Voters in two camps, and gaps in between

Some of us would vote "to replace him that”, others would vote, if possible, for their party leader in whom they see the messiah; others would vote for the ideology and program of their party; the fourth would vote for an alliance with "like-minded people" (for a "column of like-minded people"); the fifth for the party that will win the elections; the sixth will vote for the party whose name is circled by the owner of their lives; the seventh as they were told or ordered; the eighth would vote for those not on the list; the ninth say they are disappointed in politics "and everything", and the tenth are disgusted by politics; the eleventh do not know who to vote for; the twelfth will vote anyway without knowing for whom ("They said to vote, and I vote, I close my eyes, turn the pen and whoever the tip of the pen falls on, that's what I vote for"); the thirteenth don't even know what it's about ("they're not from here")... There is a great variety of motives, both for going to the polls and for voting. First, whether to go to the polls or stay at home / in the pub. Second, those who have decided to vote should do so once more trouble so they can decide who to vote for.

"BIG IDEAS" VS. LIFE

We have listed here 13 groups of reasons that appeared in pre-election opinion surveys in which I participated or conducted, from 1990 to this year, 2023. It is certain that not all reasons have been listed, but the more numerous ones are. No matter how large the number of 13 reasons may seem, it is almost negligible compared to the number of registered political parties, which is ten times larger. In the last parliamentary elections (April 3, 2022), there were 19 election lists and slightly more political parties that appeared as holders of those lists.

While the researcher can apparently reduce the number of motives by grouping them into several units, the number of political parties (and electoral lists) cannot be reduced to that extent while we have a multi-party system. And those who could reduce the number of parties that go to the elections, and the number of electoral lists, will not or do not know how to do it, or they think that it is impossible because they are such a unique phenomenon with goals different from the goals of all other parties, with leaders who are the smartest and most beautiful. However, it would be difficult for them to show and prove the diversity of party and leadership interests...

In an extreme case, the number of reasons for going to the polls and voting can be reduced to two groups of reasons for voters and voters. Exactly those two groups, those two camps will be discussed here. One camp is the camp of state-building voters and voters and other major national issues of Serbia and the "Serbian world". In the second camp, however, we find voters marked by the struggle for personal and family existence (from survival to a decent life), and then by advocating for the arrangement and normalization of life in the local community and beyond.

EXTREMELY UNDONED PESSIMISM

Recently, Aleksandar Vučić said: "They have now made that alliance for victory ('Agreement for victory'), they are going to win, they are big favorites, they have enormous strength in the people." I don't know if and, if so, to what extent Vučić is right. I don't even know if he's exaggerating, being sarcastic or just being objective. Maybe he cites findings from research that only he has, maybe the researchers are deceiving him, and he accepts the flattery of the researchers as the truth... Or, after all, it's just a subconscious desire to rest from everything.

The research that I believe, as well as the one that I have done, at this moment, do not support this decisive statement of Aleksandar Vučić. Not everything is so dark for Vučić and his parties. I don't know why Vučić is such a pessimist. With his defeatism, he is only harming his rating and the electoral result of his party, because there is no victory without faith in victory.

It is true that the voting public is no longer the same as it was 11 years ago and later, it is no longer so obsessed with progressives and so in love with Vučić. By the way, I saw the strongest expression of the people's love for Vučić in the statement of those 17 out of 100 supporters of his party, and other parties that are in coalition with the progressives, where they say that they accept to be vaccinated against corona "if President Vučić recommends it". For other respondents, the impact of Vučić's recommendation is at the level of a statistical error, 2-3 percent (the stated data is according to the Demostat survey from September 2020, see https://demostat.rs/sr/vesti/istrazivanja/javno-mnjenje-srbije-o- covid-19/1010).

I don't know why some "analysts" say that Vučić ran when he announced the elections for December 17. It is better for the progressives that the elections be held as soon as possible and thus catch the opposition half-asleep, even before they finish the processes of pre-election rapprochement. It is clear that a united opposition is a great danger for the government of the progressives, and that is why Vučić's decision is smart and timely. Because if the opposition quarrels again now, it will remain divided for a long time. And so Serbia will once again remain the property of the progressives and their leaders, under the baton of Vučić, who is undoubtedly the most popular political figure in Serbia.

Some "analysts" write and say that these hasty elections are not good for the progressives because the Kosovo crisis is in full swing, inflation is everywhere, you don't know what's going up... My people, it's as if Kosovo is from yesterday, so how many centuries has it been Kosovo? burdens, so nothing. And that with inflation and high prices, as if it were something new for the Serbs, as if there was someone who could free the Serbs from this evil. Those analysts do not understand that Kosovo, inflation, price increases will be there tomorrow and the day after tomorrow, so should we postpone the elections because of that...

photo: sava radovanović / tanjug

I don't know on what basis Vučić claims that they (that is, the opposition) are the big favorites and that they have enormous strength in the people, when, for example, in Šabac, the progressives have almost twice as many voters as the coalition Together for Serbia. Admittedly, there are three times more voters who are electorally undecided than voters of the Serbian Progressive Party, but the progressives will "help" them in various known ways to make up their minds and recognize the party for which they should vote. After all, the arguments of coercion and extortion are on the side of the state, and we know in whose hands it is. Those arguments are normally approached in order to make the electoral victory more certain, and the defeat of any opposition as visible and bigger as possible. The big defeat of the opposition in the first next elections, no matter when they are, is an important pledge for a more certain victory in the next elections and in elections at all levels.

