French presidential Election of 1974

Following the death of President Georges Pompidou the April 2nd 1974 of the continuations of the Disease of Waldenström, a presidential election anticipated is made necessary. It will be held the May 5th and the May 19th 1974 . This election, which marks the backward flow of the Gaullisme, will be concluded by the nomination from a young president from 48 years which cultivates an image of modernity, Valery Giscard d'Estaing. The second turn, who opposes it to the candidate Union left François Mitterrand, will be tightest of the history of the Fifth Republic, the victory being finally ensured Valery Giscard d'Estaing only by: 430000 votes in advance.

This poll is also that of another record: that of the voter turnout. With 87,33% of participation in the second turn, it is more the low level of abstention from all the history from the Vote for all in France.

Candidates

In the majority, two candidates

The candidate of the UDR, Jacques Chaban-Delmas

Jacques Chaban-Delmas, deputy and mayor of Bordeaux, is 59 years old. Prime Minister of Georges Pompidou of 1969 with 1972, it can incarnate a fidelity with the Gaullisme which is not solved with the passeism - it will take again in the form of slogan of countryside the topic which had been already been the directing wire of its passage to Matignon: the “new business”.

The April 4th, two days hardly after the death of president Pompidou, the very same day of the burial, Jacques Chaban-Delmas declares his candidature. The dispatch of the AFP will fall on the Téléscripteur S at 4 p.m. 09, while one pronounces with the Parliament the funeral praise of the late one. Valery Giscard d'Estaing will not fail to exploit with its detriment this awkward precipitation.

The fact is that Chaban-Delmas has good reasons to want to go quickly. Even if its companies to gather behind him the party gaullist bore their fruits the previous months (its close relation Roger Frey obtained the presidency of the parliamentary group, and it could push Alexandre Sanguinetti, a “historical” gaullist criticizes towards President Pompidou with the general secretary of the party), it knows that other ambitions can compete with it within the movement gaullist. And it is indeed cacophony in this camp: Christian Fouchet, in the name of absolute fidelity with de Gaulle was the first to be launched out as of the April 3rd, whereas, on April 5th, it is inconstant the Edgar Faure which also makes know its intention to contribute. But most prejudicial in Jacques Chaban-Delmas would be a candidature of the Prime Minister in station, Pierre Messmer, in the name of the heritage of the Defunct president, with the legitimacy which its function can confer to him.

However a group “pompidolien” carried out by the Minister of Interior Department Jacques Chirac and two advisers of president Pompidou, Marie-France Garaud and Pierre July, pushes in this direction Pierre Messmer conscious of his lack of charisma and not very inclined to launch out in the battle. This last announces the April 9th its intention to launch out if that makes it possible to make the unit of the majority, then is withdrawn the evening even after having noted not to be followed (if not by Edgar Faure, which benefits from it to be withdrawn with plume of a combat badly started for him). Jacques Chaban-Delmas, who obtained the April 7th the support of the central committee and the parliamentary groups of UDR, is thus definitively the one applicant of the party gaullist. He also obtains the support of small the Center democracy and progress of Jacques Duhamel the April 9th, a management Committee approves this support by 35 votes against 7 abstentions). But its legitimacy is undermined by the overflow of candidatures declared during the week.

The publication the April 13rd of “Proclamation of the 43”, call of 4 ministers and 39 members of Parliament UDR or close to the UDR, still saps its candidature. Beyond the Set language of the text, a thing is clear: this one does not mention the name of Chaban-Delmas and thus repudiates the candidature which the signatories are supposed to support.

Consequently, the course of the countryside of Chaban is summarized with a continuous tumble in the surveys. Perhaps the low blows of part of the UDR do not explain all: several commentators allot also the failure of Jacques Chaban-Delmas to his strategic choice of a campaign centered on social topics, which startles the line without biting on the electorate of François Mitterrand.

One can announce for the anecdote a last tactical awkwardness of Chaban, that to invite André Malraux to take part in his spot of official countryside. This one is very sick and the appearance of this old man who holds a prophetic speech where it calls upon the manes of Jules Ferry is hardly to rectify the image of unhappy Chaban-Delmas .

The candidate of the “change in continuity”, Valery Giscard d'Estaing

Valery Giscard d'Estaing, that the French indicate familiarly under the initials of “VGE”, is since already 1962 Minister for the Economy and Finances (with a three years interruption). It does not remain about it less, with its 48 years, young person of the three candidates likely to carry it.

In the beginning member of a party to the image droitière, CNIP of Antoine Pinay, Giscard left this movement in 1962 when this one entered in conflict with the president Charles de Gaulle. In 1966 it can nevertheless express its difference compared to the most orthodoxe gaullism while proclaiming: “We are the center and European element of the majority”. Besides its political training, the Independent Republican , becomes a force impossible to circumvent of the majority, counterbalancing the weight of UDR in the majority. Daring to be distinguished still more while inviting to vote “not” with the referendum of April 27th, 1969 and thus taking part in the fall of De Gaulle, he is not less minister of all the governments under the presidency Pompidou.

Remained in a decent silence for the period of national mourning, Giscard launches out to shift the April 8th. It is of its provincial stronghold, the town hall of Chamalières (a small town of the suburbs of Clermont-Ferrand), that it makes the advertisement of it while stating to want “to look at France at the bottom of the eyes”.

Valery Giscard d'Estaing is at the beginning of her countryside able of to federate behind its name almost all those who are not gaullists on the right and at the center right, of the Extreme-right-hand side anti-gaulliste nostalgic of OAS to moderated democratic Center of Jean Lecanuet . It has from now on to make countryside in the difficult situation without a priori of outgoing minister by incarnating the revival to disavow the heritage; to express this ambivalence, it will re-use a slogan which had already been that of Georges Pompidou in 1969: “Change in continuity”.

More precisely, it is the April 10th which the democratic Center brings its support for the giscardienne candidature, to which Jean Lecanuet joined without hesitation; an extraordinary political council approves this decision with 157 votes against 84 (with 7 abstentions). Side of tiny the republican Center, the centrist party of Michel Durafour, one is also giscardien. On the other hand the National center of Independent and Country the of Antoine Pinay, who is not any more that the shade of itself under the direction of Camille Laurens, will not be unanimous to line up behind its former member, and will adopt a variable attitude from one department to another.

Valery Giscard d'Estaing will conduct a campaign of extremely coherent image to the second turn, without never inflecting her strategy: to aim to the center. Quite characteristic of this positioning of its speech of the meeting of Nantes of the 1 {{er}} May is this quotation: “The fight is between the center and the extreme-left”.

With respect to the candidature Chaban, the tactics are to be unaware of it. No positioning answers those of its competitor of the majority; at most the topic of the “new men” tries it to exploit the rejection of the “State UDR” by part of the opinion. In the last week before the first turn, within sight of the surveys which ensure to him to have overcome this first obstacle, Valery Giscard d'Estaing can offer the luxury to refer to her participation passed in the “government Chaban-Delmas” as if this name were that of honourable reprocessed.

Against Mitterrand, it is a question of exploiting the difference in generation. The idea forces campaign, it is that it is about a man of late the Fourth Republic; one will thus be ironical about “the man of the past”. The natural topic of the anticommunism, that the acquired audiences of the meeetings like to hear, will be used only précautionneusement: they are the supporting roles who undertake some, Michel Poniatowski particularly, or more still the anonymous documents of countryside the candidate, who must seem a man of gathering, takes care well as for him not to take part in the aggressive polemics.

