We will retire the fake pollsters in April!
❗ While several left-wing analysts are publishing or circulating fictional results claiming that the left is leading, the leaked internal measurements speak for themselves. The confused commentaries of Endre Hann and Gábor Török are clearly aimed solely at influencing voters.
Facts, however, are stubborn things. The Hungarian people have both their hearts and minds in the right place — everyone feels that in times of danger we must place our trust in a strong, experienced leader who can say no to Brussels and the Ukrainians.
🟠 Only Viktor Orbán and Fidesz are the safe choice!
We are ahead by 26 points in Kisvárda, 22 in Pápa, 13 in Tarján, 10% in Mezőkövesd, Sziget-Szentmiklós and Baja, and 9 in Tapolca.
How are we standing 45 days before the finish? I think we are doing very well, and I believe we will stand even stronger as election day approaches. And I hope that “Uncle Bandi” Hann will finally go into retirement — where he belongs — together with his fake opinion polls.
🧠 Szentkirályi Alexandra’s Communication – Rhetorical–Propaganda Analysis
Actors:
- Szentkirályi Alexandra
- Hann Endre
- Török Gábor
- Orbán Viktor
- Fidesz
Narrative:
“Fake opinion polls + left-wing manipulation → only experienced national leadership is the safe choice.”
Structure: Technique – Goal – Effect
1️⃣ Delegitimization and labeling – “fake pollsters”
📌 Technique:
- Discrediting labels (“fake pollsters”).
- Personalizing and mocking tone (“Uncle Bandi should retire”).
- Questioning the analysts’ motives.
🎯 Goal:
To undermine the legitimacy of public opinion polls before any substantive debate about the numbers can take place.
💥 Effect:
The audience no longer sees polling as a methodological issue, but as deliberate manipulation.
2️⃣ “Leaked internal measurements” – authority without evidence
📌 Technique:
- Vague source attribution (“leaked internal measurements”).
- Reference to unverifiable information.
🎯 Goal:
To counter public data with an alternative “hidden truth.”
💥 Effect:
Creates uncertainty: if all data can be manipulated, then only “our side’s” numbers are trustworthy.
3️⃣ Sovereignty framing – “able to say no to Brussels and the Ukrainians”
📌 Technique:
- Dramatization of external threats (“in an age of dangers”).
- Reframing the election as a sovereignty issue.
- Emotional identification (“the heart and mind of the Hungarian people”).
🎯 Goal:
To turn political competition into a matter of loyalty and national defense rather than policy programs.
💥 Effect:
Voters decide based on a sense of security rather than on data or policy comparisons.
4️⃣ Listing percentages – constructing a victory mood
📌 Technique:
- Mentioning specific towns and percentage leads.
- Creating a sense of forward momentum (“we are advancing”).
🎯 Goal:
To trigger the bandwagon effect.
💥 Effect:
Undecided voters are more likely to align with the perceived winning side.
5️⃣ Infantilization and mockery
📌 Technique:
- Diminutive, belittling address (“Uncle Bandi”).
- Age-based degradation (“he should retire”).
🎯 Goal:
To weaken the opponent’s professional credibility.
💥 Effect:
The debate shifts from professional substance to emotional confrontation.
🎯 Overall Picture
The communication operates on multiple levels:
- It delegitimizes data.
- It offers an alternative, unverifiable “internal truth.”
- It reframes the election as a matter of sovereignty and security.
- It projects an atmosphere of inevitable victory.
- It provokes emotional reactions through personalization.
This is a classic campaign formula:
uncertainty creation + external threat framing + strong leader narrative + bandwagon effect.