I would understand Vučić to say that the opposition does not yet have enormous strength among the people, but that it has a great chance to create that strength and that it will be helped by his vassals who do not choose the way in which they will make personal profit and gain all kinds of benefits. After all, Vučić himself will help the opposition with his strange policy, which more and more often produces results contrary to expectations. The most extreme indicator of that policy is this upside-down "Kosovo excursion", the consequences of which we not only glimpse, but also see, and soon - God forbid - we will also feel them!

PENSIONERS VS.. WORKING WORLD

The watershed that divides Serbian voters and voters into two camps is made up of answers to three questions and sub-questions that arise from the answers to the basic questions: the first is the acceptance or non-acceptance of the greatest truth of Serbian history - "Kosovo is the heart of Serbia"; the second is the acceptance or non-acceptance of the genesis of Serbian survival - "Russia is the Serbian mother., and China is Serbia's stepmother” (from the mentioned statement, the opinion about who is to blame for the war in Ukraine clearly emerges); and thirdly, the acceptance or non-acceptance of this great truth – “Serbia is not even the world., nor Europe (nor part of the European Union), possibly it can be a Russian governorate". Public opinion surveys clearly show that the first camp is more numerous both in terms of voters and voters, and that it is made up of those voters who know that Kosovo is the heart of Serbia, that Russia is Serbia's mother, and who think that Serbia does not belong to Europe, but is located somewhere between Europe and going down in history. To the ideological-emotional characterization of the members of this "state-building" camp should be added the attachment to the leader, as evidenced by the aberrations to the claim: "(social) changes are only possible if a strong leader appears whom the people trust and support". 53 out of 100 respondents agree with this statement, 17 out of 100 partially agree and partially disagree, and only 14 out of 100 disagree.

We find indications about the members of the first camp of Serbian divisions in several studies conducted by Demostat in the last five or six years. For the sake of illustration, I am citing the opinions of respondents from the latest research conducted in the municipality of Šabac: to the question "Who would you rather vote for in the elections, for the party that would bring us closer to the European Union or for the party that would bring us closer to Russia and China?", 34 out of 100 respondents answered "for a party that will bring us closer to Russia and China", and 28 out of 100 said "for a party that will bring us closer to the European Union", while the remaining 38 out of 100 fell into confusion - they said that they would not vote for either the first or the second party or they said that they did not know how to answer this question.

Among those who rejected the claims accepted by the members of the first camp (about Kosovo, about Russia and China and about Europe and the European Union), a considerable attachment to personal and social problems, as well as to the problems and arrangement of the local community, was observed. And we will illustrate this with the findings from the Šabac research: members of the second camp are characterized by being burdened with issues of standards: 55 out of 100 respondents who have significant problems state that the most important is precisely the standard of living. When asked about local problems, 21 out of 100 of those who claim that the municipality of Šabac has significant problems cite corruption and crime; also, 21 out of 100 problems are related to politics, government and institutions.

These three characteristics are also important, by which the members of the first and second camps are distinguished. Most of the oldest respondents belong to the first camp, it can even be said that every voter who is older than 55 will belong to the first rather than the second camp, in contrast to those under 55 who are more common in the second camp. This finding, given the trend of the aging population of Serbia, works in the hands of Vučić and his parties. It should also be mentioned that there is a considerable difference in terms of schooling of members of the first and second camps. In the first camp there are twenty times more voters and voters with or without primary school than there are in the second camp; also, in the first camp there are twice as many of those with workers' schools (secondary school lasting two or three years). On the other hand, in the second camp there are slightly more voters and voters with a four-year secondary school, 50 out of 100 to 32 out of 100 and twice as many with higher schools and colleges, 36 out of 100 to 18 out of 100 in the first camp. Finally, when it comes to employment status, the first camp has six times more pensioners than the second camp, and the second camp has more employees (57 out of 100) than the first camp. With a lot of generalizations, we could say that the first electoral camp is pensioners', and the second electoral camp - workers' (in the broader sense of that term: all those who live from their work). Between those two camps is the void of pre-political Serbia filled by voters who do not know who they are, where they are and where they are going!

THE OPPOSITION MUST BE DIFFERENT THAN THE GOVERNMENT

What the opposition could not do, Vučić did; he chased away so many progressive mayors. With that move, did he betray his intention to take the job to the opposition? He can do that too. Wasn't he just retaliating against the opposition, which in the assembly almost took over the methods and tactics of the ruling MPs, so now they behave like them. Together they made a circus out of the Assembly! I want to say that as long as the opposition is guided by the principle that the most effective way to fight against a political opponent is to use its means of struggle, there is nothing from the opposition, nor from the supremacy of the opposition over the opponent. The opposition, in my humble opinion, should demonstrate its supremacy over the parties in power and those in power, by showing the people, its existing and future electoral supporters, that it is significantly different, that it is the bearer of a different policy, one that enables a better future. In any other case, we have a policy that this nation recognized a long time ago, and the result of which is reflected in the popular wisdom of "Ride Janko, let Marko ride." Public oppositionists need more intelligence than the one reflected in copying the political insolence of the opposing bashibozuk. In my humble opinion, the opposition should follow the strategy indicated by Professor Vladeta Janković in his current parliamentary and other statements - knowledgeable, wise, dignified, straight to the point...