President Macron's successor: too many candidates?
France will elect a new president next spring. More than 30 candidates have already thrown their hats into the ring to succeed Emmanuel Macron. Commentators point to the risks that such a panoply of contenders and proposed policies poses.
Fatal referendum frenzy
Candidates who promise voters referendums on issues such as immigration and deficit reduction are treading on thin ice, L'Opinion warns:
“Should they lose on the very issues that lie at the heart of their programmes, the candidates would run the risk of their presidency being stillborn. And the likelihood of losing is by no means small. … Quite apart from their personal fate, the presidential election itself is undermined by this referendum frenzy. What's the point of voting for a candidate and their programme if they're going to gamble it all away when they win? By promising to take this reckless risk, those involved believe they are demonstrating their faith in democracy. But on the contrary, they seem to be acknowledging from the outset that the mandate conferred by direct election is not enough to secure their legitimacy.”
Irresponsible discord
Le Temps is concerned:
“The fragmentation of ambitions and the clash of egos are driving rational, sensible France into a wall. Such disarray is irrational and defies reason. Worse still: it is absurd and, above all, inconsistent. It will be responsible for the impending chaos, almost as much as the architects of that chaos, [the far-right] RN and [the radical left] LFI. Need we remind readers that the surprise entry of [the then Front National leader] Jean-Marie Le Pen into the 2002 run-off was caused by the rifts within the left? And that the consequences of that psychodrama were far less severe than they would be now because back then Jacques Chirac was on hand to salvage the situation?”
Challenges call for a serious strategy
Le Monde calls for candidates who inspire confidence:
“In a world in turmoil, the ability to protect the French people will play a decisive role in 2027. Yet nothing in the foreign policy espoused by the [far-right] RN – its fascination with authoritarian regimes, its admiration for Donald Trump, its closeness to Vladimir Putin – is likely to inspire confidence. ... It may well be that against all expectations the serious approach will prevail, given the existential challenges the country faces: a heavy debt burden, the need to restore its sovereignty and the fragility of its social model, which appears to be full of holes.”