Presidential Election 2027Probabilities of winning, recalculated every day
Gabriel Attal
Photo: Ismail Aissoub, CC BY 4.0, Wikimedia Commons

Candidates

Gabriel Attal

RE — Centre / Renaissance

1st-round score
11.7% 4.4–21.3
Qualifies for the 2nd round
21%
Comes first in the 1st round
5%
Wins the election
6% <1–11%

Model, not a poll · spread across scenarios · 80% interval · 1 Nov 2026

Profile

Experimental · automatically generated (local model) from Wikipedia and the press — may contain errors.

Gabriel Attal, former Prime Minister and Secretary General of the Renaissance party, is positioning himself as a candidate for the 2027 presidential election. He proposes organizing a "primaries of the democrats" bringing together the center and the right to designate a single candidate against the extremes. This initiative aims to consolidate the central bloc in a context of electoral difficulties and social tensions.

Strengths

  • He benefits from the support of figures within his camp, such as Aurore Bergé, who backs his primary project to designate a single candidate. CNEWS Right · 31 Oct 2026 ; 20 Minutes · 31 Oct 2026 ; RTL · 31 Oct 2026
  • According to L'Opinion (center-right), his discourse on a "liberal turn" and a planned economy is perceived as a relevant programmatic direction for the central bloc. L'Opinion Centre-right · 29 Oct 2026 ; Le Parisien Centre
  • He maintains media and field visibility, participating in public events such as the Route du Rhum to sustain his campaign. Le Télégramme · 31 Oct 2026 ; Ouest-France · 31 Oct 2026

Weaknesses

  • Several media outlets, including France Info and Le Nouvel Obs, note a drop in polls and describe his "democratic" gathering as a flop due to a lack of buy-in from other candidates. France Info · 30 Oct 2026 ; France Info · 30 Oct 2026 ; Le Nouvel Obs Centre-left · 30 Oct 2026
  • According to Libération (left), he is criticized for political inconsistency, having previously refused any alliance with Bruno Retailleau before inviting him to his primaries. Libération Left · 30 Oct 2026
  • Bruno Retailleau's camp deems the primary project "stillborn," while other sources mention a risk of being wiped out in the second round amidst social anger. RFI · 31 Oct 2026 ; Le Parisien Centre

Text from Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Polls and trend

Dots: one first-round poll. Line: model average. Band: 80% interval.

How to read this chart. Each dot is a published poll (pollster, end date of fieldwork); the line joins the average score estimated by the model. Hover over a dot to see the pollster and sample size.

Learn more

Polls from different pollsters are not directly comparable: each has its own method and usual bias, which the model corrects in part. The spread between dots on the same day reflects this diversity as much as statistical uncertainty.

View the figures as a table
DatePollster1st-round scoren =
22 Oct 2026Cluster1712.0%3000
22 Oct 2026OpinionWay4.0%973
22 Oct 2026Ipsos9.5%1500
22 Oct 2026Ipsos4.0%1500
21 Oct 2026Harris Interactive11.0%2094
21 Oct 2026Harris Interactive5.0%2094
21 Oct 2026Harris Interactive10.0%2094
19 Oct 2026Ifop6.0%1928
19 Oct 2026Ifop5.0%1928
19 Oct 2026Ifop4.0%1928
19 Oct 2026Ifop6.5%1928
19 Oct 2026Ifop13.0%1928

Estimated share and uncertainty fan

Experimental: this block does not feed into the probability of winning. Left of the vertical line: dots are polls, the line is the smoothed median of the estimate, the pale band its 80% interval. Right: the state estimated on the day of the last poll, carried forward 28 days with the same random walk; three nested bands hold 50, 80 and 95% of the draws. It measures the uncertainty of the estimate; it does not announce the vote.

Experimental · does not feed into the probability of winning

Experimental: estimated share of Gabriel Attal and uncertainty fan Last smoothed median: 4.7% on 22 Oct, from 27 polls. Fan at 28 days: 50% of draws between 3.5 and 6.2%, 80% between 2.7 and 7.9%, 95% between 2.1 and 10.2%. 0102030 Share of voting intentions (%) 24 Apr17 Aug10 Dec3 Apr27 Jul19 Nov Date 1 Oct · Cluster17 · 12.0 %28 May · Ipsos · 8.5 %8 Jul · Ifop · 15.0 %8 Jul · Harris Interactive · 8.0 %9 Jul · OpinionWay · 7.0 %10 Jul · Elabe · 7.5 %19 Aug · Harris Interactive · 8.0 %25 Aug · Ifop · 8.0 %28 Aug · Elabe · 6.5 %2 Sep · Ipsos · 7.5 %3 Sep · OpinionWay · 7.0 %9 Sep · OpinionWay · 8.0 %9 Sep · Ipsos · 6.0 %10 Sep · Harris Interactive · 8.0 %10 Sep · OpinionWay · 7.0 %21 Sep · YouGov · 9.0 %24 Sep · Harris Interactive · 5.0 %29 Sep · Ifop · 8.0 %8 Oct · Harris Interactive · 5.0 %14 Oct · Ifop · 13.0 %14 Oct · OpinionWay · 7.0 %15 Oct · YouGov · 6.0 %16 Oct · Elabe · 4.5 %19 Oct · Ifop · 5.0 %21 Oct · Harris Interactive · 5.0 %22 Oct · Ipsos · 4.0 %22 Oct · OpinionWay · 4.0 %
  • Poll
  • Smoothed median
  • 80% interval (past)
  • 50% fan
  • 80% fan
  • 95% fan
  • Carried-forward median
  • last poll

