Socialist Segolene Royal and conservative Nicolas Sarkozy have a few days to persuade the French electorate that they are the best choice for France.

After the first round of the presidential elections took place last Sunday, the two advanced for what will be a run-off to replace outgoing French President Jacques Chirac, who is stepping down after 12 years.

Sarkozy registered a slight advantage over Royal, having polled 31.1 per cent of the votes against the socialist contender’s 25.8 per cent, but that could all change when the two face each other head to head on 6 May.

Last Sunday’s first round eliminated 10 other candidates, from Trotskyists to far right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen. Le Pen had hoped to repeat his strong showing of 2002 but instead finished fourth, with only 10.5 per cent of the vote.

One now has to see where the votes for the candidates who were eliminated will go. Equally importantly, one also has to see whether the turnout for the second round of the election will be as high as last Sunday’s, which reached 84 per cent – a staggering figure for a country like France.

Should she win, Royal would be the first woman president of France, and she has openly appealed to women to vote for her, saying her election will have positive consequences not only in France but around the world.

Whoever of the two shall win, France will get its first president with no memory of World War II. But this is the only matter than links the two candidates.

The two acknowledge their differences, and this is what perhaps will take the race for the presidency to the wire.

The runoff offers “a clear choice between two very different paths,” Royal said after the results of Sunday’s election were known.

For his part, Sarkozy said that by choosing him and Royal, voters “clearly marked their wish to go to the very end of the debate between two ideas of the nation, two programmes for society, two value systems, two concepts of politics.”

The winner’s task will not be easy: France is a troubled nation after many years of high unemployment, increasing competition from growing Asian economies and a perception that France is no longer as influential in world politics as it used to be.

Both have said they will work to get France back on its feet, but the difference between their ways and means was very much in the open.

For example, Sarkozy said he would loosen labour laws and cut taxes to invigorate the slow economy. He calls France’s 35-hour work week “an absurdity” and wants to make overtime pay tax-free to encourage people to work more. Work creates wealth that creates jobs, he says.

On the other hand, Royal would increase government spending and conserve the country’s generous worker protections. She would remove a relatively timid job reform that made hiring and firing easier. She argues that public spending on job programmes and raising the minimum wage will breathe life into the laggard economy. She would keep the 35-hour work week.

Business leaders and others who believe that France must reform to avoid economic decline when compared to Asia and America will prefer Sarkozy. People worried about their jobs may opt for Royal.

In the end, the 6 May election is still open for all results. Both Royal and Sarkozy leave sections of the electorate cold – Royal because she’s seen by some to be too inexperienced; Sarkozy because he leaves minority voters worried because of his tough views on immigration and crime.

A scramble is now on for voters in the middle ground and others who deserted the left and right in favour of other candidates.