeared by 2019, according to her research:Where 15 years prior, the only difference between partisans was in helping others (and the difference was slight), we see in this second (2019) snapshot several items of disagreement. In the United States, Democrats are more likely to value associational life and respecting opinions of others as values of good citizenship. Moreover, the gap between Democrats and Republicans in “helping others” has widened significantly. For Republicans, respondents are significantly more likely to value obeying the law. This portrays a clear erosion of overlapping norms, on almost every item.In his March 2022 article “Moderation, Realignment, or Transformation? Evaluating Three Approaches to America’s Crisis of Democracy,” Lee Drutman, a senior fellow at New America and the author of “Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop,” argues that neither moderation nor realignment is adequate to address current problems in American democracy:Only reforms that fundamentally shake up the political coalitions and electoral incentives can break the escalating two-party doom loop of hyperpartisanship that is destroying the foundations of American democracy.Drutman makes the case that moderation is futile becausein today’s politics, with national identity, racial reckoning, and democracy itself front and center in partisan conflict, it is hard to understand moderation as a middle point when no clear compromise exists on what are increasingly zero-sum issues. This is where the moderation principle falls especially short. If one party or both parties have no interest in moderation or cross-partisan compromise, would-be “moderates” cannot straddle an unbridgeable chasm.What about a realignment in which the Democratic Party regains its majority status more firmly?Drutman writes in his essay:Any future scenario in which Democrats achieve a decisive and sustainable national majority is a future in which the Republican Party is almost certain to be led by the illiberal radicals who have been gaining power within the party for years as small-l liberal Republicans have fled the party. In short, “realignment” in the form of an extended period of Democratic majority rule does not offer a clear solution. It runs up against significant structural obstacles. And the more likely it seems, the more it stands a very good chance of pushing the Republican Party into even more radical insurrectionism.In fact, Drutman’s basic argument is that “there is no feasible solution to the current crisis within the two-party system itself, given the escalating polarization and the extremist trajectory of the Republican Party.”According to Drutman, “this kind of polarization, which involves not just (or not even) policy agreement but instead deep distrust of fellow citizens, is a very typical precursor of democratic decline.” Conversely, “in more proportional systems, out-party hatreds are rarer and tend to only be directed toward extreme parties.”Drutman acknowledges the many roadblocks that face the kind of transformation to a multiparty system he proposes. He argues, however, thatthe only way to make America governable for the foreseeable future is to allow new and more fluid political coalitions. Major electoral reform may seem radical, but the challenges that the American political system faces right now — toxic polarization, a major party that is rapidly embracing illiberalism, widening economic inequalities, and a racial reckoning — are immense and will blow right through straw and sticks. Only a genuine transformation of the structures of American democracy offers a solution.Still, the relentless, insidious and secretive assaults on democracy that now permeate American culture may not be amenable to procedural solution.Gerald J. Postema of the University of North Carolina describes the current embattled climate in his June 2021 essay “Constitutional Norms — Erosion, Sabotage and Response”:The degradation has resulted not from apathy or indifference, but from hostile subversion of democratic institutions and the values that they seek to serve. The attack can be stealthy. Unlike their predecessors, contemporary aspiring authoritarians pay striking attention to the forms of law in their efforts to consolidate and entrench their power. They seek to preserve the constitutional frame while “hollowing out” its substantive content and the constraints on their power that it seeks to impose. They use various devices to achieve their anti-democratic aims. They use constitutional amendments or legislation when they can, mobilizing artificial legislative majorities or manipulating weakened courts. Often, however, the assault is less direct, if no less visible, attacking the soft underbelly of the constitutional order: the norm-governed practices that give the Constitution and institutions of government their solidity, stability and vitality.The erosion of democracy is now self-evidently a global phenomenon with exogenous and endogenous causes. A brief list from the Hague Journal of the Rule of Law gives the idea:Economic inequality; political polarization; cultural backlash against rapid social, moral and demographic change; the scapegoating of immigrants and minorities by political forces; the profound — and often negative — effects of technology on society and the political system; the rise of non-liberal alternative governance models viewed as successful …. The trend of democratic decay itself — and the means by which political and social forces are degrading liberal democracy — is rapidly changing, developing and spreading. We are trying to understand a global phenomenon as it envelops the world in real time.It’s a lot to ask voters to adjudicate everything on that list. So the question that remains is this: Is the Trump version of this phenomenon the worst we are going to get, or are there people watching and waiting in the wings who will make it much worse?The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Macron to Face Le Pen for President as French Gravitate Toward Extremes

      by

