Agnieszka Wiśniewska: If the young elected the president, Sławomir Mentzen would be in the second circular and Adrian Zandberg. Why are the differences between young and old voters so big?
Przemysław Sadura: In age group 18–29 years is chosen differently from older groups, due to the fact that younger ones search clarity. Parties with a more extremist message are credited, it may be programme radicalism, but it may besides be aesthetic radicalism.
We got utilized to it, it was the standard of the 3rd Republic of Poland, that in various incarnations the Korwin-Mikke parties received the voices of young people. The extremes until late were designated by the Confederate and Sławomir Mentzen, and Braun appeared, who received quite a few votes by 30-year-olds, so besides by the elderly.
On the another hand, Adrian Zandberg appeared, who turned out to be the most radical, but on the left. Magdalena Biejat was more moderate. She mobilized women, fresh Left prepared an offer for a 30-year-old, but Zandberg came and stole the young, seduced them with a truly large message and a well-made run in social media.
When Janusz Korwin-Mikke got good results among young people, there were always voices that young people were more radical, looking for something else, but they grew out of it. Now there are more of these young people looking for another policy. Grow up?
As we look at the age structure of the Confederate voters, there is simply a immense group of youngest people who have been attracted by the Confederate to a greater degree than before, but you will find a large group of 30-40-year-olds who in the past most likely had the chance to vote at least erstwhile for any kind of incarnation of the Korwin party. The Confederate collects the fruits of the twenty-year-old Orc of Korwin, who did almost Sisif work, did these campaigns, inserted this stone, but erstwhile he almost made a good result, he started something before the election – and it attacked a disabled child, and this misogynistic thing he told – and his support landed where it should have been. After his defeats he started again and so on throughout the past of the 3rd Republic.
That way there's a small 30-, 40-, almost 50-year-olds who already know this transmission. Of course, these voters can besides think of interest categories – they are formatted under neoliberalism and for example have their own economical activity. There may be any sleazes out there who hatred women or are xenophobic. This colourful coalition is increasing stronger. It shows that working on young voters makes sense.
The effects of Korwin's years of work were besides collected by Grzegorz Braun, who got over 6 percent. How come pre-election polls didn't see this coming?
Most of the polls were made at a example of a 1000 people, a assurance level of 95, or the margin of mistake was 3 percent points. In Braun's case, all the polls that predicted he'd get between 4.84 and 7.84 percent, but they were almost gone. In these elections, as in many others, right-wing voters tended to avoid answers or to give false answers, so the quotes of utmost right-wing candidates are underestimated.
All of them?
Yeah. Navrock, too. And this is simply a clue how to read polls before the second round. We must correct Karol Nawrocki's score by at least 2 percent points in his favour.
The second crucial thing: if we are talking about polls, let us remember that there were quite a few candidates with a akin score. To be honest, I did not attach myself to the order of candidates who received a fewer percent in the polls, although I assumed there would be a fight between Simon Holovnia and Magdalena Biejat, possibly Adrian Zandberg.
There were respective candidates who had a fewer percent in the polls, but Braun's score amazed the most. How did he convince the voters?
One wonders which component of his fascist communicative attracted people. I don't think it's anti-Semitism, even if Braun's acting like he's been transferred from the 1930s. The 20th century, the end-aged intelligent-Jewish eater. However, I think Braun has gained from anti-EU and anti-Ukrainian narratives.
You wrote with Sławek Sierakowski in the study Poles behind Ukraine but against Ukrainiansthat anti-Ukrainian moods are growing.
They grow up and have no place in mainstream media. And this then beats the candidates who are against the EU and against the Ukrainians. For me, it is incomprehensible that the debaters did not respond erstwhile Braun poured out his anti-Semitic xenophobic sewage.
Maybe this liberal mainstream didn't want to believe that Braun could have so much support? erstwhile we saw in the poll 3 percent for Braun, we thought that if you corrected these 3 for a poll error, it would come out zero, and it turned out to be 6.
We're just trying to look at reality through pink glasses. We've beaten up political criticism reports respective times. erstwhile we published the study Poles behind Ukraine but against UkrainiansWe've heard that we're exaggerating and why say things like that.
It was the same six months ago. In a study published on the 15th October election anniversary, Hidden Power Crisis, we wrote that the government coalition electorate dominated by negative sentiments, disappointments, a sense of disappointed hope that there was no sense of perpetuity. And nothing has been done about that deficit. Now it's actually besides late to change anything.
Rafał Trzaskowski, who has been a brick presidential candidate for the past years, ceased to be a favourite on Sunday. alternatively of swearing on reality, politicians gotta start changing it, due to the fact that that's what people anticipate from the government.
The uncomfortable fact is that Trzaskowski may be hard if he is not a candidate for the full government coalition. Leaders of all parties should not only support him, but besides actively convince voters. It would besides aid to make a compromise around unresolved issues specified as abortion and the wellness contribution for entrepreneurs so that people can hear what Trzaskowski will sign in the first weeks of the presidency.
She supported him. Magdalena Biejat. She and Adrian Zandberg did a good job. Is that a sign that the left is not dead yet?
She's not dead, but she's inactive not conscious. The old regulation is that, in general regardless of the era, about 10% of our society has left-wing views. Whether it was the II of Poland or the III of Poland. The ewenement was advanced support for the SLD, but then the SLD had voters with non-left views. Now the left is very much that left-wing part of society has perfected, giving them the choice and as many as 3 candidates.
It made the discussions about the divisions on the left come back.
Leaders of left-wing parties live in the false belief that their electorates are very different. Recently, I was working in focus with a group that voted for the left, and in these elections she supported various of its candidates, and they between these left-wings do not see the difference. 1 woman told her it was Biejat who told her how to vote in the first circular to vote with her heart, so this woman voted for Joanna Senyszyn.
The participants in that survey told me that they didn't realize what Magda and Adrian had been arguing about, why they didn't like each other. possibly it's time for a cleaning conversation on the left, possibly it's time to put this company together due to the fact that divisions are ridiculous.
Of course, if Adrian continues to think he has a monopoly on his left-wing conscience, it will be difficult. Although during the run erstwhile he attacked Biejat, he showed that he could besides play cynically and opportunisticly. It is paradoxically a good sign – due to the fact that the cynic will deal with old activists from the erstwhile PZPR faster than the idealist. Old companions did not know how to talk to a radical, revolutionary, utopiat, but with opportunists they can.
If the left does not agree, the mechanics of political evolution will destruct them from political life, and they will be replaced by another formation. due to the fact that left voters won't disappear.
**
Przemysław Sadura – habilitated doctor, prof. of the University of Warsaw. Lectures at the Faculty of Sociology of the University of Warsaw. Founder of the Field of dialog Foundation. It examines relations between the state and society in the fields of functioning of different public policies. Author of books, among others State, school, class and co-author (with Sławomir Sierakowski) of the book Population of populists.