What imports above all, it is to give to the French the personal image of a man of head and heart. After five years with finances, the candidate already forged an image of technician to the higher intelligence; it is a question of capitalizing on this one by inflecting it to appear more human. During the countryside, one will thus see VGE playing of the Accordéon or Football, and it is in same logic that the children of the candidate will be used in the construction of the image of their father (Hyacinth, thirteen years old, is reproduced on the large poster of countryside in the sides of Valéry). The candidate also will exploit his relative youth: one will be made photograph with the orders of a Hélicoptère, and even barechested in the cloakrooms at the conclusion of the small footballistic demonstration. Lastly, last asset on Mitterrand which it is necessary to emphasize, the international recognition of the candidate is highlighted, so much well even the foreign politics is it almost absent from debates. The photographs of the documents of countryside represent the minister-candidate at the sides of large of this world; with the meeting of Marseilles of the April 27th two sentences will be enough to evoke that one attended Richard Nixon, Leonid Brejnev, Konrad Adenauer and Willy Brandt.

Once passed the first turn, the small center and right-wing candidates, Jean Royer, Jean-Marie Le Pen and Emile Muller invite all without reserve their voters to refer on Valery Giscard d'Estaing. Jacques Chaban-Delmas is a little more careful verbally initially (it “confirms his opposition solved to the candidature” of François Mitterrand), but the May 13rd formalizes its call more clearly to be voted for Valery Giscard d'Estaing. One can add to these supports that from now on formalized CNIP and especially that of the Radical party valoisien of Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber which gives up the May 14th its posture wait and see and lines up in the camp giscardien (by 70 for, 18 against and 1 abstention).

No rupture of style enters the two turns. At most the right-wing candidate will emphasize it a little more the topic of “safety”, likely to allure the hesitant last on the right without frightening the center. He also recalls that he will call into question neither the institutions gaulliennes of the Fifth Republic, nor the defense policy. But it is not essence; the objective remains the same one: to convince the last hesitant voters that he is a promising man vis-a-vis the man of passed and to propose to the French a “change without risk” .

François Mitterrand, candidate of the Union of the left

Then 58 years old, François Mitterrand, appointed Nievre, has already a political long experience since it was eight times minister and three times Secretary of State under the Fourth Republic, and that he was the one applicant of the Left to the presidential election of 1965, putting in ballot Charles de Gaulle.

Since it took the control of new the socialist party with the Congrès of Épinay in 1971 then signed the common Programme of government with the French Communist party and small the Mouvement of the radical lefts, it is the unchallenged leader of the parliamentary left and his candidature asserts himself by itself.

During the days which follow the death of President Pompidou, François Mitterrand, fine tactician, is injoignable. He knows that its relationships to the Communist party will be exploited by its adversaries and he plays of his politicking know-how to give the indication of greatest independence. When the April 4th, it cannot avoid briefly meeting the first secretary of the French Communist party Georges Marchais with the National Assembly, in the office of Gaston Defferre, it firmly refuses to enter in talks to organize its plan of countryside. A request written of the communist leader follows to solemnize by a Joint Declaration of the three left parties its candidature, to which it takes care not to answer while charging the number two with the Party Pierre Mauroy with returning a dilatory answer. After having played on the nerves of his partners without anything to yield, François Mitterrand can thus carry out the launching of his candidature as a free man.

As for that of Valery Giscard d'Estaing, it is the April 8th which the candidature is put on orbit. An Extraordinary congress of the Socialist party is joined together Salle of Reciprocity in Paris; it designates unanimously François Mitterrand like candidate of the 3748 mandates. It is only in the one second time that the other parties of the Union of the left are invited to support this candidature by a Joint Declaration.

Meanwhile the national management of the Socialist party unified decided the day before April 7th, as Michel Rocard recommended it, to adopt the Mitterrand candidature and to give up presenting the candidature of the trade unionist Charles Piaget (with a majority of 48 votes against 35 and one abstention).

Finally several trade unions bring in the days which follow their support for the candidature of François Mitterrand: initially the CGT and the CFDT, but also FEN (Federation of state education] and MODEF (Movement of defense of the family owners).

Contrary to VGE, Mitterrand does not have thus an adversary to manage in his own camp but a partner, which is not inevitably easier. The relations with PCF will be good throughout all countryside: the Communist party fights sincerely for the victory, agreeing with a real good will to pass by the conditions of the candidate of the Union of the left. Thus it is understood that the countryside of the parties will remain independent of that of the candidate; the two representatives of the PCF admitted in observers with the seat of countryside, Tour Montparnasse do not have an office, are not reproduced on the flow chart, and one even asks them to keep secret their presence. When the April 16th Mitterrand announces that in the event of election it will choose a socialist Prime Minister, its communist partners politely complain not to be warned by advance of its declaration, but do not express an excessive irritation.

Just like Giscard, François Mitterrand is conscious that the election will be played in center and thus endeavors to attract with him this fringe of the electorate. It refers the least possible to the “common Programme” which binds the parties of the Union of the Left - or restricts itself to return to the “orientations” of this program and, like besides its main adversary, avoids the Démagogie and takes care well not to formulate too precise promises as for the decisions which it would make, once elected.

The team of François Mitterrand called upon sounders to test the image of the candidate and the perception of the topics of countryside by the public opinion, and to be used as a basis for the development of the strategy. For the first turn, conscious that one is to be late on Giscard as regards the image, one will choose to rather direct as long as possible the countryside towards the political field than personal. As the main adversary is the outgoing minister for the Economy and Finances, one will weaken it by pointing out his results, while réfrénant attacks against his person: from where importance given to the topics of the rise of the prices and the social inequalities.

For the second turn, one will bring some inflections: to allure the moderate ones, the social problems will be mentioned under the set of themes of “social peace” rather than that of the inequalities; to allure the gaullists one will put in advance the topic of “national independence”. One is more worried to build an image competing with that of Giscard: as this last one will propose the family entourage. Finally one will allow a little more aggressiveness towards the competitor, of which it is advisable to break the consensual image by presenting it as a “man of the right” in what it has of retrograde. One identified three categories of voters among whom a margin of progression exists, and which will have to be allured in priority: elderly, executives, women.

After the May 5th, the small left-wing candidates and ecology invite all the three to support François Mitterrand, in more or less circumvented terms but without ambiguity: Arlette Laguiller declares that “the voices of the extreme-left belong to the voices of the left”, Rene Dumont “chooses the hope as a voter François Mitterrand, with personal capacity”, Alain Krivine invites “to beat the line by all the means”. On paper, by supposing the perfect carryforwards, François Mitterrand thus has 47,3% of the votes. If the carryforwards are done sufficiently badly on the right, the victory is possible. The individual evolutions gaullists, even marginal, are consequently of first importance: one thus notes with interest the rallying with François Mitterrand of the former ministers Jean-Marcel Jeanneney and Edgard Pisani or of old of Resistance like Jacques Debû-Bridel and Romain Gary, or the call to be voted white launched by the youth movement gaullist, the Union of the young people for progress. A little disappointed seems it at the conclusion of the first turn, François Mitterrand, in the last days, starts to accept the possibility of a victory.

Remain nine candidatures of testimony

A candidate of a moral nature on the right, Jean Royer

The mayor of Turns, in addition Minister for the Stations and Télécommunications in the government Messmer is 53 years old. Gaullist convinced without being member of UDR, it is known of the French for his tireless combat against the Pornographie, a topic which is not marginal with the beginning of the year 1970 when proliferates suddenly the erotic cinema. Famous for his decrees of prohibition of the films rascals in his good town of Turns, Jean Royer is also for his recent passage to the ministry for the Trade and the Craft industry where it is at the origin of a law which bears its name and which limits the development of large surfaces.