      President Emmanuel Macron and the hard-right leader Marine Le Pen will compete for a second time in a runoff on April 24.PARIS — President Emmanuel Macron will face Marine Le Pen, the French far-right leader, in the runoff of France’s presidential elections.With 92 percent of the ballots cast on Sunday counted, Mr. Macron, a centrist, was leading with about 27.4 percent of the vote to Ms. Le Pen’s 24.3 percent. Ms. Le Pen benefited from a late surge that reflected widespread disaffection over rising prices, security and immigration.With war raging in Ukraine and Western unity likely to be tested as the fighting continues, Ms. Le Pen’s strong performance demonstrated the enduring appeal of nationalist and xenophobic currents in Europe. Extreme parties of the right and left took some 51 percent of the vote, a clear sign of the extent of French anger and frustration.An anti-NATO and more pro-Russia France in the event of an ultimate Le Pen victory would cause deep concern in allied capitals, and could fracture the united trans-Atlantic response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine.But Mr. Macron, after a lackluster campaign, will go into the second round as the slight favorite, having fared a little better than the latest opinion polls suggested. Some had shown him leading Ms. Le Pen by just two points.Marine Le Pen speaking after the first-round results were announced on Sunday.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesThe principled French rejection of Ms. Le Pen’s brand of anti-immigrant nationalism has frayed as illiberal politics have spread in both Europe and the United States. She has successfully softened her packaging, if not her fierce conviction that French people must be privileged over foreigners and that the curtain must be drawn on France as a “land of immigration.”Ms. Le Pen’s ties to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia are close, although she has scrambled in recent weeks to play them down. This month, she was quick to congratulate Viktor Orban, Hungary’s nationalist and anti-immigrant leader, on his fourth consecutive victory in parliamentary elections.“I will restore France to order in five years,” Ms. Le Pen declared to cheering supporters, appealing to all French people to join her in what she called “a choice of civilization” in which the “legitimate preponderance of French language and culture” would be guaranteed and full “sovereignty reestablished in all domains.”The choice confronting French people on April 24 was between “division, injustice and disorder” on the one hand, and the “rallying of French people around social justice and protection,” she said.Mr. Macron told flag-waving supporters: “I want a France in a strong Europe that maintains its alliances with the big democracies in order to defend itself, not a France that, outside Europe, would have as its only allies the populist and xenophobic International. That is not us.”He added: “Don’t deceive ourselves, nothing is decided, and the debate we will have in the next 15 days is decisive for our country and for Europe.”A polling station in Pontoise on Sunday.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesLast week, in an interview in the daily Le Parisien newspaper, Mr. Macron called Ms. Le Pen “a racist” of “great brutality.” Ms. Le Pen hit back, saying that the president’s remarks were “outrageous and aggressive.” She called favoring French people over foreigners “the only moral, legal and admissible policy.”The gloves will be off as they confront each other over the future of France, at a time when Britain’s exit from the European Union and the end of Angela Merkel’s long chancellorship in Germany have placed a particular onus on French leadership.Mr. Macron wants to transform Europe into a credible military power with “strategic autonomy.” Ms. Le Pen, whose party has received funding from a Russian and, more recently, a Hungarian bank, has other priorities.The runoff, on April 24, will be a repeat of the last election, in 2017, when Mr. Macron, then a relative newcomer to politics intent on shattering old divisions between left and right, trounced Ms. Le Pen with 66.9 percent of the vote to her 33.1 percent.The final result this time will almost certainly be much closer than five years ago. Polls taken before Sunday’s vote indicated Mr. Macron winning by just 52 percent to 48 percent against Ms. Le Pen in the second round. That could shift in the coming two weeks, when the candidates will debate for the first time in the campaign.Reflecting France’s drift to the right in recent years, no left-of-center candidate qualified for the runoff. The Socialist Party, long a pillar of postwar French politics, collapsed, leaving Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the far-left anti-NATO candidate with his France Unbowed movement, to take third place with about 21 percent.Supporters of Mr. Macron in Paris on Sunday.James Hill for The New York TimesMs. Le Pen, who leads the National Rally, formerly the National Front, was helped by the candidacy of Éric Zemmour, a fiercely xenophobic TV pundit turned politician, who became the go-to politician for anti-immigrant provocation, which made her look more mainstream and innocuous. In the end, Mr. Zemmour’s campaign faded, and he took about 7 percent of the vote.Mr. Zemmour immediately called on his supporters to back Ms. Le Pen in the second round. “Opposing Ms. Le Pen there is a man who allowed 2 million immigrants to enter France,” Mr. Zemmour declared.The threatening scenario for Mr. Macron is that Mr. Zemmour’s vote will go to Ms. Le Pen, and that she will be further bolstered by the wide section of the left that feels betrayed or just viscerally hostile toward the president, as well as by some center-right voters for whom immigration is the core issue.More than half of French people — supporters of Ms. Le Pen, Mr. Zemmour and Mr. Mélenchon — now appear to favor parties that are broadly anti-NATO, anti-American and hostile to the European Union. By contrast, the broad center — Mr. Macron’s La République en Marche party, the Socialist Party, the center right Republicans and the Green Party — took a combined total of about 40 percent.These were numbers that revealed the extent of anxiety in France, and perhaps also the extent of distrust of its democracy. They will be more comforting to Ms. Le Pen than to Mr. Macron, even if Mr. Mélenchon said his supporters should not give “a single vote” to Ms. Le Pen.He declined, however, to endorse Mr. Macron.At Ms. Le Pen’s headquarters, Frederic Sarmiento, an activist, said, “She will benefit from a big transfer of votes,” pointing to supporters of Mr. Zemmour, but also some on the left who, according to polls, will support Ms. Le Pen in the second round.Immigrant families awaiting emergency accommodation outside the Paris city hall