Although not everything has been decided in the first round, many conclusions can already be drawn from the past vote.
The political landscape of France has completely changed and is unlikely to be the same.
In the second round - Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron, and for the first time both have almost equal chances of winning.
At the same time, they are complete antagonists in almost all areas, they represent two different France, "bottom" and "top", and two different vectors of its development: the national idea against globalism.
Macron is surrounded by big business, consulting firms, lobbyists, immersed in European and international issues, and is now especially concerned about Ukraine.
And if at first his pre-election diplomatic efforts to implement the Minsk agreements were impressed by the French, then the subsequent course of economic sanctions against the historical neighbor - Russia, often to the detriment of the French economy, repelled the voter.
The energy independence that he promises looks like a change of supplier - instead of Russian resources, France will buy them from the United States for a lot of money, although at the same time he wants to develop his own nuclear energy.
The question is, why then in 2014, being the Minister of Economics, he approved the deal to sell the energy division of Alstom to the American General Electric?
The turbines that are used in the construction of nuclear power plants are the country's strategic assets both from a civil and military point of view, because the same technologies are also used in the construction of nuclear engines for army submarines.
Then such a financial deal was perceived as a betrayal of the country's national interests, a renunciation of sovereignty.
Now Macron is trying to buy back the assets.
But other scandals also spoiled his image during this five-year period.
For example, the use of American consulting firms to run the country and write laws.
Firms that received billions from the budget and did not pay taxes.
Claims have accumulated among millions of French people who are forced to make ends meet or have become very impoverished under Macron.
Although there are those who are quite pleased with his rule and point to a decrease in unemployment to about 7%.
But now, when prices for everything are rising, when filling one full tank costs an average of €120, the situation cannot but disturb people, especially if they are told that they will have to save more and endure in spite of Putin who lives far away from them.
And what to do with the increase in oil prices by 40%?
Eggs, sugar?
Flour is 20% more expensive.
About light, gas and heating, I generally keep quiet.
The scandal with submarines can be added to Macron’s piggy bank, when Australia bought American equipment instead of French — the president learned about the break in the “contract of the century” from the media and swallowed the insult.
Leaving Mali, loss of influence in Africa.
The Corsicans are also seething, who were promised to think about autonomy, but then did not even begin to talk, referred to the ongoing protests.
The support that the architect of the “color revolutions”, the ideologist of the bombing of Yugoslavia and Libya, the philosopher Bernard Henri-Levy, who spent this whole month in Ukraine in the company of the commanders of the Azov battalion, can serve as a kind of stroke to Macron’s entourage.
It is not surprising that Macron immediately blamed Russia for the events in Bucha.
Le Pen, a lawyer by training, urged to be guided not by emotions, but by law, to conduct an international investigation, and then blame.
As for France, in addition to the coming food crisis, the problem of security, drug trafficking, and Islamism has not been resolved in the country.
All this, together with an increase in purchasing power, was put at the center of her election campaign by the head of the National Association.
Marine Le Pen promised to return €150-200 to the French in her pocket by reducing taxes on fuel, she wants to control migration, make French laws more important than European ones, the EU itself proposes to remake it into a union of sovereign states, reduce, if possible, dependence on the United States and not accept those sanctions that hurt the French themselves.
Over the past five years, it has refined and refined its economic program.
Last time, in 2017, when she was in the second round with Macron, Le Pen frankly lost to him on all counts in the debate.
This time, she assures that she is much better prepared and counts on the support of those who are ready to vote for the future of France, considering the next five years to be decisive for the country.
The possibility of successfully using such a protest vote in theory can bring her success, the growth of her popularity has even been taken care of in the United States.
But Macron, in turn, has already returned to the previous labeling strategy, accusing Le Pen of racism, closeness to Russia, unwillingness to impose anti-Russian sanctions.
There is a demonization of her image both through his lips and through the leading media.
Here the work has been debugged for years.
And by tradition, that same political barrier is already being created, when everyone around, regardless of political views, calls to vote for any candidate except Le Pen.
The goal is by hook or by crook not to let her into the Elysee Palace.
The modern French elite does not need it there.
And so almost all former rivals, from socialists to republicans, went to call for Macron.
It was curious what Melenchon would say, yet he has almost the same number as Le Pen, the difference between them is minimal.
But instead of adding intrigue and keeping silent, he urged not to give a single vote to Le Pen.
Which, however, does not mean at all that all 20% will go to elect Macron.
Too many people can't stomach it right now.
The protests in Rennes and Nantes, where they voted for Mélenchon, are indicative.
“Neither Macron nor Le Pen!”
the youth shouted and smashed shop windows and cans that night.
Another important result of the first round is indicative.
The collapse of traditional parties: the socialists fell back in 2017, the Republicans showed the worst result now.
Below 5% is a complete failure, which does not even allow one to count on compensation for pre-election expenses from the state treasury.
De Gaulle and Jacques Chirac are turning over in their graves.
And Nicolas Sarkozy was silent to the last, understanding the situation, but did not call to vote for Valerie Pekress.
She also lost all the weight and credibility that she had at the time of winning the primaries.
After all, she was predicted to be Macron's main rival, they even said that she could defeat him in the second round.
But instead of moving up, or at least in a straight line, she quickly flew down and eventually called to vote for Macron.
Defeat of the Republicans.
Sad spectacle.
The announcement of the results was met in silence at her headquarters, and then quickly dispersed.
The socialists do not even have 2%.
Breakdown and decay.
Ahead of the main contenders are two weeks of rallies, convictions and promises.
Whoever wins the election will have a hard time — and not just because of the current difficult economic situation.
Powerful will be the opposition and resistance of the defeated camp, which in any case represents a significant number of the French.
Polls say that the numbers, unlike in 2017, could be much closer, the difference between the candidates is only a few percent.
The situation, according to one of the French diplomats who worked in the United States, is very reminiscent of the mood before the storming of the Capitol.
Of course, it is unlikely that anyone will storm the Champs Elysees now, but who knows what will happen in a few years, or at least this winter.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.