It lasted nearly three hours. Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen speaking in turn, and it is first of all the attitude of the two candidates that is commented on this morning in the press. ” Macron on the attack, Le Pen in defense ” for Le Parisien/Today in France while Le Figaro title ” Macron dominates, Le Pen holds the shock “. A real match, therefore, where playing time is counted, as are the points and beware of red cards.
But compared to 2017, the tone has gone down a notch sums up the day-to-day, so much so that the pace rose very slowly: “ a diesel debate ” for Releasewhich speaks of second warm-up lap “but for whom” the far-right candidate lacked a respondent », not hesitating to title « still not up to par with a close-up of Marine Le Pen’s face, her gaze shifting. Emmanuel Macron him ” limited the damage in terms of arrogance, the president appeared more solid and more credible in the face of what he describes as a “shrinking project” and was able to unfold his program quietly “, always according to Release.
Update on the topics covered, including purchasing power
The echoes analyze the positions of each of the two candidates and believe that ” the new context (of crisis) risks hitting programs bottled up at “whatever the cost” “. Four small inserts in the pages of West France to summarize the main topics: two ways to boost purchasing power : checks or VAT », « frontal opposition on the veil », « the shadow cast by Vladimir Putin ” or ” climatosceptic against climatohypocrite “.
Which voters will be seduced by which candidates? Le Figaro publishes a study carried out with the Jean Jaurès foundation, we learn in particular that the Le Pen vote would be indexed on the distance to the metropolises and that the coastal and tourist cities are in favor of Macron.
In case of victory of the president of the National Rally…
Rather than political fiction, Humanity give voice to those who have endured the extreme right in this case on a local scale, from Hayange to Hénin-Beaumont. ” Identitarians sow terror in Lyon », affirms an elected official of the city while a co-president of family planning speaks of « threat to women’s rights “.
Opinion sees beyond the second round and focuses on the third round! A cartoon shows Jean-Luc Mélenchon in a sidecar, motorcycle helmet already screwed on the head but nobody on the saddle, while the candidate of rebellious France aims for the legislative elections and a post of Prime Minister. Double page in the newspaper The world on ” the temptation of hegemony on the left “and the Greens would have this vision of Jean-Luc Mélenchon” as an emperor who dominates the arena », fearing the decision he would announce with a thumbs-up.
“ What happens in the brain when voting ? », wonders West France
Interview with a neurologist who distinguishes the conscious and unconscious part of the brain but qualifies: “ the conscious part at the cerebral level, with which we can demonstrate self-criticism, is very small and not very accessible (…) our brain has a greater sensitivity to emotional messages “. The very sound of a candidate’s voice could influence us!
The situation in Mariupol also commented
A file is to be read in Releasenotably dedicated to Mariupol, a city in agony “. The Russian forces indeed intend to seize the totality of this city. Several hundred civilians are still entrenched in the Azovstal steel and metallurgical plant with the last two combat units in Mariupol, according to the Ukrainian authorities. ” Most soldiers (…) know they won’t get out of this factory alive according to the daily, which believes that food and medicine must be lacking and this could signify the fall of Mariupol.
The world is interested for its part in the local elected officials who knew how to resist in Ukraine, in spite of the threats and the arrests, one of them speaks of threats of ” terrorists “. Le Figaro poses the following question: can conflict change the law of war ? “A question not only rhetorical, because” the Russian legalistic discourse is accompanied by an assumed desire to overhaul an international order based on an interpretation deemed unjust of the legal rules “.