It is on these topics reactionaries and poujadists that it will build its countryside; in addition that of the categorical opposition to any liberalization of the abortion. With such a program, it is not surprising that Jean Royer excites the direction of the formula of the commentators: Franz-Olivier Giesbert sees there the “solemn prophet of the tradesmen and the ladies of piety”, the Nouvel Observateur a “Savonarole of the shops”, while Libération describes its positioning thus: “Royer, it is the politician of Pierre Bellemare and Michel Sardou, a president who feels chip. ”

As of his first decisions, Jean Royer - who cultivates a justified image of total moral rigor - will be distinguished by not doing anything like everyone, and this very often because these decisions are as many big mistakes. He starts by resigning of his ministry (Valery Giscard d'Estaing will take care well not to do as much of it), considering incompatible the statute of candidate and that of minister. More curiously, he will refuse with any declaration before the April 19th date of opening of the official countryside. The selected prime coat for its poster of countryside is the dark chestnut, and its photograph does not appear there. The candidate, who does not support the plane, rented a Autorail of two cars and carries out his displacements through France by these means of transport; of this fact it cannot of all the countryside give the feet to its general headquarter, which it had in addition very little the judicious idea to base with Tours and not with Paris like all its competitors. Finally if the young opponents with Jean Royer make turn by their tomfooleries his countryside to the pantalonnade, it therefore is not helped by his own wife whose interview on Europe 1 contributes to reject its candidature in the register of comic the grivois.

Alas for Jean Royer, which one will retain of his countryside, it is especially the disturbance of its meetings by hilarious opponents, who stress “Royer, Pétain, even combat” and “Royer, virgin, the people will have your skin”. Without service of order worthy of this name, the candidate can only box and makes the error counteract thus highly the disturbers (with Nice: “You do not have undoubtedly great a deal to make day, you did not invent anything”), exciting them still more. The top is reached with the meeting of Toulouse April 25th where an young woman dévêt and dances half an hour the naked chest, for the greatest happiness of the press photographers and the television cameras. The April 27th with Lyon, Royer confirms not to withdraw its candidature but explains why it gives up the public meetings to be folded back on the radio and television and the meetings on invitation. Its score is very disappointing, the capital of sympathy of which it had in the first surveys having melted progressively its disastrous countryside: with 3,2% of the votes cast, it will be hardly able to weigh on the second turn.

The first woman candidate with the presidency of France, Arlette Laguiller

The young person Arlette Laguiller - it has thirty-four years - is not completely unknown of the public, since its political training Workers' struggle promoted it “spokesperson” of the party to the legislative of 1973, at the time which it collected in a district of the XVIII {{E}} district of Paris 2,47% of the votes cast.

When president Pompidou dies, a strike initiated with the Crédit Lyonnais sets ablaze the banking environment since. Permanent trade-union to Working force in load of this sector, Arlette Laguiller is ridden on line, opposing the CGT, and again was under the projectors of the media; thus a report of Paris-Match compares it the March 23rd with another famous trade unionist: “It is called the Piaget banks in revolt”.

When its party indicates it to represent it with the candidature for the presidential one, Arlette Laguiller is thus by her acts in total coherence with her speech: the objective of a candidature is above all to wake up the revolutionary conscience of the working class and its program is initially “to give a voice and a face to all those which are keep silent”. If its direct competitors of the revolutionary communist Face can fustigate in Rouge its “vote-catching maneuvers”, the bet is successful: its electoral result, 2,33% of the votes cast, is more amusing for a party hitherto not very media. Undoubtedly, as the studies of the transfers of voice show it (a quarter of the voters of Arlette Laguiller states to refer on Valery Giscard d'Estaing to the second turn), a considerable part of its electorate it was justified by sympathy to a woman of the people and not by its calls to the Revolution. Nevertheless, the party trotskist will be able to build on this first base and “Arlette” will carry out five other consecutive candidatures which will spread out until in 2007.

The first ecologist in a presidential Frenchwoman, Rene Dumont

The nebula ecologist, which lived under the Pompidou presidency one period of intense development, is well defined to express its vitality in this election. One considers a candidature of Philippe of Saint-Marc, who prefers to undertake a bringing together with Valery Giscard d'Estaing, of Theodore Monod which refuses estimating itself too old, of the commander Cousteau which is challenged too. It is finally Rene Dumont, seventy years a reprocessed famous agronomist, who will carry the colors of ecology.

Its countryside iconoclast is very noticed, the candidate being characterized by his vestimentary aspect (a famous red sweater), its displacements in the bicycle, its formulas which explode of the traditional political discourse (“the car, that which been able, that pollutes and that returns idiot… ”). Its team can invent media “blows” which animate the very dull official countryside: the general headquarter of countryside is installed on a Bateau-mouche, the candidate on television brings a Pomme and water glass which he drinks in front of the televiewers to illustrate the ecological crisis.

The result is not with the height of the hopes that the interest of the public and the mediae for its innovative countryside could make it possible to nourish. The score obtained (1,3% of the votes cast) disappoints.

Six other candidates do not exceed 1% of the expressed bulletins

It is the president of the National front - a new party created in 1972 -, Jean-Marie Le Pen, which will be the carry-flag of the right-hand side of the right-hand side to this election, starting a series of candidatures which will carry out it in 2002 to the second turn. Exploded view in several bunches in permanent recombining, the extreme line leaves divided; the revolutionary tendency resulting from new Order carried out by Alain Robert and Pascal Gauchon and the tendency maurrassienne incarnated by François Brigneau are allied within the group Faire face (matrix of the future Parti the new forces) which competes with seriously the young person National front and put on the support for Valery Giscard d'Estaing rather than on an autonomous candidature. Finally the presence of very the droitière candidature of Jean Royer (which obtains itself the support of Jacques Isorni and association Pétain - Verdun, and is the candidate of the catholic circles traditionalists) is prejudicial as well obviously to the candidate of the National front. Under these conditions, Jean-Marie Le Pen - who centers her countryside on the fight against Communism and the strikes, the Avortement and for the defense of the reprocessed ones - obtains a ridiculous score (0,75% of the votes cast, to bring back to the 5,27% Jean-Louis Tixier-Vignancour in 1965): for the nationalist right, the Années 1970 are definitely a period of low water level .

In the center, almost all the tendencies approached one or the other of the three principal candidates: the Mouvement of the radical lefts of Robert Fabre adheres since 1972 to the common Programme of the left and thus supports François Mitterrand; the Center Democracy and Progress of Jacques Duhamel and Joseph Fontanet supports Jacques Chaban-Delmas; it is Valery Giscard d'Estaing who best succeeded in the calls of feet with the centrists, since the democratic Center of Jean Lecanuet and the republican Center of Michel Durafour join at once with its candidature, while the Radical party valoisien, then directed by Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber, supports it in writing pad by holding however the declaration of its formal support for after first turn. Only small the Movement democrat-Socialist of max Lejeune and Emile Muller makes the choice of autonomy. It is thus the mayor of Mulhouse, Emile Muller who represents with this poll a center alternative. Not very known the French, Emile Muller conduct a rather dull campaign and see sanctioned by the ballot boxes its strategy of autonomy, which receives the support only of 0,69% of the voters.