last April.Andrea Mantovani for The New York Times“I am very worried, it will be a very close runoff,” said Nicolas Tenzer, an author who teaches political science at Sciences Po university. “Many on the left will abstain rather than vote Macron.”Mr. Macron gained the immediate support for the second round of the defeated Socialist, Communist, Green and center-right candidates, but between them they amounted to no more than 15 percent of the first-round vote. He may also benefit from a late surge in support of the Republic in a country with bitter wartime experience of extreme-right rule.In the end, the election on Sunday came down to Mr. Macron against the extreme right and left of the political spectrum, a sign of his effective dismantlement of the old political order. Now built essentially around a personality — the restless president — French democracy does not appear to have arrived at any sustainable alternative structure.If the two runoff qualifiers are the same as in 2017, they have been changed by circumstances. Where Mr. Macron represented reformist hope in 2017, he is now widely seen as a leader who drifted to the right and a top-down, highly personalized style of government. The sheen is off him.On the place of Islam in France, on immigration controls and on police powers, Mr. Macron has taken a hard line, judging that the election would be won or lost to his right.Addressing his supporters after the vote Sunday, he said he wants a France that “fights resolutely against Islamist separatism” — a term he uses to describe conservative or radical Muslims who reject French values like gender equality — but also a France that allows all believers to practice their faiths.A polling place at the Versailles town hall.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesHis rightward shift had a cost. The center-left, once the core of his support, felt betrayed. To what extent the left will vote for him in the second round will be a main source of concern, as already reflected in Mr. Macron’s abrupt recent catch-up paeans to “fraternity,” “solidarity” and equality of opportunity.Throughout the campaign, Mr. Macron appeared disengaged, taken up with countless telephone calls to Mr. Putin that proved ineffectual.A comfortable lead in polls disappeared in recent weeks as resentment grew over the president’s detachment. He had struggled during the five years of his presidency to overcome an image of aloofness, learning to reach out to more people, only to suffer an apparent relapse in the past several weeks.Still, Mr. Macron steered the country through the long coronavirus crisis, brought unemployment to its lowest level in a decade and lifted economic growth. Doing so, he has convinced many French people that he has what it takes to lead and to represent France with dignity on the world stage.Ms. Le Pen, who would be France’s first woman president, is also seen differently. Now in her third attempt to become president — Jacques Chirac won in 1995 after twice failing — she bowed to reason (and popular opinion) on two significant fronts: dropping her prior vows to take France out of the European Union and the eurozone. Still, many of her proposals — like barring E.U. citizens from some of the same social benefits as French citizens — would infringe fundamental European treaties.The leader of the National Rally, formerly the National Front, toned down her language to look more “presidential.” She smiled a lot, opening up about her personal struggles, and she gave the impression of being closer to the day-to-day concerns of French people, especially with regard to sharply rising gas prices and inflation.But many things did not change. Her program includes a plan to hold a referendum that would lead to a change in the Constitution that would ban any policies that lead to “the installation on national territory of a number of foreigners so large that it would change the composition and identity of the French people.”She also wants to bar Muslim women from wearing head scarves and fine them if they do.Polling booths in Trappes on Sunday. The first round of voting saw the highest abstention rate in decades.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesThe abstention rate Sunday, at between about 26 and 28 percent, was several points above the last election. Not since 2002 has it been so high.This appeared to reflect disillusionment with politics as a change agent, the ripple effect of the war in Ukraine and lost faith in democracy. It was part of the same anger that pushed so many French people toward political extremes.Aurelien Breeden More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      With Macron and Le Pen Leading Election Field, a Fractured France Decides

      by

      In Dijon, magnificence and malaise sit side by side, in the image of a country divided before the presidential vote on Sunday.DIJON, France — At Le Carillon, a convivial place for a coq au vin as France prepares to vote in a critical election, the heated political debates that always characterized past campaigns have fallen silent, as if the country were anesthetized.In other election seasons, the restaurant would buzz for months with arguments over candidates and issues. This time, said the owner, Martine Worner-Bablon, “Nobody talks politics. I don’t know, people’s heads are elsewhere. No confidence in politicians. If anything, they talk about the war.”In this strange atmosphere, overshadowed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, President Emmanuel Macron, a centrist, holds a slight lead over Marine Le Pen, a hard-right nationalist, according to the latest polls. But his comfortable advantage of more than 10 percentage points has evaporated over the past month as his dismissal of debate and failure to engage have irked voters.“What astonishes me is that the president of the French Republic does not think first about the French,” Ms. Le Pen, whose newfound mild manner masks a harsh anti-immigrant program, said last month. It was a remark that hit home as Mr. Macron spent most of his time pondering how to end a European war.President Emmanuel Macron held a campaign rally last week in Nanterre, near Paris.