TISZA and Kyiv are playing the same tune, working together against Hungarian interests!
Péter Magyar and his Brussels representatives have voted at least six times to abolish the utility price reduction scheme. Most recently, Eszter Lakos pressed the button against cheap Russian energy.
Earlier, Gabriella Gerzsenyi also openly attacked the utility price reduction that protects Hungarian families.
All of this perfectly aligns with the Ukrainian political pressure that has led Zelenskyy to block our oil supply for more than a month.
Péter Magyar has remained silent about all of this. He is not willing to say a single word in defense of the Hungarian people, because he simply would not be able to say no to orders coming from Brussels and Kyiv.
For them it is just a “humbug,” but for us it is our fate and our future. In April, let us choose the safe option: Fidesz!
I have a simple question. If a country’s energy supply is under threat, whose side should a politician stand on? With Hungarian families, or against them?
Péter Magyar and his allies in Brussels have already voted at least six times against the utility price reduction. Meanwhile, Ukraine has shut down the pipeline, playing with the energy security of the entire region.
Yet in this situation, the Tisza Party does not defend Hungarians but instead votes against cheap Russian energy.
If Hungarian interests truly came first, they would condemn energy blackmail. Instead, they remain silent.
But the choice is simple: not Brussels, not Kyiv — Hungary.
That is why Fidesz is the safe choice.
1️⃣ Linking an external and an internal enemy (dual enemy framing)
Excerpt
“TISZA and Kyiv are playing the same tune, working together against Hungarian interests.”
Technique
Two separate actors are merged into a single hostile bloc:
- an external actor (Ukraine / Kyiv)
- and an internal political opponent (TISZA / Péter Magyar)
Goal
- to portray the political opponent as serving foreign interests
- to transform a domestic political debate into a national defense issue.
Effect
Voters may come to feel that:
➡️ the opposition is not simply representing a different political view,
➡️ but is cooperating with external forces against Hungary.
2️⃣ Scapegoating and personalized enemy (scapegoating)
Excerpt
“Péter Magyar remains completely silent about all of this.”
Technique
A complex geopolitical and economic issue is reduced to a single individual.
Goal
- to create an easily identifiable political enemy
- to establish a simple narrative for voters.
Effect
In the listener’s mind, the perception may emerge that:
➡️ the problem is caused by a specific politician,
➡️ the conflict becomes a question of personal responsibility.
3️⃣ Economic fear framing
Excerpt
“Ukraine is blocking our oil supply.”
“it is playing with the energy security of the entire region.”
Technique
The political message is connected to a threat affecting everyday life, particularly energy prices and household utility costs.
Goal
- to trigger a strong emotional reaction
- to create a sense of insecurity among voters.
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ the country’s energy supply is under direct threat,
➡️ therefore a strong and stable government is necessary.
4️⃣ Moral framing
Excerpt
“For them it is just ‘humbug’, for us it is our fate and our future.”
Technique
The political debate is reframed as a moral issue.
Goal
- to portray one side as irresponsible or cynical
- to present the speaker’s side as defenders of national interests.
Effect
Voters may perceive that:
➡️ one side protects Hungary’s future,
➡️ while the other does not take the threat seriously.
5️⃣ False dilemma
Excerpt
“The choice is simple. Not Brussels, not Kyiv, but Hungary.”
Technique
A complex political situation is reduced to two mutually exclusive choices.
Goal
- to simplify a complicated geopolitical issue
- to frame the election as a patriotic decision.
Effect
Voters may feel that:
➡️ anyone who does not support the government is serving foreign interests.
6️⃣ Rhetorical question as persuasion
Excerpt
“If a country’s energy supply is threatened, whose side should a politician stand on?”
Technique
A question is asked that implicitly suggests only one ‘correct’ answer.
Goal
- to actively involve the audience in the argument
- to make them feel they reached the conclusion themselves.
Effect
The audience may feel that:
➡️ the political choice is obvious and self-evident.
✅ Summary
The text follows a classic campaign communication structure:
- Identifying enemies – TISZA + Ukraine + Brussels
- Building a threat narrative – energy supply at risk
- Moral framing – “us vs. them”
- Offering a simple choice – Fidesz as the “safe option”.
Core narrative
👉 national defense against both external and internal enemies.