The extreme left trotskyste divided share. In addition to the candidature of Arlette Laguiller already mentioned above, Alain Krivine, the leader of the revolutionary communist Front is there to propose a revolutionary alternative. Its party considered initially the support for a “candidature of fights” of the self-management trade unionist Charles Piaget then, this one not being concretized, makes the choice of the autonomous candidature by preferring finally Alain Krivine in spite of his “middle-class” origins for the workman André Fichaut. In spite of the strong notoriety acquired by its participation in the events of May 1968 then its candidature of 1969, its failure is resounding: 0,36% of the votes, twice less voice than with the presidential preceding one and especially six times less than the other candidate trotskyste Arlette Laguiller.

Finally three other candidates it royalist “of left” Bertrand Renouvin for the Nouvelle French Action, and the two “federalists European” Jean-Claude Sebag (for the European federalistic Movement) and Guy Héraud (for his competitor, the European federalistic Party) - make conspicuous themselves especially to have obtained the three weakest scores of all times to a French presidential election by the vote for all, as well of many voices as expressed as a percentage expressed.

Unfortunate candidates with the candidature

To these twelve candidates one must add a certain number of personalities, sometimes of a notoriety relative and often completely obscure, which expressed their intention to contribute but did not meet the legal conditions required of the candidates, namely:

Adventures

Trouble among gaullists

As one mentioned above, the camp gaullist is not plain behind Jacques Chaban-Delmas. A group carried out by Jacques Chirac, Pierre July and Marie-France Garaud conspires to torpedo its candidature.

Certain commentators, initially, allot malevolent intentions to the Minister of Interior Department in his choice of the dates of the poll. Whereas the electoral legislation left him the choice between two dates, he proposed at the Council of Ministers latest; perhaps because he thinks that a long campaign is more capable to see to crumble the voting intentions for Chaban.

On the other hand, there is hardly doubt that the pressures of this group contributed to the Messmer episode of the April 9th. Pushed by his/her friends to ensure a changing pompidolienne, Pierre Messmer announces in the morning the possibility of its candidature in carefully weighed terms:

In front of the situation created by several candidatures of the majority of Georges Pompidou, because of the risk that made run to France, I determined myself to present to me by the votes of the French if these candidates withdraw themselves. I ask it to them

Edgar Faure, which included/understood as of the first surveys that it goes in the wall, benefits from the occasion to withdraw its candidature for 11 a.m. 30; Christian Fouchet informs 12 noon 45 qu' it maintains his.

The ball is then in the camp of the two principal candidates. Jacques Chaban-Delmas returns visit to the Prime Minister to the Hôtel Matignon around fifteen hours. Maintenance does not last that three minutes it mayor of Bordeaux is maintained.

After its rival thus decided, the occasion is then too beautiful for VGE to give the indication of a candidate of union: at 4 p.m. 30, its secretariat produces an official statement recalling that it is:

loan to be erased in front of the Prime Minister named by president Pompidou.

The operation succeeded, the Messmer trial balloon did not change anything, if it is not - but it is essential in the perception of the candidatures by the public opinion. It does not remain any more but with the Prime Minister than to withdraw itself:

The conditions not being joined together, I decided not to present my candidature for the Presidency of the Republic. My decision is irrevocable.

New attack against the candidature Chaban, the April 13rd in evening is diffused a call says “Proclamation of the 43” signed of four ministers (Jacques Chirac, Jean-Philippe Lecat, Jean Taittinger and Olivier Stirn), thirty-three members of Parliament UDR and six various members of Parliament right-hand side. Written in a particularly insipid style, this “proclamation” (which will be published the following day April 14th, day of Easter, by the Sunday newspaper ) recalls the principles of political philosophy gaullienne and greets the step of gathering of Pierre Messmer; the signatories conclude as follows:

Consequently, they will stop together and in conscience a position concerted in favor of the solution which will appear to them best to ensure the respect of these principles by making failure any socialo-Communist candidature, which would call into question the future of France and the happiness of the French.

The name of Chaban-Delmas is not nowhere quoted. The observers of the political life are not mistaken there: it is a stab in the back written in diplomatic terms, and a hardly camouflaged operation of support for Valery Giscard d'Estaing. To Beaune, Jean-Philippe Lecat will go until creating and chairing simultaneously two support groups, one in Chaban and one in Giscard!

New manifestation of the capacity of harmful effect of the ministry for the Interior, France-Evening publishes the April 20th a survey carried out by the General informations which shows VGE to take a final lead on Chaban. The observers there still are not mistaken there: there must be of Chirac there behind.

The April 21st, last affront, Pierre Messmer takes again the word to specify its support for the Chaban candidature… while specifying to act “by discipline”. One can imagine more enthusiastic support.

Which play plays Moscow?

Whereas the the United States of America took care to keep most strict neutrality in this countryside, conscious that very gesture with the support or in discredit of a candidate would be completely against-productive, the ambassador of Soviet Union in Paris, Stephan Tchervonenko, visits very public to Valery Giscard d'Estaing the May 7th, two days after the first turn, under the pretext of advance various files concerning the Franco-Soviet economic cooperation.

What means this gesture? The first literal interpretation is there to see an implicit support of the Soviet Union for the candidate of the majority which remains in string for the second turn: once eliminated the gaullist Chaban-Delmas, undoubtedly the preferred candidate of Moscow, one will prefer Giscard with Mitterrand, suspected of too much Atlanticism.

But, unexpected reaction, the political office of the French Communist party publishes as of the following day May 8th an official statement disapproving this interference in the countryside. One can in fact to wonder about the real motivations of Stephan Tchervonenko; without being able besides to exclude the simple blunder (after all same Stephan Tchervonenko lunched with François Mitterrand in early April), the assumption of a gesture for the French Communists rather than of the public opinion, during one time of relative tensions between PCF and PCUS cannot be excluded.

Last episode the May 17th where a civil servant of second plan of the Soviet embassy reacts with promptness to remarks anticommunists of the lieutenant of VGE, Michel Poniatowski, remarks which had before caused a protest of the PCF of a a little disproportionate virulence. The press covers the apparently minor incident abundantly; it is true that the embassy tried hard telephonically to contact the draftings to underline the emission of the official statement to them. According to the reading of the American diplomats, it could be a question there of a Soviet concession to the dissatisfaction with the French Communists, made in gesture of appeasing of the tensions caused by the visit of the May 7th.

The televised debate of the second turn

It is one of the great innovations of this poll: the two candidates of the second turn agreed to clash in an on line televised duel, like one makes with the the United States of America. Here are which is more exciting that the dull official countryside where each one monolog behind the same naked table. The come day, the May 10th, they are 20 to 25 million televiewers, about half of the French, who will attend the televised tournament on the two chains of ORTF and on a dozen European televisions. The debate is also retransmis on France Inter and the peripheral radios.

However there already were first this April, when the candidates clashed on the peripheral radios. No candidate clearly carried it on another in these debates, generally courteous and organized, even if per moments one or the other knew to show its direction of distributed (thus the April 25th on Europe 1, François Mitterrand: “You were eleven years minister” and Valery Giscard d'Estaing: “And you you were to it eleven times, I counted them”.)

One negotiates with roughness the conditions of the debates; at the beginning one would plan to propose two with the spectators of them, but VGE refuses a debate too close to the poll. There will be of them thus only one, one Friday evening, whose realization will be entrusted to Roger Benamou. Mitterrand, rather reticent with the televised debate, negotiates the total non-intervention of the organizers and the provision of the cameras. A Drawing lot preliminary to the retransmission gives the word in first to Giscard d'Estaing, given that Mitterrand will have thus the privilege to conclude the debate.

