On May 18, the first circular of presidential elections will take place. We will most likely gotta wait for the second circular to settle the elections, that is to say, who will become president of the Republic of Poland, due to the fact that no of the main candidates will gather specified a majority, or more than 50 percent, to win in the first round. Based on the polls, it is reasonable to foretell that Rafał Trzaskowski and Karol Nawrocki will meet in the second round.
Whoever wins the election is very hard to predict, due to the fact that the difference in the votes cast will surely not be great. Although both major competitors guarantee their ‘citizenship’, independency from the main political forces to which they belong, formally, like Trzaskowski, or not, like Nawrocki, it is clear that they represent the Civic Platform and the Law and Justice. In the presidential election, however, the aim is to get votes not only of his organization electorate, but besides of voters of another parties and votes cast on individual else in the first round. These flows are never obvious, and they are decisive. It can be assumed that left-liberal voters (Hołownia, Left) will vote for Trzaskovsky, recognising him as alleged lesser evil than Nawrocki. Nawrocki can number on the voices of right-wing candidates, although it is not entirely predictable, as the voters of Sławomir Mentzen will behave: whether they will vote more on the basis, i.e. economical issues, here free marketplace or superstructure, or worldview. Incidentally, both candidates in the second circular will fight for Confederate votes, ensuring their free marketplace approach. In addition, Trzaskowski will most likely talk about a "moderate" approach to the alleged vice – in this sense his motion made during the debate to put aside the rainbow flag given to him by Nawrocki, although most likely spontaneous, was not as incorrect as it may seem (the question whether he could convince the Confederates that it is not the "Rate Reef"? In my opinion, however, most Mentzen voters will vote for Nawrocki, and it will be those votes that will guarantee his victory.
When following an election campaign, while speculating on the settlement of a well-run or badly run campaign, you can mention a number of issues covered in the position of multimedia policy.
A number of issues can be raised here, specified as the function of memes or tv debates.
Memes is simply a form of net communication of an ironic nature, which is simply a fast comment on reality, which can influence the shaping of the image of a given policy by effectively mocking it, for example its inauthenticity. For example, Trzaskowski became “Bonżurzem” and the memes concerning his journey with the “telecommunication” of the city in Warsaw effectively showed that creating himself as a regular Warsawist did not make much sense. The politician wants to convince us that he is 1 of us, but he is not, due to the fact that he is actually a “minister child”.
In this regard, Trzaskowski's inclusion in the script of a rich home master, unlike Nawrocki as a "boy from the estate", is surely in favour of the latter, due to the fact that most people did not have a guaranteed start like the president of the capital.
Furthermore, reading in 1 of the debates by Krzysztof Stanowski a fragment of the book "Rafal", about Trzaskowski's extraordinary courage among sharks and the fight against eel, made him an object of memoirial ridicule alternatively than serious treatment. Memes, as erstwhile an advertisement, through humor, are able to bind us to a certain image, just as in the case of Bronisław Komorowski as a good, "bingering" uncle.
The function of tv debates is besides not meaningless, especially as they were comparatively eager to be watched.
They show that first, clickability and popularity on the net does not automatically translate into a good performance on TV. I think the best example is Sławomir Mentzen. The Confederacy is an online organization very efficient, possibly even the most efficient in this medium, as they can make a substantively meaningful, comic and memorable tic-tock message. But tv is not the same as the Internet, recording videos and, in the end, controlling the transmission.
After the debate in Koński, organized by the staff of Trzaskowski, and conducted by TVP, he lost 5 percent points, and gained the same amount Nawrocki. Of course, it is hard to find from where specified a decline, which factors are involved, but surely Trzaskowski looked tired, energyless and stressed. By the way, it is interesting that politicians so acquainted with the media are inactive nervous, although this annoyance was not seen in Simon Holownia or Mark Jakubiak. The erstwhile is raised in front of the cameras, the second in turn, like anyone who has thoughtful views and genuinely believes what he says, rapidly analyzes the statements of others and counters them from his own point of view. The same is actual of Adrian Zandberg, who is excellent, due to the fact that in substance, he falls in debates.
I think Trzaskowski realizes that his message is not consistent, and although he most likely has rehearsed answers to embarrassing questions, he feels that it is not convincing – possibly even for himself. It can be seen that in hard moments, specified as the LGBT flag put before him by Nawrocki, he cannot react: if he truly supported the environment, he would accept the flag and comment accordingly, which is not someway embarrassing – it could be turned to his advantage. Moreover, specified a motion could be expected to remind only Andrzej Duda of the proporczyk with the logo of the PO before Bronisław Komorowski during the fight for the presidency almost a decade ago. Magdalena Biejat, who was not ashamed of the rainbow flag, behaved well, and thanks to this gesture, her support grew due to the fact that she was genuinely attached to her values.
One of the problems for Trzaskowski was besides the information that in his staff, besides before the debate in Koński, there was a well-known scientist Natalia de Barbaro, who was to prepare him for this performance. Psychologists cooperate with politicians, but the disclosure of specified information does not make a good impression, as it presents Trzaskowski as individual who needs this help, i.e. he is not strong adequate to handle himself. Of course, there is nothing incorrect with it in a sense, but it leaves any uncertainty about the strength of its character, even if only at the level of emotion and not rationality.
In addition, it is crucial to appreciate tv Republic's organisation of the debate, which, I would have risked, broke the hegemony of left-wing liberal media. The deficiency of participation of Trzaskowski in this debate did not make a good impression on Poles, as almost 45 percent negatively assessed the decision to refuse to participate in it. I think Trzaskowski did not come due to the fact that he knew that in the media another than favorable PO simply could not manage.
How to mediaally “set” the clash of both major candidates to win Nawrocki?
Nawrocki must become a typical of the full opposition, all those who do not want to “close the system” to usage the wording of Grzegorz Schetyn betraying the function of the PO president. All people dissatisfied with the present governments, and these are the majority, which increases further than those satisfied. Trzaskowski must be shown who he is: a typical of liberal elites who only cares about power (read: access to finance), subordinates of Donald Tusk, poorly coping president of Warsaw, post-political PR extortion without his own opinion and views. individual who, like a typical typical of uncritical worship for the European Union, is, in fact, a puppet in the hands of representatives of the alleged old Union, which can be seen very clearly on the occasion, among others, of the current plans to make the arms manufacture strategy in the countries of the Union.
Dr. Michał Rydlewski
Graphics in the text header: Mohamed Hassan from Pixabay
