Young people, workers, employees, or simple people disappointed with macronism… Nearly one in two voters did not go to the polls during the 2022 legislative elections. These abstainers are everywhere, and appealed to by everyone. Before each election, party leaders and strategists engage in real brainstorming: finding the recipe that will bring together one or more segments of this protean bloc. And this, sometimes at the cost of an electoral “Whatever it takes”.
President of the Parliamentary and Political History Committee, historian Jean Garrigues deciphers for L’Express the phenomenon of abstentionism, its fuel, as well as its consequences on the results of the European elections on June 9.
L’Express: Contrary to preconceived ideas according to which the participation rate falls during intermediate elections, we note that that of the European elections was relatively stable until 2014, and even increased considerably in 2019. Can we hope for a new increase in 2024?
Jean Garrigues: This is not what the polls which predict a participation rate of around 45% suggest. Furthermore, while we can welcome the increase in participation between 2014 and 2019, it remains significantly lower than the levels of the golden age of European elections. In 1979, the participation rate exceeded 60%!
For the first time in 2022, the legislative elections saw a higher abstention than the European elections of 2019. How to interpret this precedent?
Two elements explain the demobilization during the legislative elections. First, the lack of vitality of the 2022 presidential campaign, truncated by the outbreak of war in Ukraine. Second, the weariness caused by the re-election of Emmanuel Macron. Note that unlike the municipal and regional elections where the issues are essentially local, and the legislative elections which arrive only a few months after the supreme election, the European elections are an opportunity to express discontent at mid-presidential term on issues that concern of central power. In fact, we can imagine that participation in the vote next June will be higher than in the legislative elections.
What fuels abstentionism?
Distrust of elected officials structurally crystallizes abstentionism. But this abstention is also the result of disappointments: voters no longer believe in the ability of politicians to resolve the problems they encounter on a daily basis. There are also factors specific to the European elections: ignorance of the role of the European Parliament, the lack of notoriety of the heads of the list who lack incarnation. And then there is this latent anti-Europeanism. For around twenty years, Europhiles and Europhobes have faced each other in a communication battle. Today, the discourse which tends to make the European Union the scapegoat for all our internal crises seems to prevail.
Paradoxically, distrust of the European Union constitutes both a vector of abstentionism and a remedy for this abstentionism: ignorance of European institutions and their actors can demobilize. Conversely, the Eurosceptic speeches of certain parties which promise an “other Europe” galvanize and motivate the protest electorate which expresses significant distrust vis-à-vis national and European power, to go to the polls.
What is the profile of the abstainer?
Abstentionism decreases with age: those who participate most in elections remain seniors. The further down the age scale we go, the more we observe an instinct of non-participation. Observation to which class cultures must be linked. Abstention increases with poverty and decreases with wealth. The typical profile of the abstainer is therefore a young person who is unemployed or who lives on a meager income.
Who benefits from abstentionism?
For several years, La France insoumise (LFI) and the National Rally (RN) have been trying to seduce both young people and the working classes. However, as mentioned previously, these are the categories that are the most inclined to avoid the ballot box. Abstentionism thus primarily penalizes the parties which seek to drain this type of electorate, namely the RN, the PCF, and LFI. The political groups which are more at the center of the political spectrum – Renaissance, and to a lesser extent The Republicans – are therefore the big winners from abstentionism.
Can abstainers change the outcome of the election?
A stronger abstention from RN voters would minimize the scale of Jordan Bardella’s victory, and break the dynamic which is supposed to lead Marine Le Pen to victory. An over-abstentionism of Macronist voters would perhaps allow the list of Raphaël Glucksmann (Socialist Party, Editor’s note) to get ahead of the list led by Valérie Hayer (Renaissance, Editor’s note), which would have a real impact on the recomposition of the left, legitimizing the anti-Nupes line…
For which parties is targeting abstainers a priority in this election?
Without a doubt the RN and LFI. The RN, for example, understood that young people from disadvantaged backgrounds were voters to be had, hence the strategy of demonization and rejuvenation embodied by Jordan Bardella. Similarly, in Mayotte, more than 71% of voters abstained from the European elections in 2019, and almost half of voters put an RN ballot in the ballot box. It is therefore a safe bet that the presence of a Mahorais candidate on Jordan Bardella’s list is a maneuver to capture new votes in the pool of Mahorais abstentionists. More generally, all political parties implement strategies intended to enable them to convince a portion of non-voters.
In 2019, Jean-Luc Mélenchon poached Manon Aubry, spokesperson for Oxfam, an NGO specializing in the fight against social inequalities and against tax evasion. This year, her prize of war is the pro-Palestinian activist, Rima Hassan. Can this turnaround be analyzed as a strategy to capture more votes among abstainers?
Totally. This is a temporary strategy, closely linked to the escalation of tensions in the Middle East, and the rise of this theme in the French public debate. The idea is to align with themes that will mobilize an electorate that is not very politically engaged. LFI sees in the Muslim electorate, very strongly marked by abstentionism, an electoral source which could make the difference in the context of an election. This is why they are also very present on issues related to secularism.
Is this strategy likely to pay off?
By going in search of abstainers, parties take the risk of losing established voters. For the Insoumis for example, a fraction of the left-wing electorate could be repulsed by the extreme positions of certain LFI leaders, and thus move closer to parties at the center of the political spectrum: the Socialist Party and Renaissance in particular. Strategic calculations must therefore be made based on this dialectic.