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesWith the vote spread over two rounds starting on Sunday, many people still undecided and an expected abstention rate of up to 30 percent, the election’s outcome is deeply uncertain. During her last campaign, in 2017, Ms. Le Pen chose to appear at the Kremlin with President Vladimir V. Putin, who said with a smirk that he did not wish “to influence events in any way,” as she vowed to lift sanctions against Russia “quite quickly” if elected.The possibility of France lurching toward an anti-NATO, pro-Russia, xenophobic and nationalistic position in the event of a Le Pen victory constitutes a potential shock as great as the 2016 British vote for Brexit or the election the same year of Donald J. Trump in the United States.At what President Biden has repeatedly called an “inflection point” in the global confrontation between autocracy and democracy, a France under Ms. Le Pen would push the needle in the very direction the United States opposes.All seems tranquil in Dijon, for now. Quiet and immaculate, its center a succession of churches and palaces, the capital of the Burgundy region is as good a symbol as any of “la douce France,” the sweet land of gastronomic delights that finds its way into many people’s hearts. But Dijon, a town of 155,000 inhabitants, has its turbulent underside, in the image of a country where beauty and belligerence and magnificence and malaise are often uneasy bedfellows.The city center of Dijon. Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesAmong regulars at Le Carillon, inquiries as to the whereabouts of nuclear bomb shelters are on the rise. Emmanuel Bichot, a center-right city councilor, does not like the country’s mood. “There’s a lot of frustration, of aggression, of tension,” he said. “People get angry very quickly. This has not been an election about programs. I don’t hear anyone debating them.”Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.He paused to contemplate this puzzle. “It’s come down to Macron’s Machiavellian manipulations against Le Pen’s resilience.” This is the third time that Ms. Le Pen, the leader of the National Rally, formerly the National Front, has run for president. The two leaders in the first round of voting go through to a runoff on April 24.One fundamental development contributed to the fractured, incoherent nature of the election. Mr. Macron’s agile occupation of the political center, destroying first the center-left Socialist Party and then the center-right Republicans, effectively wiped out two pillars of postwar French democracy.What was left was the president against the extremes, whether to the right in the form of Ms. Le Pen or to the left in the form of Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Between them, Ms. Le Pen, the far-right upstart Éric Zemmour and Mr. Mélenchon are set to garner some 50 percent of the vote, the latest poll from the Ifop-Fiducial group showed.“There’s a lot of frustration, of aggression, of tension,” said Emmanuel Bichot, a center-right city councilor in Dijon.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York Times“This is a country that no longer has the political structures that corresponds to what a democracy is,” François Hollande, Mr. Macron’s Socialist predecessor as president, said in an interview last month in Paris. “And I believe, if you look across Europe, it’s only in France that political parties have collapsed to this point.”Contemplating his own allegiance to the center-left, he said, “The left has completely blown up, divided, and the most responsible part of it disappeared.”At the same time, Mr. Macron’s own party, La République en Marche, has proved a largely empty vessel.In this vacuum, the campaign has often descended into candidates shrieking at each other, while a lofty leader takes the view that his presidential stature should be enough to win the day.That attitude, however, underestimates French restiveness. Not for two decades has a French president won a second term. Regicides are a thing of the past, but political decapitations at five-year intervals are not.Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader, campaigning in Stiring-Wendel last week.Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesAt the same time, immigration, security and a sharply rising cost of living have coalesced into an ugly brew. Many French people feel left out from the economic growth Mr. Macron has delivered to the country and anxious about the violence they see in their neighborhoods.Referring to several Islamist terrorist attacks in France, Irène Fornal, a retired state pension fund director ensconced at Dijon’s Café de l’Industrie, said, “After Charlie Hebdo, after Bataclan, after the murder of Samuel Paty, evil was personified by the immigrant stranger, and the country split.”Dijon, like many towns in France, has its projects, underprivileged areas of nondescript high-rises where immigrants, often Muslims from North Africa, and their descendants predominate, and the drug trade brings violence between rival gangs.“Insecurity pollutes the life of people,” said François Rebsamen, the city’s longtime mayor and a lifetime Socialist who has joined the Macron campaign, given his own party’s collapse. “In these areas, tranquillity is elusive.”“Insecurity pollutes the life of people,” said François Rebsamen, Dijon’s longtime mayor.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesTwo years ago, in the Les Grésilles neighborhood of Dijon, street battles between Chechens and North Africans erupted over five days after a 16-year-old Chechen boy was assaulted by drug dealers from the Maghreb. In another depressed area, called Fontaine d’Ouche, some stores are still boarded up after drive-by shootings late last year.Mathieu Depoil — who heads a social center in Fontaine d’Ouche that tries to improve people’s lives through sports, carpentry, gardening and other activities — said the area’s roughly 7,000 inhabitants, mostly immigrants, formed a “zone of precariousness” with a 25 percent poverty rate, high unemployment and many single-parent families.“People complain to me that if they say where they live, they are told, ‘Oh, you live with savages,’” he added.A mock election he organized recently with a debate on the 12 official presidential candidates drew only a handful of people. “I am not sure people will go vote,” he said. “They are disillusioned, they feel alone and isolated after Covid-19. They have lost any faith in collective solutions.”The Fontaine d’Ouche neighborhood in Dijon. Many French people feel left out from the economic growth Mr. Macron has delivered to the country and anxious about the violence they see in their neighborhoods.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesWe went for a stroll through the neighborhood, visited late last month by Mr. Macron as he finally woke up to the need to get out of Paris and hear the concerns of people struggling to get by. The posters of him that were hurriedly put up are now gone.Instead, the bespectacled face of Mr. Mélenchon, the hard-left candidate, adorns many walls with the slogan, “Another world is possible.”Who Is Running for President of France?Card 1 of 6The campaign begins. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Elecciones presidenciales en Francia: lo que debes saber