It is understood that the two organizers, the journalists Alain Duhamel and Jacqueline Baudrier will have only one role technical; they are there to remind the candidates where they are of their speaking time, not to direct the debate. The choice of the subjects is left with the free appreciation of the protagonists who will inveigh themselves with blow of questions/answers on the assessment of the current government whose VGE is the Minister for Finance and plan for the future, in particular of the common Programme of the left. Envisaged over one one hour total duration thirty, the debate is somewhat prolonged by common agreement to finish at the end of two hours.

None the adversaries will gain by KB. Each one affirms a style, Valery Giscard d'Estaing cultivating her image of first of the class which is familiar with the cases better than François Mitterrand and which reproaches its adversary for being the man of the past. François Mitterrand wants to show himself above the fray by affecting an irony detached when its adversary speaks, for per moments igniting with passion, as when it defends his will to make take part the communist in his next government or when it defends certain aspects of the programme of union of the left.

Finally what one will retain of the debate thirty years afterwards, it is the “short phrase improvised” by Valery Giscard d'Estaing: “Mr Mitterrand, You do not have the monopoly of the heart”. It is it whom will quote the commentators of immediate to conclude that VGE marked some points. But of the observers more to the fact of the techniques of communication make more technical remarks: Giscard knew better than Mitterrand to react by mimicry to the remarks of its adversary, to speak for short interventions, and to thus attract the camera on him, giving a more alive image, more reactive. François Mitterrand will learn a lesson for 1981 from it where it will require the presence of two realizers designated by the two candidates, and will bitterly make negotiate the organization of the plans of cut or reaction.

A survey Sofres carried out the following day records sudden but thin rise of the voting intentions for Valery Giscard d'Estaing (they progress to 51,5%) which total 50% in the days which follow. Effect of the debate or margin of error of the estimates? This televised confrontation does not seem to have had a significant effect on the public opinion, although the very tight votes and the very short electoral campaign make think that the debate will have inevitably influenced certain voters who could make the difference at the time of the final calculation.

The vote overseas

The fights of influence to control the votes in some territories overseas (Territory of Afars and Issas, the Comoros in particular) are followed the informed media, but observers them candidates in particular, but also the President by interim Alain Poher or the ambassador of the Etats - Linked - knows well that these territories can be an essential stake in a poll which is announced tight.

In the Straw and the grain , François Mitterrand poses the problem crûment: with Djibouti, Ali Aref control: 30000 votes, with the the Comoros Ahmed Abdallah approximately: 70000. One can legitimately have some reserves to cash take for money the allegations of an unfortunate candidate, but force is to consider that more the high ranking authorities of the State have same concerns: Alain Poher will make known into private with several personalities the concern which these operations inspire to him.

Jacques Foccart, with an unquestionable direction of the ellipse, is rather transparent on this subject in its newspaper: “I see Ahmed Abdallah, rather lengthily. For the Comoros, that will go” (on April 9th); “I see Pascal, who deals with the questions of finances in DOM-TOM for the account of Chaban” (on April 22nd); one will read as the relation of a telephone call received of VGE the May 8th in the morning, follow-up the afternoon of an appointment about TOM with Victor Chapot, treasurer of the independent Républicains, Foccart concluding the narration from his day by specifying as “it is regulated” with Aref and Abdallah. Mitterrand, for its part, claims that Abdallah directly paid to him to have negotiated in private conversation with Giscard the contribution of the voices under its control in exchange of the independence of the Comoros.

It is in this context that one can appreciate an incident in extreme cases of legal and of the policy. National Commission of Control - an organization made up of five magistrates, and whose role is to take care of the impartiality of the State in the countryside having decided to send observers overseas, it follows a conflict of competences between this one and the Constitutional council, which protests against this initiative.

It is advisable all the same to specify that, out the three very underdeveloped territories of the the Comoros, the Afars and Issas and Wallis-and-Futuna, the results of the second turn overseas do not diverge in a obvious way of those of metropolis and that François Mitterrand carries it even with the Réunion and in French Polynésie.

In any event, in fact the overseas territories will make the difference: even if the behaviors pointed by these some observers could influence a hundred thousands of voice, one is clearly in lower part of the variation which will separate in fine the two candidates, and Valery Giscard d'Estaing is also victorious on the only Metropolitan France, of: 350000 votes approximately.

Giscard and Mitterrand: two campaigns

The observers note in 1974 the penetration of the techniques resulting from the Publicité in the design of the electoral campaigns. Guard should all the same be taken: the same references were quoted in 1965, in particular to describe the countryside of Jean Lecanuet. One is in a logic of slow progression of the political Marketing on a long run and there is no clear rupture in 1974, except perhaps on some precise points, in particular the noticed irruption of the surveys in the countryside.

Buildings

The team of Valery Giscard d'Estaing settles in an office building, with 41, rue de la Bienfaisance, in the VIII {{E}} district of Paris, not far from the church Saint-Augustin.

For its part, François Mitterrand throws his reserved on a stage of the Tour Montparnasse, on left bank - for the little story one will note besides that these buildings had initially been reserved by Edgar Faure, which released them by renonçant the April 9th with its candidature.

Teams of countryside

As regards team giscardienne, a very particular role is initially entrusted to the Minister for Health Michel Poniatowski. Except flow chart, he is the close lieutenant of the candidate, that which must be consulted on all the important matters. On the same level, the number one of the team of the street of the Benevolence is Michel d' Ornano, which directs from there the political reflection assisted of a team close to three collaborators: Jacques Dominati (in addition charged with the countryside in Paris region), Jean-Pierre Soisson (for the countryside in province and overseas) and Roger Chinaud with the general organization. To assist it, a “cell ideas” is animated by Christian Bonnet and Jean Serisé, while Lionel Stoléru deals with the surveys.

In the field of the material organization, Roger Chinaud is specifically in load of the public meetings. Remarkable feature of the countryside giscardienne, the services centered on the communication are entrusted to technicians and not to policies: a service of relations with the press is directed by Maurice Dalinval, but it is especially on the level of the cell of preparation of the documents of propaganda that VGE made a remarkable choice: it is a professional advertizing executive, Jacques Hintzy of the agency Havas Conseil which with the load of this sector.

On the other hand the very political task of the service of order of the meetings must return to a right-hand man. It is Hubert Bassot which of it is responsible. This old of French Algeria will know to use the services of the groups of combat of the Extreme-right-hand side. The effective direction of the service of order is entrusted to old “hard” of OAS, Pierre Sergent which, according to Jacques Bern, would divide even the office of Michel d' Ornano the bully boys who take care of the grain in the meetings point out themselves by violences whose press of left makes its lambsquarters; thus in particular in the two Breton meetings of April 24th: with Rennes a disturber must be unconscious hospitalized, with Brest a handicapped doctor (it is paralyzed of an arm) which verbally took the defense of a tabassé disturber itself is coiled of blows and jeté on the ground since a staircase - it will have to be hospitalized for a quadruple fractures front armlever. Le Figaro , which it is true rolls rather for Chaban, can write in its columns under the feather of Patrice Delage: “The extreme-right-hand side ensures the safety of Mr. Giscard d'Estaing and his meetings. It had to be said”.

