Magyar leads polls in Hungary but will need more than 50% to counter Orbán’s electoral system

Surveys carried out by independent demographic institutes, such as Median, Compass o 21 Research Centerplace Tisza’s advantage over Fidesz with a wide margin (even 56% vs. 37%). On the contrary, those more related to the ruling party, such as Point of view o McLaughlingive close victories to Orbán’s party (45% compared to 40%). The aggregator PolitProwhich brings together all the polls, for example, places Tisza ten points above Fidesz.

Although some more optimistic analyzes suggest that Magyar could even reach the qualified majority of two thirds in a National Assembly of 199 seatswhich would allow it to approve laws, even of constitutional rank, without the support of other parties.

Now, winning at the polls does not guarantee power. The path to the prime minister’s office in the Carmelite Monastery is strewn with institutional mines, strategically placed by Orbán during years of autocratic drift.

The unique Hungarian system forces Magyar to an unprecedented victory. To neutralize the electoral shield of Orbanism, it is not enough to come first. The analyzes maintain that while Fidesz could retain the parliamentary majority with just 43% of the votes, the opposition would need to exceed 50%. Thus, this electoral architecture requires Magyar a lead of at least six or seven points to achieve a simple majority.

Orbán’s traps

In 2011, the ruling party promoted a reform that completely redesigned the country’s political system, reducing the number of seats from 386 to 199. Subsequently, a process comparable to what is known in the United States as gerrymandering. That is, the manipulation of electoral districts to favor a party, according to the agency. Efe.

In this way, Fidesz restructured the constituencies with the aim of concentrating the opposition vote in a few urban districts, while rural areas —Orbán’s traditional strongholds— have a disproportionate weight in the distribution of seats.

In addition, the system includes single-member districts, in which the candidate with the most votes wins the seat by a simple majority. This mechanism has tended to benefit parties with solid territorial support, to the detriment of a hitherto more fragmented opposition.

On the other hand, Hungary combines these districts (106 in total) with a national list system. As explained by the Atlantic Council, the “surplus” votes of the winning candidate in the individual districts are added to your national list. This design allows a party that obtains, for example, around 45% of the votes, to control up to 67% of Parliament.

The effects are reflected in the electoral results. In 2014With 45% of the popular vote, Orbán’s party won almost all of the 106 single-member seats and a parliamentary majority of two-thirds of the total.

In 2018 popular support rose to 49% and the party once again obtained disproportionate representation, with around 67% of the 199 seats. And in 2022, Fidesz won about 54% of the votes, which translated into almost 68% of the seats.

Last year, the Government promoted another modification by eliminating the maximum limit on funds allocated to electoral campaigns, which, according to experts, also favors Fidesz, according to Efe.

After the 2022 elections, electoral observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) concluded that the appointment to the polls was “free” but “unfair”, given the enormous budgetary advantages and media coverage favorable to Orbán.