Polish conservative Nawrocki wins presidential vote, electoral commission says
-
The Left does protest under centrist governments as well. LGBTQ+, climate, anti racism and so forth is run as well and often massive. They even win from time to time, as can be by same sex marriage, new climate laws and so forth.
They even win from time to time, as can be by same sex marriage, new climate laws and so forth.
They win sometimes, but lose a lot. The wins are nice, but this is simply not a sustainable dynamic, as seen from the rise of the far right and climate targets becoming less and less likely to fulfill by the day.
-
They even win from time to time, as can be by same sex marriage, new climate laws and so forth.
They win sometimes, but lose a lot. The wins are nice, but this is simply not a sustainable dynamic, as seen from the rise of the far right and climate targets becoming less and less likely to fulfill by the day.
Do you seriously believe centrist want to let the left win? They want to do nothing. However under a right wing government winning just means nothing happens.
The goal of the left should be to be in charge and not the center or the right. So the question should be under whom is it easier to take power. The centrist will leave the electoral system in place, so there is a clear plan. The right wants to create a dictatorship, meaning the way to power can only go through revolution. That however is much much harder and in the meantime things will get worse much more quickly.
So a centrist government is better for the left. Even when the system is broken.
If you want to see that in action, just look at the 2024 French parliament election. Centrist in power and both the left and right won. In the UK the right was in charge and the center won. In the German election with a somewhat center left government the center lost votes, whereas the left and right won.
-
Do you seriously believe centrist want to let the left win? They want to do nothing. However under a right wing government winning just means nothing happens.
The goal of the left should be to be in charge and not the center or the right. So the question should be under whom is it easier to take power. The centrist will leave the electoral system in place, so there is a clear plan. The right wants to create a dictatorship, meaning the way to power can only go through revolution. That however is much much harder and in the meantime things will get worse much more quickly.
So a centrist government is better for the left. Even when the system is broken.
If you want to see that in action, just look at the 2024 French parliament election. Centrist in power and both the left and right won. In the UK the right was in charge and the center won. In the German election with a somewhat center left government the center lost votes, whereas the left and right won.
This is all well and good, but here's the thing: You're assuming that the left is a unified bloc of rational actors, which is just not true. A significant fraction of left-leaning activists put the lesser evil in charge and then bow out until the next election—or worse, actively run defense for said lesser evil. Remember when you couldn't criticise Biden (later Harris) for supporting genocide on Lemmy? Well I do, and I can state with 100% certainty that nothing about that was unified or rational. The left does nothing to stop centrists from handing power to the right and then act surprised when the right is in power, as most aptly shown in America's last election.
In the German election with a somewhat center left government the center lost votes, whereas the left and right won.
Die Linke certainly won a bunch of votes, but by far that election was a disaster for the left and a victory for the right. Die Linke winning 25 more seats does not counteract AfD winning 69. If this is what you consider a win then you should look at the numbers again and tell me who is going to end up in charge at this rate.
-
Mama Mia!
-
We have far right governments in Poland, Italy, Sweden, Netherlands and some more center right governments in other EU member states. This is very bad for human rights and we should be worried by this trend.
I can't answer definitively for the other countries, but the Netherlands has a far-right party in government, but it's not the government - that's a coalition together with three right-wing parties. Certainly not what left-wing folks like to see, but the other three are keeping the far-right one in check somewhat compared to winner-takes-all systems like in the US.
-
I myself abstained this time (just voted both). Voting for Nawrocki would be against Poland and voting for Trzaskowski would be against my personal interest as an individual. There wasn't lesser evil this time and nothing would change regardless.
Edit: I want public healthcare — which neither candidates supports. Trzaskowskis party literally proposed to reduce the healthcare budget by 20bln like a month ago
I want marriage equality — which neither candidate supports. Trzaskowski is said to be in favour but he never said it straigh up and he vocally opposes same-sex adoption.
I want affordable housing — which neither candidate supports. Both parties similarly had their housing programmes which caused the market prices to soar and opposed public housing.