At François Mitterrand, one will quote the names of André Rousselet, in load of finances and general coordination shouldered by Georges Beauchamp with coordination and Pierre Joxe with the financing, of Georges Dayan with the political contacts, of Louis Mermaz with the departmental action, of Charles Hernu with the relations with the elected officials, of Jacques-Antoine Gau with those with the members of Parliament, of Paul Legatte with documentation, of Georges Fillioud with the contacts with the press. It is the lawyer Robert Badinter who represents the candidate attached to the National Commission of Control. The sensitive station of the management of the meetings and their service of order falls to Joseph Franceschi. Jean-Pierre Cot and Pierre Guidoni leads the political analysis.

For the design of the material of propaganda, François Mitterrand also did not go far Valery Giscard d'Estaing and did not call upon a professional of the political Marketing; however he either did not entrust this responsibility to him to a policy, since it is Claude Perdriel, the managing director of the Nouvel Observateur which in with the task. This one will have nevertheless to justify its choices near the “policies” which surround it and one undoubtedly leaves less the free support to him that to his counterpart of the camp of opposite.

The parties are not represented as such. However Claude Estier, formally to represent the newspaper there the Unit is in fact the contact near the Socialist party, while two communist representatives (whose François Hincker) are allowed Montparnasse turn, but without office and except flow chart.

Finally two other personalities take an active part in the countryside also except structures. Jacques Attali initially, under the pseudonym of Simon Ther, personally represents the candidate in the difficult negotiations (with the PSU, but also to make secret contacts with the German government in order to prevent possible speculations against the franc). Finally a personal friend of the candidate, François de Grossouvre follows it “like a shade” and is for him “all at the same time confidant, bodyguard and doctor”.

Slogans and “short phrases”

There are initially the Slogan S briefs, those which one registers above the platforms, and for Giscard on the tee-shirts. For François Mitterrand, it is “Mitterrand President”. One is more original on the right with “Giscard with the bar”, which will leave a durable memory.

Then there are the slogans used on the official posters. With the first turn, one tells an instructive anecdote on the countryside of François Mitterrand: whereas Claude Perdriel suggested using the percussion formula “Change France with François Mitterrand”, the policies of the countryside would have refused to him to prefer the heavy one there: “The only right-wing idea, to keep the capacity. My first project, to return it to you”. On the posters of VGE, one will read simply: “A true President”.

To the second turn, the coincidence of the slogans on the posters affixed side-by-side is almost cocasse: “A President for all the French” for Mitterrand neighbor with “the President of all the French” for Giscard.

Finally on the plan of the “short phrases”, in the long run, it is Giscard which will have carried it, since two of its formulations remain a long time in the collective memory: “to look at France at the bottom of the eyes” of its declaration of candidature and of course famous “the Mr Mitterrand, you do not have the monopoly of the heart” of the televised debate of second turn.

Each one its flowers

For Valery Giscard d'Estaing, two flowers are put side by side to evoke the “change in continuity”: the forget-me-not, symbol of fidelity, and the lily of the valley, flower of the revival. May 1st it is Johnny Hallyday in person which comes, in front of the objectives of the photographers, to offer the traditional lily of the valley to Anne-Aymone.

As regards François Mitterrand, not of surprised: the pink, emblem of its party, is also the emblem of its countryside. At the end of each one of his meetings, while International the resounds, the candidate takes a pink and holds up it.

Innovations: the Tee-shirt S of Giscard and caravans of Mitterrand

A gadget invented by the giscardienne team left a durable memory: the Tee-shirt S which post the slogan “Giscard with the bar” and which its young people supporters in the meetings carry. There is not only the small fry to wear these tee-shirts: Brigitte Bardot itself in revêt its generous curves, and will be requested besides by the president of its polling station with Saint-Tropez of going to change before carrying out its electoral duty… under the eye of the press photographers.

On the left, not of so memorable innovations. One tries oneself well to launch “caravans” on the model of those which furrow the beaches the summer with advertizing objectives, who will traverse between the two turns the departments where the electoral experts detected reserves of more abundant voices. One visits the coast Atlantique, the other the medium-sized cities to a hundred kilometers of Paris. More remarkable is the use in the countryside of Mitterrand of a Mailing, initiative innovative at the time: to call with gifts, one will specifically prospect the known senior officers of the files held by the Nouvel Observateur , that Claude Perdriel places at the disposal of the candidate.

Finally one endeavors to accumulate the supports of famous personalities. There is not only Brigitte Bardot with being solicited for a campaign. As ever, the two candidates of the second turn sought to gather signatures of support, among the writers and the actors (for Giscard Marcel Jouhandeau or Louis de Funès, for Mitterrand Vladimir Jankélévitch or Francoise Sagan), but also among the show business (Stone and Charden or Sylvie Vartan behind Giscard, Serge Reggiani and Dalida with Mitterrand).

Budgets of countryside

No credible public information is available on this subject; it is known well that at that time the essence of the political financing is occult, and the few sources which sought to reconstitute the real costs of the campaigns obtain results which vary whole with the whole. Finally about nothing is accessible to the public which allows to analyze the origin of the receipts of the candidates.

Between the two turns, François Mitterrand publishes a summary account of countryside, which would reveal a budget lower than 3 frank million . Even observant which does not make mystery of its sympathy to this candidate, Sylvie Colliard, cannot be easily deceived; she for its part estimates the real costs of the countryside of the left-wing candidate at 7 million approximately. Jacques Bern, who was informed of this estimate, evaluates for its part the budget of VGE about to the double, that is to say to 15 franc million.

Other analysts do not see the same order of magnitude: Jacques Gerstlé estimates the countryside of each finalist of the second turn at 40 franc million; it is also the estimate of the weekly magazine Current values . Christian Garbar, who followed the countryside much more reduced of Jean Royer obtained collaborators of this candidate an estimate of the cost of this one to 2 franc million (and it implies that there is there too a certain undervaluation); there is consequently sorrow to consider probable the moderate estimates of Sylvie Colliard and even of Jacques Bern.

Television

Television is not any more one innovation, and all the candidates know well that the choice of the voter will depend for a good portion on their services in the small attic window. Valery Giscard d'Estaing more seems however to have put on these media its adversary: it exposes to its team of countryside her priorities: “what counts, it is the style of the candidate on television”.

One above evoked the debate of the second turn, big event of the countryside; one will quote here some interesting data concerning the emissions of the official countryside: while cultivating his image of “famous person”, one can note that Valery Giscard d'Estaing is the candidate who best included/understood than the communication with a very broad audience requires to be simple to be clear. Though speaking more quickly than François Mitterrand (115 words at the minute against 99) it uses on the whole of the emissions only 1247 different words, against 1611 for its adversary.

This interesting study also noted the difference in use of the pronouns between the three principal candidates: at Giscard it is it “I” which dominate (73% of the uses of a personal pronoun), against “You” at Chaban (49%) and, in a way much less clear, “Us” for Mitterrand (to 32%).

Good use of its family

There still, it is Valery Giscard d'Estaing who innovates while choosing to expose to the projectors her four children, who form an important part of the system that assembles the giscardienne team to build the image of the candidate. Thus his/her Jacinthe daughter is reproduced it in her sides on one of the large posters of her countryside while elder the Valerie-Anne, coed with Sciences Po, is particularly active in the team of countryside and present in the photo pages of the magazines. The young Hyacinth, which is only thirteen years old, will be even presented to the public with the meeting of Poitiers of the May 11th.