      by

      Los franceses eligen a su presidente en abril, una votación crucial para Francia y clave para Europa. El presidente Emmanuel Macron es el favorito para ganar, pero la carrera se ha puesto reñida.PARÍS — Los franceses acuden a las urnas este mes para elegir a su presidente, el cargo más poderoso de Francia y que tiene un control considerable de la política interior y exterior, en uno de los Estados miembro más poblados e influyentes de la Unión Europea.La guerra en Ucrania ha dominado la cobertura informativa en Francia y ha eclipsado en gran medida la campaña. El presidente Emmanuel Macron ha sido acusado de utilizar su condición de líder en tiempos de guerra y de diplomático en jefe de Europa para evitar enfrentarse a sus oponentes y llegar a un segundo mandato, y algunos críticos se preocupan de que la campaña desigual haya carecido de un debate sustantivo.Sin embargo, la carrera se ha abierto recientemente con el auge de su principal contrincante, Marine Le Pen, la líder de extrema derecha con una plataforma anti-UE, anti-OTAN y pro-Rusia que repercutiría globalmente si llega a ganar.Esto es lo que hay que saber sobre la votación, que se celebrará en dos rondas el 10 y el 24 de abril.¿Qué está en juego?Francia, una nación de más de 67 millones de habitantes, es la séptima economía del mundo, el país más visitado, uno de los cinco miembros permanentes del Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas y una potencia nuclear. Es miembro fundador de la Unión Europea y un motor clave de su política.El próximo presidente de Francia tendrá que ayudar al país a sortear dos fuerzas que actualmente azotan a Europa: la brutal invasión rusa a Ucrania, que ha desplazado a millones de personas a las puertas del continente, y una recuperación económica relacionada con una pandemia que está tensando las cadenas de suministro.Una familia de refugiados ucranianos esperando para subir a un tren a Budapest desde una ciudad del este de Hungría en marzo.Mauricio Lima para The New York TimesAunque las fuerzas de la derecha han ganado en gran medida las guerras culturales de Francia en los últimos años, las encuestas muestran que los votantes franceses están ahora preocupados principalmente por el creciente costo de la vida. El próximo presidente tendrá que compaginar estas preocupaciones con otras cuestiones a largo plazo en la mente de los votantes, como la transición de Francia a energías limpias, la sostenibilidad de su generoso modelo de bienestar, el temor a la inmigración y el nerviosismo por el lugar que ocupa el Islam en el país.La desilusión generalizada con la política también se ha convertido en una fuente importante de preocupación, y se teme que estas elecciones puedan ser las de menor participación en una elección presidencial en décadas.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.¿Cuáles son los poderes de la presidencia francesa?Los presidentes franceses disponen de poderes extraordinarios, más que la mayoría de los líderes occidentales, con menos controles y equilibrios que limitan el poder ejecutivo en otros países.A diferencia de los primeros ministros británicos o los cancilleres alemanes, que son elegidos por los partidos que controlan el mayor número de escaños en sus parlamentos, los presidentes franceses son elegidos directamente por los ciudadanos para mandatos de cinco años. Poco después de esas elecciones, Francia vuelve a las urnas para elegir a los representantes de la Asamblea Nacional, la cámara más poderosa del Parlamento, cuyos mandatos también duran cinco años.El hecho de que ambas elecciones se celebren en el mismo ciclo de cinco años aumenta considerablemente la probabilidad de que Francia vote por legisladores que apoyen al presidente recién elegido, lo que significa que los presidentes franceses no tienen que preocuparse tanto como otros líderes por la agitación interna de los partidos o las elecciones de mitad de mandato. El primer ministro de Francia, como jefe de gobierno, desempeña un papel importante en el sistema constitucional, al igual que el Parlamento. Pero el presidente, que nombra al primer ministro, establece gran parte de la agenda de Francia¿Quiénes son los candidatos?Hay 12 candidatos oficiales, pero las encuestas sugieren que solo unos pocos tienen posibilidades de ganar.El actual favorito es Macron, de 44 años, un exbanquero de inversión que fue elegido en 2017 con poca experiencia política y que se presenta a un segundo mandato. Fue elegido sobre las ruinas de los partidos políticos tradicionales de Francia con una fuerte plataforma proempresarial. Reformó el código laboral, eliminó un impuesto sobre el patrimonio y reformó la compañía nacional de ferrocarriles. Pero su afán reformista ha sido atenuado por las huelgas masivas a raíz de sus planes de reforma de las pensiones, las protestas de los “chalecos amarillos” y la pandemia de coronavirus. La guerra de Ucrania lo puso por delante en las encuestas, pero su ventaja se ha reducido recientemente, hasta aproximadamente el 25 por ciento en los sondeos.El presidente Emmanuel Macron este mes en Nanterre, cerca de ParísDmitry Kostyukov para The New York TimesLa principal contrincante de Macron es Le Pen, de 53 años, la eterna líder de extrema derecha que se presenta por tercera vez y que perdió ante él en 2017. Lidera la Agrupación Nacional, un movimiento conocido desde hace mucho por su antisemitismo, su nostalgia nazi y su postura antiinmigrante, que ella ha tratado de sanear y convertir en un partido creíble y capaz de gobernar. Le Pen se ha enfrentado a las críticas por su anterior simpatía por el presidente ruso, Vladimir Putin, pero la inflación y el aumento de los precios de la energía encajan bien en su plataforma proteccionista. Actualmente ocupa el segundo lugar en las encuestas, con un 20 por ciento de apoyo.Marine Le Pen el año pasado en La Trinité-sur-MerDmitry