I want ecology — both candidates oppose nuclear power and Trzaskowskis party literally cut public forestry budget and increased the deforestation rate
I want the church to shut up and stop stealing public money — Trzaskowskis party, despite being called "anticlerical" gave the 20% increase of the Church Budget in 2025. Their original promise was to reduce it to 0.
I want a reasonable migration policy — both candidates' parties use migrants as scapegoats and support limiting asylum laws.
I want access to abortion — which Nawrocki opposes; Trzaskowski himself supports it, but some of his party and majority of his coalition doesn't and will never vote for it
Both candidates are shit in their own way
-
Assassination on presidents tends to martyrize them
-
Poland just never learns.
Poland learned plenty. Record turnout, the candidate won by a very slim margin. It's brexit vote all over again - half the country is indoctrinated rednecks. A TV station had statistical data - voting for the right wing candidate was proportional with shittier education. People after universities voted 70% in favour of Trzaskowski. People who only finished grade school voted 70% in favour of Nawrocki. You can guess which group has more idiots in it.
-
if you dont explain your "personal interests", we assume you are just an idiot
He's against the gays, the immigrants, even against the war refugees, against any women rights, and this is every pole in UK
-
Out of interest, what personal interests would the other candidate have been against? I'm genuinely interested and I'd rather ask you than just downvote like others have done that probably have no idea about either candidate.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I want public healthcare — which neither candidates supports. Trzaskowskis party literally proposed to reduce the healthcare budget by 20bln like a month ago
I want marriage equality — which neither candidate supports. Trzaskowski is said to be in favour but he never said it straigh up and he vocally opposes same-sex adoption.
I want affordable housing — which neither candidate supports. Both parties similarly had their housing programmes which caused the market prices to soar and opposed public housing.
I want ecology — both candidates oppose nuclear power and Trzaskowskis party literally cut public forestry budget and increased the deforestation rate
I want the church to shut up and stop stealing public money — Trzaskowskis party, despite being called "anticlerical" gave the 20% increase of the Church Budget in 2025. Their original promise was to reduce it to 0.
I want a reasonable migration policy — both candidates' parties use migrants as scapegoats and support limiting asylum laws.
I want access to abortion — which Nawrocki opposes; Trzaskowski himself supports it, but some of his party and majority of his coalition doesn't and will never vote for it
Both candidates are shit in their own way
-
if you dont explain your "personal interests", we assume you are just an idiot
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I want public healthcare — which neither candidates supports. Trzaskowskis party literally proposed to reduce the healthcare budget by 20bln like a month ago
I want marriage equality — which neither candidate supports. Trzaskowski is said to be in favour but he never said it straigh up and he vocally opposes same-sex adoption.
I want affordable housing — which neither candidate supports. Both parties similarly had their housing programmes which caused the market prices to soar and opposed public housing.
I want ecology — both candidates oppose nuclear power and Trzaskowskis party literally cut public forestry budget and increased the deforestation rate
I want the church to shut up and stop stealing public money — Trzaskowskis party, despite being called "anticlerical" gave the 20% increase of the Church Budget in 2025. Their original promise was to reduce it to 0.
I want a reasonable migration policy — both candidates' parties use migrants as scapegoats and support limiting asylum laws.
I want access to abortion — which Nawrocki opposes; Trzaskowski himself supports it, but some of his party and majority of his coalition doesn't and will never vote for it
Both candidates are shit in their own way
-
He's against the gays, the immigrants, even against the war refugees, against any women rights, and this is every pole in UK
Quite the opposite. See my comment above
-
Idiot bigot.
See my edit
-
Poland learned plenty. Record turnout, the candidate won by a very slim margin. It's brexit vote all over again - half the country is indoctrinated rednecks. A TV station had statistical data - voting for the right wing candidate was proportional with shittier education. People after universities voted 70% in favour of Trzaskowski. People who only finished grade school voted 70% in favour of Nawrocki. You can guess which group has more idiots in it.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Yeah but close isnt enough, how many more years is it gonna take before polish people learn to vote liberal, pro eu candidate, not some pro putin idiot
-
The right keeps voting the right and thus making sure the candidates can get more right.
