I expect a dramatically more contentious 2nd round than many in this thread (and the media) are predicting. I am not convinced that Fillon's voters will move to Macron, whatever he himself tells them to do.
But based on what? Le Pen performed worse or exactly as predicted, according to the polls. In fact, the polls were probably one of the most accurate in a long time. Also, I really doubt old people (who are basically the only ones who voted for Fillon) will flock to Le Pen en masse. I'm not French but I would guess that name
really doesn't sit well with older people, as they probably associate it with Jean-Marie.
Also, not picking on you specifically, but this type of thinking has to be one of the worst GAF memes in recent history. It even gets more ridiculous with every new election.
Austria was a close election, but van der Bellen was in the lead. And he won more decisively than predicted.
Okay, so surely Wilders will win in the Netherlands, won't he? Surprise, he didn't by a wider margin than predicted, and I mean, even if he had, that still wouldn't have put him in charge.
Okay, so surely Marine Le Pen will win the first round of the French elections, won't she? Surprise, she didn't win and performed slightly worse than predicted.
And now we're talking about an election where the candidates aren't within 2 percentage points, but over 20? I'm sorry, but what? I really hope that stops after Macron beats Le Pen 67-33 (calling it now!). Or are we then going to talk about a German party hovering around 8% and now facing a leadership crisis somehow seizing power?
I mean, there is no evidence of such things whatsoever, in fact, there's lots of evidence against it. The
only point in favour of this "silent right-wing majority" thinking is Trump, and that's mainly to blame on the US' weird election system -- Clinton won the popular vote after all. It's bordering on a conspiracy theory and looks like talking the right into power.