This is yet another example of how hatred has spiraled out of control among TISZA supporters.
Together with Fidesz parliamentary candidate Kovács Balázs Norbert, we personally delivered the Prime Minister’s letter.
One family told us that after they put up a Fidesz poster, their balcony was pelted with eggs and tomatoes.
There is such anger and hatred among TISZA supporters that can only be generated by a leader driven by revenge, Magyar Péter.
However, we believe that people want peace and calm, and that they will vote on April 12 for a national government built on a community of solidarity and unity.
Together we will show: only Fidesz is the safe choice!
A new kind of “electronic Károlyi Mihály” — simply put, the same sense of revenge is present in him as it was in Károlyi. It is tragic that such emotions are being stirred up.
Have you experienced this personally?
“Our balcony was hit with two eggs and one tomato… well, they just threw them. Two eggs and a tomato. And who goes out to protest with eggs and tomatoes? Honestly… I should have brought some paprika as well and made a proper mix.”
“Yes, the next day we even ate it — the eggs were all smashed. Well… nothing serious happened, just shows how much tension there is in people. We wouldn’t do this — but they do. Still, we hope people choose peace and calm, not those who incite.”
Thank you very much for the meeting!
All the best!
Thank you!
Nice to see you again!
“TISZA = hatred + aggression”
“Péter Magyar = driven by revenge”
“Fidesz = peace + calm + unity”
“Election = order vs. chaos”
👉 Underlying formula:
single incident + enemy construction + emotion + moral contrast
→ “they are dangerous, we are the normal/safe choice”
👉 🔥 Core point:
➡️ not evidence
➡️ but emotional framing
➡️ goal: trigger fear + force a moral choice
🔍 Manipulation techniques
1️⃣ Anecdotal generalization
👉 Example:
“their balcony was pelted with eggs and tomatoes”
Technique:
- one specific, unverifiable story
- generalized to an entire group
Goal:
➡️ create the feeling that “this is what TISZA supporters are like”
Effect:
➡️ distorted perception of reality
➡️ emotional reaction (“this is unacceptable!”)
2️⃣ Enemy framing
👉 Example:
“hatred… a leader driven by revenge”
Technique:
- political opponent framed as a moral threat
- not a debate partner, but a destructive force
Goal:
➡️ delegitimize the opponent
Effect:
➡️ “there can be no compromise with them”
3️⃣ Leader demonization
👉 Example:
“Péter Magyar… driven by revenge”
“an electronic Mihály Károlyi”
Technique:
- linking to a historically negative figure (Mihály Károlyi)
- personal attack instead of policy critique
Goal:
➡️ trigger emotional rejection
Effect:
➡️ activates historical trauma (betrayal, collapse narratives)
4️⃣ “We = peace / they = aggression” (false moral dichotomy)
👉 Example:
“we stand for peace, calm, a community of love”
Technique:
- sets up two extremes
- no middle ground
Goal:
➡️ simplify the decision
Effect:
➡️ “if you’re not with us → you’re on the side of hatred”
5️⃣ Victim framing
👉 Example:
“their balcony was attacked”
Technique:
- own side → victim
- opponent → aggressor
Goal:
➡️ evoke empathy
➡️ build moral superiority
Effect:
➡️ “they are being attacked → they must be protected”
6️⃣ Mixing dramatization with trivialization
👉 Example:
“two eggs and a tomato… we ate them the next day”
Technique:
- both dramatizes and downplays the incident
- makes the story feel relatable
Goal:
➡️ increase perceived authenticity
Effect:
➡️ “this must be real, it sounds so everyday”
7️⃣ Final campaign mobilization
👉 Example:
“only Fidesz is the safe choice”
Technique:
- exclusivity
- forced decision
Goal:
➡️ push immediate voting action
Effect:
➡️ lock in undecided voters
🧩 Overall picture
This text:
- is not about policy
- provides no real evidence
- uses an emotional story to drive a political conclusion
👉 Classic formula:
small incident → exaggeration → enemy → fear → “we are peace” → vote
🔥 In short (for a post):
👉 A single story is used to prove the opponent is “dangerous”
👉 The opposing leader is demonized (“revenge”, “Károlyi”)
👉 Two worlds: “they = hatred”, “we = peace”
👉 Ends with an exclusive voting message
➡️ not a debate, but emotional mobilization