François Mitterrand, seems it, drag a little feet to follow the same way. He is solved after the first turn to make some concessions with the new last style. His wife Danielle will thus come to her sides to present herself to the French at the time of the first spot of the official countryside for the second turn, and it is the photograph in large size of the Mitterrand family, with her children Gilbert and Jean-Christophe - without forgetting the dog posing in front of the country house of Soustons which will occupy the place of honor on first page of the document of countryside printed to several million specimens for the second turn.

Legal aspects

The presidential election of 1974 gives place to a dispute relatively not very abundant, and is not at the origin of particularly noticed jurisdictional decisions.

It offers nevertheless to the Constitutional council the occasion to reaffirm its competence to note the vacancy of the Presidency of the Republic. As it had done at the time of the resignation of the Général de Gaulle, the Council meets and makes publish a constatative declaration.

The Council reaffirms moreover its jurisprudence Ducatel C Krivine of the May 17th 1969 and admits the admissibility of complaints directed against the list of the candidates. Thus, in a decision answering a complaint of the candidate Maoist André Roustan it reaffirms the ineligibility of failed legal; it in addition confirms on complaint of the regionalistic candidate Robert Lafont that this one did not receive hundred valid presentations: among a hundred and fourteen signatures of which it is prided, eighteen come from elected officials who sponsored several candidates. In this last decision, the commentators note a light inflecting of jurisprudence: whereas in 1969 in the event of multiple presentation by the same signatory, the Constitutional council had retained the first received presentation, he regards from now on the totality of the presentations emanating of the same elected official as null.

In same logic, the Constitutional council admits the admissibility of a complaint of François Mitterrand against the list of the symbols allotted to the candidates (it disputes the attribution of the Cross of Lorraine with Jacques Chaban-Delmas), while rejecting it on the bottom.

For its part, the National Commission of Control, in addition to its interventions in the countryside reported overseas higher, takes some interesting initiatives within the framework of its mission of control of the televised countryside. It authorizes the debate of the second turn on line (whereas the emissions of the official countryside are remote, and are the subject of an examination before diffusion); within the framework of the official countryside, without strictly censuring any message programmed by such or such candidate, it “recommends” to Arlette Laguiller to modify a formulation on the “colonial domination” overseas; she refuses in Alain Krivine and Guy Héraud the participation in their spots of personalities not having French nationality.

One more notices the decisions of proclamation of the results of the two ballots. Whereas in 1965 and 1969 the Constitutional council had been restricted to give a report on “corrections of material errors” or “rectifications considered to be necessary”, it details from now on “cancellations” of votes, which relate to two offices with the first turn, and thirteen with the second (five completely, eight partially) while exposing by which irregularities the poll was vitiated in each commune concerned.

Finally the Council takes a more singular initiative, than he will repeat starting from 1988 with each presidential ballot, and will then extend to the referendums and parliamentary elections : it makes public a declaration of the May 24th 1974 (not published in the Official journal but included in the Recueil of the decisions published by the Council) where it suggests with the public authorities various reforms which appear useful to him to guarantee the regularity of the poll. So some are technical (obligation to send the signatures of presentation of the candidates on “official forms”), one at least is more directly political since the Council recommends to increase the number of necessary presentations to authorize a candidature. The majority of its suggestions will be followed, by way of constitutional revision or Organic law, and starting from 1981 they will be five hundred signatures of elected officials who will be necessary to be reproduced on the list of the candidates to the presidential election.

Surveys

The vulgarizing of the surveys is one of the most outstanding ruptures of this election compared to the past. It is almost daily that the press publishes forecasts of results for its reader-citizens; one will read the conclusions of them below. As it is seen, so much with the first turn than with the second the predictions appeared very close to the verdict of the ballot boxes; consequently confidence in the scientificity and the reliability of the surveys is strong at the exit of the countryside and the commentators use them without expressing doubts on lightings which they can offer.

Certain newspapers, in particular Nouvel Observateur , with the point for serious information but distracting, try to break the monotony of these lists of forecasts by publishing more specialized surveys. For this weekly magazine of left, the Sofres will study the carryforwards between candidates from one turn to another, or the attitude of the French in front of the televised countryside.

Lastly, invisible of the public, other surveys light the candidates and help them to refine their strategy according to the reactions of the electorate. In the Giscard team, Lionel Stoléru manages a “cell surveys”; in the Mitterrand team one will order two studies detailed to appreciate the assets and the weak points of the candidate. Even Jean Royer, with a budget of campaign another order, will order a study to build its positioning.

Two incidents both will imply the popular newspaper France-Evening. The first relates to the publication surprising with this newspaper, the April 20th of an emanating survey of the General informations. Although it does not make state for the first turn of a fall of the voting intentions for Chaban significantly stronger than those which one could read the previous days, this survey marks a turning: in the estimates of second turn, it gives Mitterrand gaining against Chaban but losing against Giscard. Several authors see in this quite convenient escape the leg of Jacques Chirac.

Second incident: not-publication per France-Evening of its survey of the April 17th, two days before of the poll, whose results should have appeared in the edition of the following day. The President of the Senate, Alain Poher, which takes over temporarily the duties of the Presidency of the Republic, takes the initiative to write to the managing director of the daily newspaper personally, Henri Amouroux, to ask him to give up this publication because of the influence which it could have on the sincerity of the poll. France-evening will submit at the request of the President per interim and will publish the results of the investigation later… only one year, the May 18th 1975. Alain Poher was wrong to fear a handling: the survey envisaged a tie between the two candidates of the second turn!

The role of the surveys in the countryside is the subject of innumerable comments, the Constitutional council will be made the echo in its “declaration” of the May 24th and will suggest of it the introduction of a “true statute of the practice of the opinion polls in election time”. A law will come in 1977 to give following this suggestion and to frame from now on the publication of electoral surveys whose publication will be from now on prohibited in the week preceding each ballot.

One will find below the results of the préélectoraux surveys published by the press the surveys ordered with IFOP were published by France-Evening and the Point , those ordered with the Sofres by Le Figaro and those ordered from Publimétrie by the Dawn . One there associated a survey on the carryforwards of voice between the two turns, published by Nouvel Observateur and realized by Sofres.

Surveys preliminary to the first turn

Surveys between the two turns

Study of the carryforward of the voices enters the two turns

Results

Thus at the conclusion of the first turn, François Mitterrand and the three candidates of extreme left and ecologist adds up 47,3% of the votes, Valery Giscard d'Estaing and the four candidates who desist in his favor by joining together 52,3%. According to Jean-Jacques Becker, the left is in light retreat compared to its performances of the legislative election of 1973.

Several political economists are leaning on the detailed results and studied the transfers of voice between the two turns. With much of insurance, Lucien Boucharenc and Jean Charlot think of being able to affirm that the right-wing voters of the legislative of 1973 abstained from at 13% with the first tower of presidential whereas those of left deserted the ballot boxes only at a rate of 4,5%. According to them, the victory of Giscard would be explained by the mobilization of this reserve of abstentionnists: in their reading, among the million new voters come to take part in the second turn while having neglected the first, two thirds approximately would have chosen Valery Giscard d'Estaing. By other methods, Alain Lancelot estimates that among these repented abstentionnists, there would be five of them out of eight which would have chosen the elected president. In both cases of figure, the carryforwards gaullists would have been sufficiently imperfect so that, without this reinforcement of last minute, one had been extremely near to a victory of François Mitterrand.