How to read this chart. Horizontal axis: time; vertical axis: the share of voting intentions, in %. Dots are polls, the line is the median of the estimate. After the vertical line the bands widen: the further from the last poll, the less certain the estimate.

Learn more

The three nested bands hold 50, 80 and 95% of the draws of the estimated state, carried forward with the same random walk as the opinion model; they contain neither future polls nor the vote itself. Validation shows this layer's intervals are too narrow: read them as a lower bound on uncertainty. The table under the chart gives the same values as numbers.

View the figures as a table · Fan values
Estimated share in %, by percentile of the draws.
Days after the last pollDatePercentile 2.5Percentile 10Percentile 25Percentile 50Percentile 75Percentile 90Percentile 97.5
022 Oct4.04.24.44.75.05.35.6
729 Oct3.13.54.04.75.56.27.2
145 Nov2.63.23.84.75.86.98.3
2112 Nov2.32.93.64.76.07.49.3
2819 Nov2.12.73.54.76.27.910.2

Probability of winning, day by day

Line: main scenario. Band: spread across poll scenarios (min–max).

Reconstructed curve: the model replayed day by day on the polls already published. Days without a recent poll are missing.

How to read this chart. The line is the candidate's probability of winning over time, the band its uncertainty interval. It is reconstructed day by day on the polls already published.

Learn more

A falling probability does not say the candidate is "losing": it says that, given the known polls, a smaller share of simulations has them winning. The model knows neither manifestos nor events, only the numbers.

Second-round head-to-heads

How to read this table. Each line pits two candidates against each other in the second round. The first table gives the score of head-to-head polls; the second, the share of simulations in which the first named wins.

Learn more

Head-to-head polls test specific pairs on a given date; the model, for its part, simulates all possible pairs from the first round and vote transfers. The two figures can therefore differ without contradicting each other.

Second-round polls

Attal – Le Pen43.1% 40.7–46.0 3 polls, latest on 19 Oct

80% interval — Second-round polls : 1st-round score A.

Most likely match-ups according to the model

Why it moved

These items coincided in time with the movement. The model does not prove a cause-and-effect link: a coincidence is not an explanation.

30 days

Probability of winning: 9.4% → 5.8% in 30 days (−3.6 pts)

Average 1st-round score: 13.4% → 11.7% (−1.7 pts)

Breakdown (probability, in points)
Polls leaving the window — 180 polls −0.1 pts
Ageing of polls −0.2 pts
New poll — 7 polls −1.7 pts
New poll — 7 polls 0 pts
New poll — 7 polls −0.1 pts
New poll — 7 polls +0.3 pts
New poll — 7 polls −0.1 pts
Change of main scenario — 28 polls −1.3 pts
House-effect correction −0.4 pts
Total−3.6 pts

Computed without any additional model: the same model, replayed changing one thing at a time. The lines add up to the total.

Market: no quote on both dates.

In the press over the same period

66 articles (previous period: 0) · Attention spike on 29 Oct: 5 articles against 0 on average · Attention spike on 30 Oct: 27 articles against 1 on average · Attention spike on 31 Oct: 26 articles against 3 on average · Topics : Alliances 39, Economy 3, Polls 3, Security 3

These items coincided in time with the movement. The model does not prove a cause-and-effect link: a coincidence is not an explanation.

How to read this table. Each card breaks down the period's movement in probability into contributions: published polls, vote transfers, other items. The sum of the lines equals the total movement.

Learn more

The card names, for each contribution, the poll concerned (pollster, date). The market and the articles from the same interval are given separately, as context: they are not demonstrated causes.

In the press

What newspapers write is not voter support. None of these figures enters the probability.

How to read this table. The list shows recent articles in which the candidate is mentioned, with headline, outlet and date. Each headline links to the original article.

Learn more

The number of mentions measures press attention, not opinion: an article may be favourable, critical or purely factual, and the site does not judge. The outlets tracked cover the whole spectrum; their list is on the "Press" page.

Mentions : 66

What the markets say

How to read this chart. The solid line is the model's probability; the other lines are betting-market quotes. Above the chart is the day's gap.

Learn more

A betting market reflects money stakes, with their biases and liquidity. It is neither a poll nor the truth: it is another source, shown next to the model so that everyone can compare.

Model 6% · Market <1% (kalshi) · Gap +5 pts — within the noise