66.7% of the electorate turned out to vote. This return to the levels seen in years before the introduction of the five-year presidential term, in 2000, (67.9% in the first round in 1997) resulted in a major electoral defeat for the governing coalition, despite a respectable score (20.8%). On Sunday, June 30, a deep-seated desire for a change of government emerged, reflected in a paradigm shift that the continuation of the three electoral blocs should not obscure: For the first time in its history, the far-right Rassemblement National (RN) party won the first round of a decisive election, following three consecutive victories in the European elections and party leader Marine Le Pen's two qualifications for the second rounds of presidential elections. The left has also been reconstructing itself, a situation that should not be overshadowed by tensions over its leadership and the nuances of its programs.
Several factors can be put forward to explain the presidential majority's failure. Firstly, the government failed to explain the reasons for the dissolution. The presidential right to dissolve the Assemblée Nationale does not absolve the head of state from having to provide a justification that appears well-founded and legitimate. By moving closer to the "dissolution of convenience" model decided on by former president Jacques Chirac in 1997, Emmanuel Macron ventured down an overly complex path on June 9.
The latest poll carried out by Ipsos for the Cevipof research center and its partners found that incomprehension, at 26%, topped the list of feelings expressed about this decision, particularly among voters who support the presidential coalition or the right-wing Les Républicains (LR) party. Feelings of hope came in second (22%), but this was only due to voters from the two groups most vehemently opposed to Macron (supporters of the radical left La France Insoumise party and those of the RN). Paradoxically, the president has, on his own initiative, opened a window of opportunity for the electorate that most reject his leadership.
Everything seems to have happened according to the scenario that sociologist Christian Morel, an expert in "absurd decisions," calls situations of "loss of meaning." These situations are a particular form of "absurd decisions," when absurdity – making a decision contrary to the intended objectives – takes an even more random path: The absence of a clear goal to achieve, in other words "when the objective is uncertain, absent, uncontrollable or inconsistent," said Morel. For it was this lack of an explicit and legible political goal that transformed this dissolution into a terrible downward spiral for the presidential bloc, a race toward the abyss.
You have 57.25% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.