Kostyukov para The New York TimesVarios candidatos, que tienen entre el diez y el 15 por ciento de los votos, se disputan el tercer puesto con la esperanza de lograr un aumento de última hora que los haga pasar a la segunda vuelta.Jean-Luc Mélenchon, de 70 años, es el líder del partido de extrema izquierda Francia Insumisa y el candidato de izquierda mejor posicionado para llegar a la segunda vuelta. Político veterano y hábil orador, conocido por su retórica apasionada y su personalidad divisiva, ha prometido invertir en energía verde, reducir la edad legal de jubilación, aumentar el salario mínimo mensual y redistribuir la riqueza poniendo impuestos a los ricos. También quiere reformar radicalmente la Constitución francesa para reducir los poderes presidenciales.Jean-Luc Mélenchon en enero en BurdeosPhilippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesValérie Pécresse, de 54 años, es una política que preside la región francesa de Île-de-France, una potencia económica y demográfica que incluye a París. Es la candidata de Les Républicains, el principal partido conservador francés. Varias de sus propuestas económicas, como el aumento de la edad legal de jubilación a los 65 años, son similares a las de Macron. Pero en unas elecciones en las que las voces más radicales han marcado el tono del debate en la derecha, ella ha dado un giro duro en temas como la inmigración y la delincuencia, lo que la deja con problemas para sobresalir entre los otros candidatos de la derecha.Valérie Pécresse, en el centro y a la derecha, en febrero en Mouilleron-en-ParedsLoic Venance/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉric Zemmour, de 63 años, es un escritor, comentarista y estrella de la televisión de extrema derecha que lleva años en los medios de comunicación franceses, pero cuya campaña, con ecos de Donald Trump, ha revuelto la política francesa. Es un nacionalista que evoca imágenes de una Francia en franca decadencia a causa de la inmigración y el islam, y ha sido condenado en múltiples ocasiones por infringir las leyes que castigan la difamación o los actos que provocan el odio o la violencia por motivos de raza y religión. Últimamente, sus perspectivas se han ido desvaneciendo.Éric Zemmour el domingo en ParísYoan Valat/EPA vía ShutterstockEl resto de los candidatos tienen un porcentaje de votos de un solo dígito y tienen pocas posibilidades de llegar a la segunda vuelta. Entre ellos se encuentran Anne Hidalgo, de 62 años, alcaldesa de París y candidata del moribundo Partido Socialista, y Yannick Jadot, de 54 años, candidato del Partido Verde, que ha tenido dificultades para avanzar a pesar del creciente apoyo a las causas medioambientales en Francia.¿Cómo funciona?El candidato que obtiene la mayoría absoluta de los votos en la primera vuelta es elegido directamente, un resultado improbable que no se produce desde 1965, la primera vez que un presidente francés fue elegido por votación popular directa. En su lugar, suele celebrarse una segunda vuelta entre los dos primeros candidatos.Las normas electorales francesas son estrictas, con rigurosos límites a la financiación de las campañas y al tiempo de emisión, y con un apoyo financiero y logístico del Estado que pretende igualar las condiciones. (Aun así, muchos medios de comunicación son propiedad de personas adineradas, lo que les da una vía para influir en las elecciones).Los gastos de campaña tienen un tope de unos 16,9 millones de euros para los candidatos en la primera vuelta, o sea, unos 18,5 millones de dólares, y de unos 22,5 millones de euros para los que llegan a la segunda. Los que se saltan las normas —como Nicolas Sarkozy, expresidente de derecha— enfrentan multas y sanciones penales.Las empresas privadas no pueden hacer donaciones de campaña, y los particulares únicamente pueden donar hasta 4600 euros para toda la elección. Los candidatos reciben el reembolso de una parte de sus costos de campaña, y el Estado paga algunos gastos.El tiempo de emisión está estrechamente regulado por el organismo de control de los medios de comunicación de Francia. En un primer momento, las televisiones y radios deben garantizar que los candidatos tengan una exposición que se corresponda aproximadamente con su importancia política, basándose en factores como los sondeos, la representación en el Parlamento y los resultados de las elecciones anteriores. Cuando la campaña comienza oficialmente, dos semanas antes de la votación, todos los candidatos tienen el mismo tiempo de emisión. Está prohibido hacer campaña los fines de semana de votación.Preparando los sobres con las boletas de los candidatos presidenciales y los folletos del programa el mes pasado en Matoury, Guayana FrancesaJody Amiet/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images¿Qué sucede después?A las 8 p. m. del día de las elecciones, el 10 de abril, los medios de comunicación franceses colaborarán con las encuestadoras para publicar los resultados previstos, basados en el recuento preliminar de votos. Eso dará una buena indicación de quién se espera que pase a la segunda vuelta, pero si la elección está reñida, las proyecciones podrían no estar claras hasta más tarde. Los resultados oficiales estarán disponibles en el sitio web del Ministerio del Interior.Los dos candidatos a la segunda vuelta se enfrentarán en un debate por televisión antes de la nueva votación, el 24 de abril. Si Macron no es reelegido, el nuevo presidente tendrá hasta el 13 de mayo para tomar posesión. La atención se centrará entonces en las elecciones para la Asamblea Nacional. Todos los escaños estarán en juego, en un sistema similar de dos rondas de votación, el 12 y el 19 de junio.Aurélien Breeden cubre Francia desde la oficina de París desde 2014. Ha informado sobre algunos de los peores atentados terroristas que ha sufrido el país, el desmantelamiento del campamento de migrantes en Calais y las tumultuosas elecciones presidenciales de Francia en 2017. @aurelienbrd More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      How Marine Le Pen Threatens to Upend French Elections

      by