Meanwhile the left abstain, making sure the right is in power.
Gg.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]If my choice is right wing (which will empower the right wing government I don't support) or far right (which will fight the right wing government I don't support) then the choice is nonexistent
-
You will regret this sooner than you expect and still find excuses not to admit it was stupid.
If all you know about the two parties who have been ruling Poland for the past 20 years is that one of them doesn't "beat the gays" then I don't think you should be judging our individual voting strategies.
-
This is all well and good, but here's the thing: You're assuming that the left is a unified bloc of rational actors, which is just not true. A significant fraction of left-leaning activists put the lesser evil in charge and then bow out until the next election—or worse, actively run defense for said lesser evil. Remember when you couldn't criticise Biden (later Harris) for supporting genocide on Lemmy? Well I do, and I can state with 100% certainty that nothing about that was unified or rational. The left does nothing to stop centrists from handing power to the right and then act surprised when the right is in power, as most aptly shown in America's last election.
In the German election with a somewhat center left government the center lost votes, whereas the left and right won.
Die Linke certainly won a bunch of votes, but by far that election was a disaster for the left and a victory for the right. Die Linke winning 25 more seats does not counteract AfD winning 69. If this is what you consider a win then you should look at the numbers again and tell me who is going to end up in charge at this rate.
Remember when you couldn’t criticise Biden (later Harris) for supporting genocide on Lemmy?
No, the argument was that only Biden(later Harris) could win the election against Trump and that Trump would be far worse then either of them. Looking at the election results it was clearly a race between Harris and Trump, with nobody else coming close. If Harris would have gotten the votes Biden did get, then she would have won against Trump. Also Trump is worse then at least Biden and very likely Harris on basically every issue including Gaza. When Israel tried to cut off Gaza from food, Biden put a lot of pressure on them to allow food in and even used the US military to deliver food. Right now under Trump no food at all gets into Gaza, causing two million Gazans to starve.
The left does nothing to stop centrists from handing power to the right and then act surprised when the right is in power, as most aptly shown in America’s last election.
Harris lost due to a lot of left wing voters, not voting for her due to Gaza. Now the Gazans are all killed under Trump, while they can feel great about themself on their flight to El Salvador.
-
I want public healthcare — which neither candidates supports. Trzaskowskis party literally proposed to reduce the healthcare budget by 20bln like a month ago
I want marriage equality — which neither candidate supports. Trzaskowski is said to be in favour but he never said it straigh up and he vocally opposes same-sex adoption.
I want affordable housing — which neither candidate supports. Both parties similarly had their housing programmes which caused the market prices to soar and opposed public housing.
I want ecology — both candidates oppose nuclear power and Trzaskowskis party literally cut public forestry budget and increased the deforestation rate
I want the church to shut up and stop stealing public money — Trzaskowskis party, despite being called "anticlerical" gave the 20% increase of the Church Budget in 2025. Their original promise was to reduce it to 0.
I want a reasonable migration policy — both candidates' parties use migrants as scapegoats and support limiting asylum laws.
I want access to abortion — which Nawrocki opposes; Trzaskowski himself supports it, but some of his party and majority of his coalition doesn't and will never vote for it
Both candidates are shit in their own way
I can see your points. But it is still the stupidest tactic to stay away from the election. If one candidate is even 1% better than the other, vote for that one. People like you are the reason why the right-wingers always win. They go out and vote. Now the others have decided for you and you've got what you deserve.
-
Well, fuck
I wonder how long it would take Russia to take over Poland with Karol Nawrocki as president if the US pulls out of NATO and the rest of the EU and UK refuse to participate in the war. Will he capitulate the same day?
-
Anyway, my point is that I didn't want to compromise on anything or choose the lesser of two evils. It's either more GDP for health, nuclear power plants, more investment in Poland, and a rational approach to migration, or it doesn't matter who I choose.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I didn’t want to compromise on anything or choose the lesser of two evils.
We know, you poor fool. That's what you always say before you let the greater evil kill your neighbors.
