The name is absent



TO SURVIVE DE GAULLE


15


women who had made up their minds — as opposed to 49 percent of male
respondents — declared they intended to vote for de Gaulle on the eve
of the runoff ballot.*'0 As in the case of age differentials, the extended elec-
torate appears to be slightly less balanced than the restricted electorate.
It may well be that a direct two-option confrontation — especially between
de Gaulle and the Left — tends to make temporary Gaullists of those many
women who identify with the MRP (France’s most openly Catholic party)
or with the Independents, or with no party at all.®7

With regard to religion, an IFOP survey conducted after the presidential
election of December, 1965, discovered that among those respondents who
identified themselves as “regular practicing Catholics,” 66 percent had pre-
ferred de Gaulle (as opposed to 8 percent for Mitterand), while among
those who declared themselves “without religion,” only 18 percent favored
de Gaulle (as opposed to 72 percent for Mitterand). Nonetheless, de Gaulle
won the support of 37 percent of self-declared “nonpracticing Catholics,”
and apparently retained his hold over many Protestant voters in Alsace,®8
demonstrating that Gaullism was not simply a neoclerical movement.
Though relevant evidence is limited, it appears that the restricted electorate
is only slightly less Catholic, despite its larger share of urban, male, and
younger voters. In a national survey conducted three months before the
March, 1967, elections, 70 percent of those respondents who intended to
vote Gaullist on the first ballot were Catholics who practiced either regularly
or from time to time. In contrast, 53 percent of those who intended to vote
for the Federation of the Democratic and Socialist Left were either non-
practicing Catholics or nonbelievers.09

With respect to profession, the joint FNSP-IFOP election studies indicate
that the distribution within the restricted Gaullist electorate is very much
like that among French voters generally. In the first ballot of the 1958
legislative elections, the UNR had its full share of workers (30%), civil
servants and employees (20%), artisans and merchants (17%), liberal pro-
fessional men (7%), and
rentiers (19%), and lagged behind the normal
distribution (6% as opposed to 10%) only with regard to farmers and farm
laborers.70
(Rentiers are defined as persons who live off income from prop-
erty, stocks, or other investments. The number of persons so classified here
indicates that numerous retired persons were classified in this way.) With
occupations categorized slightly differently in the FNSP-IFOP survey of
voting on the first ballot of the 1962 legislative elections, the UNR again
appears remarkably close to the national distribution among occupations.
Only workers are significantly underrepresented (15 percent, as opposed
to 20 percent so classified in the whole sample), and only retired persons
are significantly overrepresented (17 percent as opposed to 12 percent).71
A national survey taken three months before the 1967 elections revealed



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. SAEA EDITOR'S REPORT, FEBRUARY 1988
3. The name is absent
4. The name is absent
5. Modelling the health related benefits of environmental policies - a CGE analysis for the eu countries with gem-e3
6. The name is absent
7. Multi-Agent System Interaction in Integrated SCM
8. Applications of Evolutionary Economic Geography
9. The name is absent
10. Regional dynamics in mountain areas and the need for integrated policies
11. Studying How E-Markets Evaluation Can Enhance Trust in Virtual Business Communities
12. Foreword: Special Issue on Invasive Species
13. Impacts of Tourism and Fiscal Expenditure on Remote Islands in Japan: A Panel Data Analysis
14. Individual tradable permit market and traffic congestion: An experimental study
15. LAND-USE EVALUATION OF KOCAELI UNIVERSITY MAIN CAMPUS AREA
16. The name is absent
17. Chebyshev polynomial approximation to approximate partial differential equations
18. Hemmnisse für die Vernetzungen von Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft abbauen
19. TRADE NEGOTIATIONS AND THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN AGRICULTURE
20. Trade Openness and Volatility