      The far-right presidential candidate has opened up about her personal life and tweaked her policies to gain sympathy and credibility among more mainstream voters.STIRING-WENDEL, France — Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader making her third attempt to become president of France, already had the backing of voters who came to listen to her recently in Stiring-Wendel, a former coal-mining town struggling to reinvent itself.But after a 40-minute speech focusing on the rising cost of living, Ms. Le Pen succeeded in doing what even few of her supporters would have predicted just months ago: impressing them. Voters trickling out of an auditorium into the cold evening said she had become “less extreme,” more “mature” and “self-assured” — even “presidential.”“She has softened, she is more composed, calmer, more serene,” said Yohan Brun, 19, a student who grew up in Stiring-Wendel and had come to listen to Ms. Le Pen because “she cares more about the French people than the other candidates.”As France votes on Sunday, polls are predicting that this election will be a rematch of the previous one, pitting Ms. Le Pen against President Emmanuel Macron in a second-round showdown. But that does not mean that precisely the same Ms. Le Pen is running.Ms. Le Pen has revamped her image since the last election five years ago. She has pragmatically abandoned certain ideas that had alienated mainstream voters. She has held on to others that certify her far-right credentials. And she has shifted emphasis toward pocketbook issues.Some who attended Ms. Le Pen’s speech in Stiring-Wendel said she had become “less extreme,” more “mature” and even “presidential.”Andrea Mantovani for The New York TimesBut as important, she has self-consciously sanded the rough edges off her persona in an effort to make herself appear more presidential and voter-friendly.The makeover is part of a long and deliberate strategy by Ms. Le Pen to “undemonize” herself and her party, and ultimately gain the French presidency. While the effort remains unconvincing to many who consider her a wolf in sheep’s clothing, it has nonetheless succeeded in giving her a last-minute surge in the polls before Sunday’s election that is worrying Mr. Macron’s camp.“Marine Le Pen appears more sympathetic than Emmanuel Macron,” said Pierre Person, a national lawmaker of the president’s party, adding that he was worried that she could win. More

    • 88 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      France’s Presidential Election 2022: Your Questions, Answered

      by

      The French are choosing their president in April, an election that is crucial for France and key for Europe. President Emmanuel Macron is favored to win, but the race has gotten closer.PARIS — The French are going to the polls this month to choose their president, who holds the most powerful office in France and has considerable control of domestic and foreign policy, in one of the European Union’s most populous and influential member states.The war in Ukraine has dominated news coverage in France and largely overshadowed the campaign. President Emmanuel Macron has been accused of using his status as a wartime leader and Europe’s diplomat in chief to avoid facing his opponents and cruise into a second term, with some critics worrying that the lopsided campaign has lacked substantive debate.But the race has opened up recently with a surge from his main challenger, Marine Le Pen, the far-right leader with an anti-E.U., anti-NATO and pro-Russia platform that would reverberate globally if she won.Here is what you need to know about the vote, which will be held over two rounds on April 10 and April 24.What’s at stake?France, a nation of over 67 million people, is the world’s seventh-largest economy, the world’s most visited country, one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and a nuclear power. It is a founding member of the European Union and a key driver of its policy. France’s next president will have to help the country navigate two forces currently buffeting Europe: a brutal Russian invasion of Ukraine that has displaced millions on the continent’s doorstep, and a pandemic-related economic recovery that is straining supply chains.A refugee family from Ukraine waiting to board a train to Budapest from a town in eastern Hungary in March.Mauricio Lima for The New York TimesWhile right-wing forces have largely won France’s culture wars in recent years, voter surveys show that French voters are now primarily concerned with the growing cost of living. The next president will have to juggle those worries with other long-term issues on voters’ minds, like France’s clean energy transition, the sustainability of its generous welfare model, fears of immigration and hand-wringing over the place of Islam in the country.Broad disillusionment with politics has also become a major source of concern, with worries that this election could see the lowest voter turnout for a presidential race in decades.What are the powers of the French presidency?French presidents have formidable powers at their disposal — more than most Western leaders, with fewer of the checks and balances that limit the executive branch in other countries.Learn More About France’s Presidential ElectionThe run-up to the first round of the election has been dominated by issues such as security, immigration and national identity.On the Scene: A Times reporter attended a rally held by Marine Le Pen, the far-right French presidential candidate. Here is what he saw.Challenges to Re-election: A troubled factory in President Emmanuel Macron’s hometown shows his struggle in winning the confidence of French workers.A Late Surge: After recently rising in voter surveys, Jean-Luc Mélenchon could become the first left-wing candidate since 2012 to reach the second round of the election.A Political Bellwether: Auxerre has backed the winner in the presidential race for 40 years. This time, many residents see little to vote for.Unlike British prime ministers or German chancellors, who are chosen by the parties that control the most seats in Parliament, French presidents are elected directly by the people for five-year terms. Shortly after that election, France returns to the polls to vote for representatives in the National Assembly, the more powerful house of Parliament, where terms also last five years.Having both of those elections on the same five-year cycle strongly increases the likelihood that France will vote in lawmakers who back their newly elected president, meaning French presidents do not need to worry as much as some other leaders about internal party turmoil or midterm elections. France’s prime minister, as the head of government, plays an important role in the constitutional system, as does Parliament. But the president, who appoints the prime minister, sets much of France’s agenda.Who is running?There are 12 official candidates, but polls suggest that only a handful have a shot at winning.The current favorite is Mr. Macron, 44, a former investment banker who was elected in 2017 with little political experience and is running for a second term. He was elected on the ruins of France’s traditional political parties with a strong pro-business platform. He overhauled the labor code, eliminated a wealth tax and reformed the national railway company. But his reformist zeal was tempered by massive strikes over his pension reform plans, Yellow Vest protests and the coronavirus pandemic. The war in Ukraine put him ahead in the polls but his lead has dwindled recently, to roughly 25 percent in voter surveys.President Emmanuel Macron this month in Nanterre, near Paris.