The Tisza Party and Brussels’ candidates are still running away. They can’t reveal their real plans.
Did you see it? A few Tisza candidates dared to step out onto the streets. Then they quickly ran off as soon as journalists started looking for them to ask questions.
Here in North Pest, Anna Müller doesn’t dare to face the voters at all. She’s one of the very worst Tisza candidates out of the 106 — she never shows up anywhere where we, the voters, could meet her.
And yet we have questions.
About war.
About migration.
About austerity measures.
About Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.
Her bosses keep saying that Ukraine must be admitted to the EU.
So what does Anna Müller think?
🔴 1️⃣ “They’re running away” narrative – cowardice framing without evidence
Claim:
“they’re just running away,” “they don’t dare to come out,” “they fled”
👉 Trick: labeling behavior instead of providing evidence
❌ Missing:
- specific location
- time
- footage
- quotation
- any unanswered question
🎯 Effect:
The voter no longer asks what the program is, but feels instead:
👉 “whoever doesn’t come out must be afraid / hiding something.”
🔴 2️⃣ Discrediting one individual = collective guilt
Pattern:
“a few Tisza candidates” → “Anna Müller” → “they’re all like this”
👉 Technique: cherry-picking + generalization
From one (alleged) incident, the entire Tisza Party is discredited.
🎯 Effect:
No need to debate 106 candidates → one face as a scapegoat is enough.
🔴 3️⃣ “Their bosses say so” – subordination fiction
Key phrase:
“their bosses keep saying”
👉 Trick:
- no name
- no quotation
- no decision
- no document
Just a vague “Brussels” presented as an enemy with its own will.
🎯 Message:
The candidate doesn’t think → just carries out orders.
That way, there’s no need to ask what they actually think.
🔴 4️⃣ Question stacking = fear package
Listed topics:
- war
- migration
- austerity
- Ukraine’s EU accession
👉 Technique: fear stacking
Deliberately blending separate issues as if they were a single “package.”
🎯 Effect:
In the voter’s mind:
👉 if they answer → trouble
👉 if they don’t answer → they’re hiding something
A win-win propaganda setup.
🔴 5️⃣ False dilemma at the end
Closing question:
“And what does Anna Müller think?”
👉 Trap:
- If she speaks → one sentence will be taken out of context
- If she doesn’t → “she’s silent because she’s afraid”
This is not a question, but a prewritten verdict.
🧠 Overall picture – what is completely missing?
❌ program
❌ policy debate
❌ sources
❌ documents
❌ real confrontation of positions
✔️ What’s there instead:
- character assassination
- fear-mongering
- subordination myth
- enemy construction