The fracture is clear. More than ever, the results of the vote in the first round of the presidential election seem to identify three blocks of voters, who are distinguished in particular according to their age. According to a poll carried out by the Elabe Institute for L’Express and BFMTV, in partnership with SFR, first-time voters (18-24 years old) were thus seduced by the candidate of La France insoumise (LFI) Jean-Luc Mélenchon, him granting 34% of their votes.
Young active people (25-34 years old) divide their vote between the leader of LFI (31%) and Marine Le Pen (27%), while 41% of older voters (65 years old and over) give their vote to Emmanuel Macron. A ranking that questions the famous “generational break” mentioned by many observers, including Stewart Chau, director of political studies and opinion for the Viavoice polling institute and co-author of The divide(Arenas, 2021).
L’Express: When we come back to the figures objectively, we realize that political tendencies emerge clearly according to the age of the voters. How to explain this phenomenon ?
Stewart Chau: There is clearly a generational divide around the results of the vote. The first element to observe is that of the overmobilization of young people – especially graduates – for Jean-Luc Mélenchon. As in 2017, the leader of LFI succeeded in seducing 18-24 year olds, for several reasons. First of all, it seems much more in tune with the themes addressed by young people: its discourse is more sensitive to social and ecological issues, which suits the expectations of this age group.
On the form, the speeches, the communication, the holograms, I also think that the campaign of Jean-Luc Mélenchon succeeded in making politics less has-been – even as he showed up for the third time. There is a form of novelty, of innovation perceived by young people, with obviously a huge sounding board on social networks.
Then, we clearly distinguish that the 25-34 year olds and the 35-49 year olds deployed on the votes for Jean-Luc Mélenchon and for Marine Le Pen, two candidates who question the established system. In my opinion, this vote plays on two very strong registers: protest and anger. This electorate shares the feeling that their life experience is deteriorating, so there is a very strong rejection of Emmanuel Macron and his record over the past five years.
Among the elderly, then, we observe a logic of protection: they will move in a rather expected way towards votes for the center-right or for a more classic right, and therefore towards Emmanuel Macron. Those over 65 are not necessarily concerned by the latter’s programme, particularly on retirement at 65 or working time – they will therefore be much more in a logic of perception and credibility, of presidential stature, which talk a lot when they see Emmanuel Macron. At the same time, they reject the tribunician logic that they see in the candidates Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Marine Le Pen.
The abstention rate is more than 26% for this first round. Is abstention also related to age?
The scores of abstention are indeed massive among young people. Thus, 42% of 18-24 year olds and 46% of 25-34 year olds did not go to the polls on Sunday, against only 12% among 60-69 year olds. This is a real sign of distrust of political action: young people have the feeling that the political class no longer has the answer to the issues they identify as essential. Above all, this questions us from a sociological point of view about the relationship of young people with our democracy, which is becoming a democracy of the elderly.
Today, it is the 60 years and over who make the election. They are the ones who brought Emmanuel Macron to the second round, for example. It’s not really a question of age, but rather a question of generation: we are perhaps in the process of building a generation of abstention. And I think this phenomenon is dangerous, in a way, because the vitality of our institutions now depends on our elders, who themselves are not eternal. Especially since tomorrow, abstentionist citizens will most certainly continue to perceive politicians as incapable of changing things and will continue on this path.
How to explain such a renunciation in the face of the vote?
I see several logics being expressed. The first is that of “all rotten”. In my book, I recall that 82% of 18-30 year olds consider our political staff to be dishonest. The second is that of “all powerless”: 80% of 18-30 year olds consider that their generation no longer believes in political action. On ecology, for example, only 10% of young people say they trust movements and political parties to provide effective responses to fight against global warming.
When asked if they abstained because of a lack of proposals on ecology, they answer that this is not necessarily the case. Above all, they are convinced that, even with a good green program, politicians will not be able to change things anyway. It’s a kind of electoral exile that didn’t necessarily exist before: according to them, voting is no longer useless.
Another dimension seems to me to be completely erased from the public debate: it is that of the crisis of representativeness. When we analyze the performance of Jean-Luc Mélenchon among 18-24 year olds, we realize that young people are looking for a political offer in line with their values and codes. We are in an extremely deep divorce with the political class that they currently know.
While 88% of 60-69 year olds voted in this first round and Emmanuel Macron won over 41% of those aged 65 and over, what will be the influence of retirees in the between-two rounds?
We know that Marine Le Pen is one of the few to convince almost all age groups: it is around 30% among 25-34 year olds, 35-49 year olds and 50- 64 years old. On the other hand, its scores fall among retirees, because its image is still too closely linked to the National Front and to the much more radical perception of the party among older people. She will therefore concentrate on her fundamentals: the results are clear enough to show Marine Le Pen that it is not profitable to go and address an older electorate who is clearly unfavorable to her.
Emmanuel Macron, he is in a more difficult score to play. He must continue to speak to his older electorate and reassure on fundamental registers, such as work, health or economic questions, while playing on a form of innovation to convince left-wing voters. He will have to be skilled at this, and has already begun this strategy during his speech on Sunday evening. By listing the different “France” he would like to build, by evoking “the new French era”, he seeks to seduce new voters, without offending his older activists – who constantly need to be reassured.