Geographical analysis

Leaving for the second turn the examination of the votes for Valery Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand, one will examine initially the charts of the voices obtained with the first turn by Jean Royer and Jacques Chaban-Delmas, (charts which is both available on line, as well the chart relating to Royer as the chart relating to Chaban (for the latter the cartography precisely describes the relative weight of the Chaban votes among the votes for the majority)).

For Royer, which strikes, it is the character completely localized of its rare successes. In spite of his very poor score, the candidate manages to obtain 33,8% of the votes cast in his stronghold of Indre-et-Loire. In the close departments, the scores remain very honourable, particularly in the very catholic grounds of the Anjou. Elsewhere there are nothing any more but crumbs…

For the Chaban vote, one notes in an obvious way the same phenomenon of baronnie local. In metropolis, Jacques Chaban-Delmas does not exceed Valery Giscard d'Estaing that in its electoral base of the Gironde and in three departments bordering: the Moors, the the Dordogne and the Charente for which it is necessary to add the Corsica (it is on the other hand at the head of the two candidates of the majority in all the departments and overseas territories). If one goes down a little low in the scores, to the zones where it exceeds the 30% of the voices of right-hand side, one distinguishes clearly on the one hand Languedocien midday and on the other hand areas located at the north of Paris. In Paris region its best scores are obtained in the popular suburbs around Saint-Denis. It is not simple to know if one must read in this geography the maintenance of a “hard core of the gaullism”; what is undeniable it is that these areas all are of the areas favorable to the left: except located exceptions, the places where the score of Chaban is honourable with the first turn, they are places where François Mitterrand will be at the head to the second turn.

The vote for Arlette Laguiller obeys him with a quite curious geography. It is not at all in the working departments that the candidate of the working class carries out her best scores (on the 19 departments where it carries out scores higher than 3% of expressed, there are of them only 3 in one the northern third of the country), but in the rural areas most devitalized, according to a large spot which recovers the Massif Central and overflows about it on the campaigns of the Berry in north, or of Toulouse midday in the south, laughing itself besides at the traditional political determinisms of these countries: its two better scores, it obtains them in the red Creuse (4,15%) and in the very preserving Cantal (4,03%).

Finally tropism for Rene Dumont is in the east: the good scores are in Alsace, Franche-Comté, the Rhone-Alps (at least in the east of the the Rhone), and also in Île-de-France. The chart of the strong points of the ecology policy for the twenty next years is already apparent with a nuance: the Brittany and the Manche are still grounds of mission. On a more reduced scale, one notes that in fact the districts with the most privileged environment were most favorable to the candidate of quality of life: thus in Ile-de-France it is with Sceaux that the best result (3,9%) is recorded and with Paris the most receptive district is the sixth (3,6%).

With the second turn, one finds France divided according to a diagram which joined that of the elections of the Fourth Republic: north and the South are favorable to the left - with some bastions of right-hand side which are intercalated there in the Yrénées-Atlantiques, the Alps and the Corsica - the West and the East votes definitely on the right, while the Massif Central divides between the two camps according to departmental political traditions installed well and the Paris and its suburbs distributes its votes on a sociological basis, the popular quarters voter on the left and the residential districts on the right.

What must initially be noted - but that one noted already with the legislative of 1973 -, it is the reconquest of the Nord-Pas-de-Calais, the Picardy and the the Ardennes by the left. The gaullism had clearly allured these working departments, the Socialist party and to a lesser extent its communist ally will profit from its backward flow.

Two long tendencies appear less directly on the chart opposite, because the departments which they relate to in general did not rock yet, but are not less very perceptible if one even compares the results of the poll with those of the presidential of 1965 with legislative of 1973. The first is the continuation of the retreat of the left on the Mediterranean coast and in Provence, gigantic if one refers to 1946 (up to -16% in the Var) but which is sensitive in several departments (Rhone delta, the Eastern Pyrenees, Corsica) even by taking 1973 for reference. Second is on the contrary the progression of the left in the urban centres of the West: if the charts drawn up on a departmental scale still reveal a dominant line almost everywhere in this area, the great urban centres of Nantes, Rennes, Caen vote less and less like the surrounding campaigns and the domination of the right-hand side on these areas could be blamed in the long term; the swing is already apparent in Seine-Maritime which starting from this election returns durably in the family of the departments favorable to the left.

Finally one will mention another key of geographical analysis of the votes which is differentiation between the urban vote and the rural vote: Valery Giscard d'Estaing carries it to 55% in the agglomerations of less: 20000 inhabitants, whereas on those of more than: 100000 (except Paris region) it is Mitterrand which is gaining to 56%. On the whole of the Paris and its suburbs, the candidates are about with equality.

Socio-professional analysis

A detailed study of the Sofres (it is a survey postélectoral carried out from May 20th to 22nd) allows more on the profile of the electorates of the two candidates present at the second turn.

| width=" 50%" align=" center" | |}

These tables speak about themselves: it is noted, whatever the mode of approach retained, from very marked cleavages the electorates separate from Valery Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand. The sections of population favorable to the left correspond very clearly to wage-earning to weak or average incomes. The distribution according to the age groups is also impressive: one is all the more giscardien that one is old. Finally religious cleavage is most strongly marked: it is seen, in 1974 Catholicism is far from to have ceased impregnating in-depth the French company and the practitioners are still enough numerous to be the part of the electorate whose vote is decisive.

Chronology of the electoral campaign

April 2nd: death of President Pompidou
April 4th: burial in the intimacy with Orvilliers. Funeral praise of President Pompidou to the National Assembly. Jacques Chaban-Delmas declares his candidature
April 5th: Edgar Faure announces its candidature
April 6th: ceremony of solemn homage to Georges Pompidou with Notre-Dame
April 7th: the Central committee and the parliamentary groups of the UDR give their support for Jacques Chaban-Delmas
April 8th: establishment of the decree of convocation of the voters. Valery Giscard d'Estaing declares her candidature. The candidature of François Mitterrand is approved unanimously by an Extraordinary congress of the Socialist party, then been the subject of a Joint Declaration of the parties of the left.
April 9th: Pierre Messmer announces the possibility of its candidature, Edgar Faure withdraws
April 11th: declaration of candidature of Jean Royer
April 14th: publication of “Proclamation of the 43” in the Sunday newspaper
April 17th: a broadcast debate opposes Jacques Chaban-Delmas and François Mitterrand on Europe 1
April 18th: the list of the candidates is stopped by the Constitutional council
April 21st: Pierre Messmer expresses his support “by discipline” for Jacques Chaban-Delmas
April 24th: André Malraux takes part in a television commercial of the official countryside in support of Jacques Chaban-Delmas
April 25th: discusses broadcast between Valery Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand on Europe 1. Unit meeting of support for François Mitterrand with the Exhibition site of the Porte de Versailles
May 2nd: discusses broadcast between Valery Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand on RTL
May 3rd: discusses broadcast between Jacques Chaban-Delmas and François Mitterrand on RTL
May 5th: first turn
May 7th: official proclamation of the results of the first turn. The ambassador of Soviet Union openly returns visit to Valery Giscard d'Estaing
May 10th: a televised debate opposes Valery Giscard d'Estaing and François Mitterrand, followed by more than 20 million televiewers
May 16th: great Parisian meeting Valery Giscard d'Estaing, with the Exhibition site of the Porte de Versailles
May 19th: second turn
May 24th: proclamation of the results of the election and beginning of the mandate of the President elected
May 27th: ceremony of nomination of the elected President and nomination of the new Prime Minister, Jacques Chirac.

Random links: