France is entering a transformative phase in terms of its executive power, moving away from the traditional expectation of a dominant legislative mandate. As the country prepares for the next presidential election, political strategists are observing a fundamental shift: the era of the absolute majority behind a single leader is fading, replaced by a fragmented landscape where coalition-building is no longer a choice, but a necessity.
Robert Zarader, the head of the communication agency Bona fidé, suggests that this new reality may force a total overhaul of how candidates present themselves to the electorate. According to Zarader, the traditional model of a solitary presidential candidate is becoming obsolete. Instead, he posits that the logique de majorité absolue derrière le futur président is being replaced by a more collaborative, “ticket-based” approach.
This shift is not merely tactical; it is a response to a deeper erosion of political conviction and the rise of a communication-first culture. In a recent analysis of political communication, Zarader argues that the public debate has been significantly impoverished, with a lack of clear political visions being masked by an explosion of media “containers”—from the proliferation of 24-hour news channels to the relentless cycle of social media.
The Rise of the ‘Presidential Ticket’
For decades, French presidential candidates have run as individual figures, selecting their Prime Minister only after victory. However, Zarader suggests that the current volatility of the electorate makes this gamble risky. He argues that “l’ère des tickets est peut-être venue,” proposing a system where candidates would indicate their chosen Prime Minister from the outset.
This approach would mirror systems seen in other democracies, such as the United States, where a presidential and vice-presidential ticket is presented as a unified package. In the French context, this would serve as a signal of a pre-negotiated alliance, providing voters with a clearer picture of how the government would actually function in a parliament where a single party is unlikely to hold total control.
The move toward tickets is a direct acknowledgment that the “center” is no longer a guaranteed stronghold. While Emmanuel Macron attempted to dissolve the traditional left-right divide during his rise to power, the political reality has instead seen a resurgence of ideological extremes. Zarader notes that those who have most successfully projected a coherent vision of the country are currently found at the fringes rather than within traditional party structures.
Communication vs. Political Substance
The tension between “the political” and “the communication” has become a defining feature of the current era. Zarader’s critique centers on the idea that communication has not just supported politics, but has effectively replaced it. This “substitution” occurs when the weakness of core convictions leads candidates to rely on the aesthetics of leadership and the machinery of media reach rather than substantive policy frameworks.
This phenomenon is amplified by the current media ecosystem. The multiplication of news channels and the constant demand for political pundits have created a high-volume environment where the “container”—the format of the interview or the viral clip—is more key than the “content” of the political proposal. This environment favors candidates who can master the medium, regardless of the depth of their political platform.
The impact of this shift is most visible in the way traditional parties have struggled to compete with the extremes. While traditional parties often operate within the constraints of established diplomatic and legislative norms, extreme movements have been more adept at using digital platforms to project a simplified, powerful vision of national identity and governance, filling the void left by a perceived lack of conviction in the center.
The Fragmented Mandate: What it Means for Governance
A president who wins without a clear absolute majority in the National Assembly faces a significantly different governing experience than those of the past. The consequences of this fragmentation include:
- Negotiated Legislation: Every major bill must be the result of a compromise between the executive and various legislative blocs.
- Cabinet Instability: The Prime Minister’s role becomes a focal point of tension, as they must balance the President’s agenda with the ability to avoid a vote of no confidence.
- Policy Dilution: The “pure” vision of a candidate is often diluted during the coalition-building process, leading to incremental rather than radical change.
This environment makes the “ticket” idea even more appealing. By naming a Prime Minister early, a candidate can signal which coalition they are targeting and who will be the primary negotiator with the National Assembly, reducing the uncertainty that typically follows an election.
Timeline of the Executive Shift
| Era | Primary Logic | Executive Structure | Legislative Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| Traditional | Absolute Majority | President $rightarrow$ Appointed PM | Dominant Party Control |
| Macronist | Dissolution of Divide | Centrist Coalition | Fluid Majorities |
| Emerging | Ticket/Coalition | Pre-defined Presidential Ticket | Fragmented/Negotiated |
The Path to 2027
As the 2027 presidential election approaches, the primary challenge for candidates will be bridging the gap between high-impact communication and sustainable political vision. The ability to present a “ticket” may become a litmus test for a candidate’s realism; those who insist on a solitary path may find themselves unable to govern effectively in a divided assembly.
The next critical checkpoint will be the continued evolution of legislative alliances within the current National Assembly, as these dynamics will serve as the blueprint for the coalition strategies employed in the next campaign cycle. Official updates on electoral law and potential reforms to the voting system will be the key indicators of whether a formal “ticket” system could be legally integrated into the French process.
We invite our readers to share their perspectives on this shift in the comments below. Do you believe a “presidential ticket” would bring more stability to French governance?
