As soon as Emmanuel Macron was re-elected, the media heavyweights provided after-sales service. To say of the president that he was “poorly elected”? It is ” undermine the legitimacy of the vote and thus the very foundation of representative democracy ” to The world. It is ” to create distrust of the institutions, in our democratic system for David Pujadas. Trade unions wanting to be considered? ” It’s factual! says Jean-Michel Aphatie indignantly.
The day after the second round of the presidential election, David Pujadas was annoyed in his program “24h Pujadas” (LCI, 04/25):
There are days when media and political background noise can be a little annoying. What is a “well-elected” president? Since last night, we have basically only heard one music. “Emmanuel Macron won, but in fact he lost a little”, “Emmanuel Macron is not completely legitimate”, “Emmanuel Macron is re-elected by breaking in”, “Emmanuel Macron must expand his team, he must keep a low profile, he must change its program, it should go on eggshells. “So a president who gets 58% of the vote is too little. How much does it take? 70%? 80%? 90% why not, it should be included in the law. Ah and so to be legitimate, you must not be elected against Marine Le Pen, it does not count, she is an anomaly.It does not matter that the voters chose her for another ballot, it is after all only ordinary suffrage.So whether we like Emmanuel Macron or not, the question is the same: when should we stop undermining the democratic government, which is an election, when will we stop creating distrust of the institutions, of our democratic system, of which we are also the first to generally condemn?
13.7 million abstaining votes, 3 million blank and invalid votes? It does not count. Left-wing voters who voted for Emmanuel Macron only to block Marine Le Pen? It does not count. What matters to David Pujadas is that Emmanuel Macron won. Although this means pretending that the forthcoming parliamentary elections do not exist, the Great Democrat calls for Emmanuel Macron to be given free rein:
What if, on the contrary, we let elected officials, no matter how they are elected, fully implement their program? An elected representative from the left to make a program for the left, an elected member from the right to make a program for the right, an elected member from the extreme center, as Emmanuel Macron defines himself, whether we approve him or not, perform his program since he was validated by the French. And if it was precisely immobility and confusion, in short, the feeling of public powerlessness that fueled this mistrust, this alienation from politicians, which we continue to regret. So it’s just a question, but it’s a question.
A cohabitation? On the set, the hypothesis is largely evacuated: ” I would say there will be no cohabitation (Sophie Coignard, Point); ” I do not think so, and above all I do not want it “(Louis de Raguenel, Europe 1),” Not desirable, absolutely! (Nicolas Bouzou)
There is also no room for criticism from its side World : “Challenging the legitimacy of the presidential election, a dangerous game” headlines the leading newspaper in its editorial on April 27. There, too, we condemn insidious music [qui] spreads for the purpose of questioning the legitimacy of his choice. »Campaigns for the parliamentary elections? Almost a majestic crime:
The protest is revived by the radical left, which is seeking to mobilize its troops for the June parliamentary elections. By claiming to be “elected” to prime minister and portraying Emmnanuel [sic] Macron as the president of the republic “the worst-elected of the fifth republic”, Jean-Luc Mélenchon continues his attempt to blow up institutions and his challenge to an opponent whom he has denied for five years the right to carry out his policies.
Or even further: But their game [la droite et « les extrêmes »]which consists in pretending to be optional features while contesting the rules is particularly perverse. “Before concluding:” All those who enjoy shaking up the legitimacy of the vote and thus even the foundations of representative democracy would do better to think about how to re-interest the electorate. »
The day before at LCI (26/04) it was Jean-Michel Aphatie who shouted loudly:
The bottom of the air is factual. In France. Academically, really. Laurent Berger, we are not used to it: Laurent Berger is a cute Republican boy, he signs on a platform in The world. What is the name of this column? ” [Monsieur le président,] You will not be able to meet these challenges alone ”. But precisely, 58% of the vote, 18 million votes. All alone ? They chose by ordinary election, all alone? Of course he is a man of choice, but he is not alone, he has the people behind him! “No, no, he’s all alone. How does Laurent Berger explain this? Laurent Berger, not a revolutionary! Laurent Berger, how does he explain it? In his forum he explains this: Mr. Macron, we’ll see, we voted for you, but we did not give you our votes. Ah bah, it’s better to stop everything at once! Do not even bother to start! If Emmanuel Macron had only votes and no votes … Stop, we stop everything, we stop the fifth [République], we’re doing the sixth, the seventh, we’re appointing Marine Le Pen, I do not know what we’re doing, it’s just as much … it’s very serious! In fact, it is factual!
Other rebels? Yes, ” Philippe Martinez, who says a word that seems banal, but in context, when you think about it anyway … That “actual word”? After criticizing the use of 49.3 for pension reform (not ruled out by two ministers) by saying: ” It is the opposite of dialogue and consultation. It is a strong passage. “(Philippe Martinez, RMC, 26/04) And Aphatie to delegitimize social mobilizations in advance: Emmanuel Macron” said what he would do for pensions […]. There it is very clear, so there is a popular mandate “Listen: 1. The dispute will not be legitimate; 2. Parliamentary elections do not exist. He will continue:” The bottom of the air is factual. For all that. For we lose sight of simple things: Emmanuel Macron has been elected, his program is clear, 49.3 is constitutional. »
Barely three days after the second round, the ceasefire came from senior media officers against any form of protest – whether the latter takes the form of a public position, an election campaign (for parliamentary elections) or collective organization (unions and politics for pension reform). Something to give a serious taste of the upcoming media violence …
Acrimed is an association that values its independence. We do not use advertising or subsidies. You can support us by making a donation or by joining the association.