Supporters of Tisza laugh while imagining Viktor Orbán being shot in the head. This is who they are — NoÁr and his associates.
They do this in light of the fact that both Donald Trump and Fico have been shot at, and Viktor Orbán and his family are being threatened with death on a daily basis by Ukrainians.
Anyone who votes for Tisza is voting for hatred. But you cannot build a nation or a homeland on hatred.
For us, Hungary is a shared passion: whoever votes for us votes for peace, security, and stable livelihoods.
In times of danger, we must all stand behind the national government. On April 12, Fidesz is the safe choice.
Members of NoÁr associated with Tisza were laughing in their show about what it would be like if Viktor Orbán were shot in the head. They were discussing where they would stand when firing. Which profile of mine would I be, I wonder? There is absolutely nothing funny about this for any person with good taste.
And it is especially not funny in light of what has happened in recent years. During the American campaign, Donald Trump was shot at, and only by chance — and by the grace of God — did he survive. Then Fico was also shot and seriously injured.
And in recent weeks, Viktor Orbán has been threatened by the Ukrainian president Zelensky, who said he would give his address to his “boys,” meaning his soldiers, so they could “have a talk” with him.
A Ukrainian lieutenant general even went so far as to threaten Viktor Orbán along with his children and grandchildren.
Such things have no place in politics — especially not in times as frightening and dangerous as the ones we are living through now.
I believe that this kind of anger, this dangerous anger, has absolutely no place anywhere near the Hungarian government — and that is exactly what Tisza would represent.
🔍 Main narrative
👉 “Tisza = violent, hate-driven side”
👉 “Orbán = threatened leader / target”
👉 “The world is dangerous → assassination attempts happen”
👉 “The election = peace vs violence”
👉 “Fidesz = security, stability, protection”
🧩 Hidden formula (very clear propaganda logic)
a selected scene / claim (“they laugh about shooting”)
→ moral outrage (“this is unacceptable”)
→ inclusion of real events (attacks on Trump and Fico)
→ emphasis on personal threat (Orbán + family)
→ generalization (“this is what they are like”)
→ existential danger (“dangerous emotions”)
→ binary choice (“they = hate / we = peace”)
→ mobilization (“stand behind us, vote”)
👉 Classic: incident → fear → moral judgment → political decision
🧠 Influence techniques
1️⃣ Fear appeal (existential threat)
👉 “Trump was shot at”, “Fico was shot at”
👉 “Orbán and his family are being threatened”
🎯 Goal:
don’t think → feel fear
💥 Effect:
the brain switches to threat mode → critical thinking decreases
2️⃣ Emotional chaining (association chaining)
👉 a humorous/tasteless scene
→ linked to real assassination attempts
→ then to Orbán’s personal danger
🎯 Goal:
everything gets categorized as violence in the viewer’s mind
3️⃣ Generalization (group labeling)
👉 “This is who they are”
👉 “Anyone who votes for Tisza votes for hate”
🎯 Goal:
reduce an entire political group to a single negative image
4️⃣ False dilemma (false binary)
👉 “hate vs peace”
👉 “Tisza vs Fidesz”
🎯 Reality:
politics is far more complex → here it is artificially simplified
5️⃣ “Protector leader” framing
👉 “stand behind the national government”
👉 “security, peace”
🎯 Goal:
power = protection
opponent = danger
6️⃣ Moral outrage trigger
👉 “there is nothing to laugh about”
👉 “unacceptable for any decent person”
🎯 Goal:
frame it not as politics → but as a moral violation
7️⃣ Enemy construction + demonization
👉 “hate”, “dangerous emotions”
👉 indirect association with violence
🎯 Effect:
the opponent is no longer political → but a threat
⚠️ What’s important
This text does not prove anything. Instead, it:
- triggers emotional reactions
- connects different events
- and suggests a conclusion from them
👉 This is not fact-based reasoning, but emotional narrative building
💥 Short, blunt evaluation
This is a textbook campaign message:
👉 fear + moral outrage + “us vs them” = votes
Its goal is not to help you decide what happened,
but to shape what you feel and who you vote for.