• The leader of France Insoumise, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, arrived at the gates of the second round on Sunday evening, with 21.95% of the vote.

  • Voters who voted for other left-wing candidates with more modest scores – Jadot, Roussel, Hidalgo… – should they have done differently?

    Do we blame them?

  • Among the testimonials and comments we have collected, no regrets.

    The “useful vote” for Mélenchon, very little for them.

Was it necessary, to ensure a place for the left in the second round of the presidential election, to favor the "useful vote" by voting Jean-Luc Mélenchon?

This is the calculation made by some rebellious people.

Because their leader, credited with 21.95% of the vote on Sunday, narrowly failed against Marine Le Pen (23.15%) to challenge Emmanuel Macron in ten days.

Less than two points difference with the candidate of the RN, knowing that the communist Fabien Roussel made 2.28%, the socialist Anne Hidalgo 1.75%, and the ecologist Yannick Jadot 4.63%.

The reproaches fuse towards these "small" candidates, sometimes creating tensions.

Sunday evening, Fabien Roussel was booed by rebellious activists.

Then the headquarters of the Communist Federation of the North was damaged.

And in Nantes, the offices of Europe Ecologie les Verts (EELV) and the PCF have been tagged with the word “traitors”.

“As a voter of Roussel, I would NEVER vote Mélenchon”

Are left-wing voters who did not vote Mélenchon biting their fingers?

Do we blame them?

Their response is unanimous: among the testimonies received, none have any regrets.

Starting with the supporters of EELV.

“I was called a 'social traitor' for having supported Yannick Jadot until the last minute, Sacha told us.

I regret that Mélenchon did not pass, but I do not regret my vote.

And for Charlotte, there was no question of going against her ideas: “it seemed essential to us, my family and me, to vote for ecology.

Many people criticized us for this, but I voted according to my deep convictions”.

Same topo among Roussel's supporters.

“The useful vote is a straitjacket, as Mélenchon said, ironically Jean-Christophe.

As a Roussel voter, I would NEVER vote Mélenchon, so the additions are worthless”.

For many, in fact, the communist and the rebellious were far too far apart.

Claude, “old voter on the left”, has “no lesson to receive (…) I will never vote Mélenchon, I will vote Macron without worry!

“, he advances.

As for Emilie, she dares a vegetable comparison: "If there is no orange, I will not take an apple instead on the pretext that it is a fruit if I do not like apples" .

Another remark from Matthieu: “The notion of usefulness in the vote is expressed much more in the legislative elections”.

And on the PS side, despite the berezina?

We find the same arguments, especially with Willy.

“Deeply socialist, I obviously voted for Hidalgo.

Friends who voted for Mélenchon blame me for it, but I tell them that I would never have voted for an anti-European”.

Moreover, he says, "a second round Macron-Mélenchon would have forced me to vote Macron".

“The rebellious who wanted to submit, a height”

Our readers are therefore entitled to their votes.

And it's not them who should be blamed, but Mélenchon himself, thinks 22Agauchetoute: “He is in a very bad position to reproach voters on the left for not having voted for him.

Hidalgo, Taubira agreed to a primary except him and Jadot, here is the result!

".

“Mélenchon did not want to ally himself, he wanted others to submit to him.

The rebellious who wanted to submit, a shame”, mocks Anti_Lozer.

As for Patrick, what he feared the most was “the cult of the leader.

With Mélenchon, I find a lot of things that have always made me doubt his sincerity.

And if it is not the fault of the rebellious, then it is the fault of the others.

MinutePapillon voted for Mélenchon: "If there are any criticisms to be made, it is rather the small candidates (Jadot, Roussel, Hidalgo) who have maintained themselves instead of taking example from Taubira".

An observation shared by Florent, yet not from the left: “He could certainly claim better without these parasitic candidacies”.

It's relentless, concludes Jean-Pierre: "All these people who refused the alliance before the first round and who are now howling wolf, I tell them" too late ""

“Freedom is voting for whoever you want”

Finally, there are those for whom there is no debate.

First because it would not have taken Jean-Luc Mélenchon to the Elysée.

“In the 2nd round, he would have had no vote reserve”, imagines Patibulair.

And according to Paula,


"we can also consider that Mélenchon has already taken all possible votes from Roussel, Hidalgo, Poutou, and that the rest of the voters (like me) have not been convinced".

And then also – and above all – because a vote cannot be discussed.

“Democracy, freedom, is voting for whoever you want.

It's in our motto, in our Constitution,” continues Paula.

The secrecy of the vote is essential, insists Philany: "No one can ever blame me for anything since no one will ever know my choice".

She is joined by Ironius, who says “votes don't need to be exposed or clarified.

If not, what are the voting booths for?

".

Elections

Presidential 2022: Some northern support for a Fabien Roussel, accused of having caused Mélenchon to lose

By the Web

Presidential 2022: No, Jean-Luc Mélenchon did not praise the National Front in an old interview

  • Elections

  • Presidential election 2022

  • Jean-Luc Melenchon

  • Yannick Jadot

  • Anne Hidalgo

  • Fabien Roussel