“I will vote for him in the first round but not in the second”: the Machiavelli of the voting booth

IIt is not only politicians who have the right to be strategists. This year, it is the voters who tinker with strategies in their corner and concoct 18-cushion billiard games in the voting booth. While part of France had not yet understood that the first round was taking place this Sunday, they had time over the campaign to build a dozen scenarios. The strategist voter is refreshing: when abstention reaches record levels because voters are convinced that their vote for one or the other will not change anything, the strategist voter, on the other hand, lends all the powers to his ballot vote: bring a candidate to the second round, block the road to another, help a small candidate to reimburse his campaign expenses, create momentum for the legislative elections… His ballot can change the face of the elections.

Read also: Article reserved for our subscribers “I made an appointment on Friday with his main teacher”: parental catch-up subscribers

How do we recognize them?

They no longer vote for their political family since there is no longer a political family. They remember their hesitations of the last elections, but not really what they ended up voting. They did the tests online – “Which candidate are you closest to? – and found the result completely silly. They are convinced that their opponents are developing even more elaborate strategies than theirs. They had considered voting for Pécresse to be in the second round, but, after her catamaran meeting, “the great replacement” and his Covid-19, they re-examined their position and wonder if they would not go so far as to vote Mélenchon. They follow the polls every day, question the timings of all the announcements and use the expressions a lot “voice reserve”, “smoothed averages”, “positive dynamics” and “margins of error”. They find useful votes from others useless. They had voted Chevènement or Mamère in 2002 “so that Jospin understands”. Their parents, chiraquiens, had voted Mitterrand against Giscard in the first round in 1981.

Read also: Yannick Jadot and Anne Hidalgo reject the idea of ​​a useful vote on the left; Valérie Pécresse defends “zero impunity”: find the political news of Wednesday April 6

how they talk

“I hesitate. ” ” If Mélenchon gets closer to Le Pen, I vote Mélenchon, while I hate this guy, so that Marine Le Pen is not in the second round. » “I will vote for him in the first round but not in the second. » “Normally, the pro-Russian guy shouldn’t have my voice. » “I prefer it to be pro-Russian not racist. » “Or else I give another meaning to my vote and I vote Jadot to be reimbursed for his campaign expenses. » “Last time, I voted for Macron in the first round so Le Pen wouldn’t be in the lead. » “I support Zemmour, but there is a risk that Mélenchon will be in the second round, so I will vote for Le Pen. » “The Macronist pollsters are raising Mélenchon to suggest that Le Pen is the useful vote. » “I’m betting on a better score than people say for Pécresse. » “I don’t like the notion of a useful vote, but you have to ask yourself the question. » “My vote of conviction, I keep it for the legislative elections. » “If Poutou was in the lead, I would have voted for him without qualms. » “I have a somewhat complex strategy. » ” You can not do that. » “You can’t say that. »

You have 21.94% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.

source site-26