Odoxa poll: Macron at a new low, Le Pen and Mélenchon capture social anger

The Odoxa-Mascaret political barometer published on Tuesday 27 October by Public Sénat and the regional press paints the portrait of an angry country that no longer trusts the executive to lead it out of the crisis. Conducted online on 21 and 22 October among 1,005 people, it was carried out a few days after the violence of 17 October and before the calmer mobilisation of Saturday 24.

The facts

According to this barometer, 83% of French people believe Emmanuel Macron is not a good president, two points more than the previous month. Only 16% hold a positive view. Public Sénat speaks of a record, but this needs qualifying: François Hollande had reached 84% in the same series. Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu gains one point, to 25% favourable opinions.

This figure is in line with other measurements. According to the Ipsos bva-CESI barometer for La Tribune Dimanche, conducted on 7 and 8 October, the head of state already had 82% unfavourable opinions, and purchasing power remained the French people's top concern, cited by 54% of them.

On the high school and student movement, the Odoxa survey reveals a paradox. The movement is considered justified by 68% of respondents, five points more than at the start of the month, but 63% want it to stop after the All Saints' holidays. Faced with the violence of 17 October, anger dominates (67%), far ahead of helplessness (19%) and fear (12%).

Finally, asked in an open question who benefits from the crisis, 74% of respondents name Marine Le Pen and 32% Jean-Luc Mélenchon. Bruno Retailleau (13%), Édouard Philippe (7%) and Gabriel Attal (6%) trail far behind. These are perceptions, not voting intentions.

The positions at stake

For the president of Odoxa, Gaël Sliman, quoted by Public Sénat, the French distinguish between demonstrators and rioters. He believes that Emmanuel Macron's statement after the violence had the opposite effect to the one intended. On Monday in Marseille, the head of state himself acknowledged a failure to anticipate, according to Public Sénat:

We had not anticipated at all what happened — Emmanuel Macron

He promised "strong announcements" and support for affected shopkeepers, while warning that the following Saturday would remain risky.

On the right, the poll benefits those who present themselves as defenders of order. Marine Le Pen gains three points of support, to 38%, Bruno Retailleau rises seven points among right-wing and centrist sympathisers, and David Lisnard records the biggest rise of the month. Gaël Sliman sees Édouard Philippe and Gabriel Attal as "collateral victims" of the unrest: the former drops three points.

On the left, Jean-Luc Mélenchon reaches 52% support among left-wing sympathisers, his best score in this group. François Ruffin gains thirteen points there and Raphaël Glucksmann, winner of the primary, seven. La France insoumise remains at the heart of a controversy: according to a Mediapart investigation published on 19 October, a territorial intelligence superintendent claims he was asked to write that LFI was behind the movement. As reported by LCP, Laurent Nuñez replied in the National Assembly that this was false, and Sébastien Lecornu deemed it "unthinkable" that a government would give such instructions. At this stage, the facts are not established beyond these testimonies and denials.

The analysis

This barometer confirms an old lesson of the Fifth Republic: when the state appears overwhelmed, it is the extremes who benefit, not those who govern nor those who claim to embody reason at the centre. Majority support for the movement shows that young people's anger is about concrete issues: guidance and university admissions, overcrowded classes, the high cost of living. The wish to see the mobilisation end reflects, for its part, fatigue and a demand for calm. The two are not contradictory: the French want the problem solved, not simply contained.

The temptation, for part of the right, would be to respond to this demand with firmness alone. It has its legitimacy, because public order is the first condition of the freedom to demonstrate. But order without social justice only postpones the next crisis. Social Gaullism understood this: the authority of the state also rests on its ability to keep its promises on schools, public services and purchasing power.

As for the intelligence controversy, it calls for caution on all sides. If the accusations reported by Mediapart were proven, they would be serious for the neutrality of the state. If they were not, this would need to be demonstrated transparently. In both cases, an independent verification would serve trust better than exchanges of denials.

Conclusion

Six months before the presidential election, this poll does not predict an outcome; it signals a danger: that of a campaign reduced to a face-off between anger and fear. To get out of it, the executive could accompany its announcements with a costed, verifiable timetable debated in Parliament, on schools as well as on purchasing power. Will the republican parties, on the right as on the left, be able to offer something other than security one-upmanship or permanent denunciation?

Article written with the help of artificial intelligence.