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesMr. Macron’s main challenger is Ms. Le Pen, 53, the perennial far-right leader who is running for the third time and who lost to him in 2017. She leads the National Rally, a movement long known for antisemitism, Nazi nostalgia and anti-immigrant bigotry that she has tried to sanitize and turn into a credible, governing party. Ms. Le Pen has faced criticism of her past sympathy for President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but inflation and rising energy prices play well into her protectionist platform. She is currently polling in second place, with about 20 percent support in voter surveys.Marine Le Pen last year in La Trinité-sur-Mer.Dmitry Kostyukov for The New York TimesSeveral candidates are jostling for third place and polling between 10 and 15 percent, hoping for a last-minute surge that would send them into the second round of voting.Jean-Luc Mélenchon, 70, is the leader of the far-left France Unbowed party, and the left-wing candidate best positioned to reach the runoff. A veteran politician and skilled orator known for his fiery rhetoric and divisive personality, he has vowed to invest in green energy, lower the legal retirement age, raise the monthly minimum wage and redistribute wealth by taxing the rich. He also wants to radically overhaul France’s Constitution to reduce presidential powers.Jean-Luc Mélenchon in January in Bordeaux.Philippe Lopez/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesValérie Pécresse, 54, is a politician who presides over the Ile-de-France region of France, an economic and demographic powerhouse that includes Paris. She is the candidate for Les Républicains, the mainstream French conservative party. Several of her economic proposals, like raising the legal retirement age to 65, are similar to Mr. Macron’s. But in an election where more radical voices have set the tone of the debate on the right, she has taken a hard turn on issues like immigration and crime, leaving her struggling to stand out from other right-wing candidates.Valérie Pécresse, center right, in February in Mouilleron-en-Pareds.Loic Venance/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesÉric Zemmour, 63, is a far-right writer, pundit and television star who has been a fixture in the French media for years but whose campaign, with echoes of Donald J. Trump, has scrambled French politics. He is a nationalist who conjures images of a France in steep decline because of immigration and Islam, and he has been convicted multiple times for running afoul of laws that punish defamation or acts provoking hatred or violence on the basis of race and religion. His prospects have recently been fading.Éric Zemmour on Sunday in Paris.Yoan Valat/EPA, via ShutterstockThe remaining candidates are polling in the single digits and have little chance of reaching the runoff. Among them are Anne Hidalgo, 62, the mayor of Paris and the candidate for the moribund Socialist Party, and Yannick Jadot, 54, the candidate for the Green party, which has struggled to make headway despite growing support in France for environmental causes.How does it work?A candidate who gets an absolute majority of votes in the first round of voting is elected outright, an unlikely outcome that has not occurred since 1965 — the first time a French president was chosen by direct popular vote. Instead, a runoff is usually held between the top two candidates.French election regulations are strict, with stringent limits on campaign finances and airtime, and with financial and logistical support from the state that is intended to level the playing field. (Still, many news outlets are owned by the rich, giving them an avenue to influence elections.)Campaign spending is capped to roughly 16.9 million euros for candidates in the first round, or about $18.5 million, and roughly €22.5 million for those who reach the second one. Those who flout the rules — like Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s former right-wing president — face fines and criminal penalties.Private companies cannot make campaign donations, and individuals can only donate up to €4,600 for the entire election. Candidates are reimbursed for a portion of their campaign expenditures, and the state pays for some expenses.Airtime is closely regulated by France’s media watchdog. At first, television and radio stations must ensure candidates are given exposure that roughly matches their political importance, based on factors like polling, representation in Parliament and prior election results. When the campaign officially starts, two weeks before the vote, all candidates get equal airtime. Campaigning on voting weekends is banned.Preparing envelopes with the presidential candidates’ ballot papers and program leaflets last month in Matoury, French Guiana.Jody Amiet/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesWhat comes next?At 8 p.m. on Election Day, April 10, the French news media will work with pollsters to publish projected results based on preliminary vote counts. That will give a good indication of who is expected to make it into the second round, but if the race is close, projections might not become clear until later. Official results will be available on the Interior Ministry website.The two runoff candidates will face off in a televised debate before the second round of voting, on April 24. If Mr. Macron isn’t re-elected, the new president will have until May 13 to take office. Attention will then shift to the elections for the National Assembly. All seats there will be up for grabs, in a similar two-round system of voting, on June 12 and June 19. More