❗ If anyone still had doubts about the direction the Western world is heading, here it is: New York’s new Muslim, radical left-wing mayor was sworn in on the Quran. Among the members of his cabinet is someone who previously provided legal defense to an al-Qaeda terrorist. Let us not forget that Gergely Karácsony was among the first to congratulate Zohran Mamdani on his victory, saying he was “rooting” for him and had been “following him with great sympathy.” 👉 What could better demonstrate how deeply misguided the mayor is when it comes to the interests of Budapest and its residents?
New York’s new radical Muslim mayor was sworn in on the Quran—someone whom Gergely Karácsony also regards as a role model. He has already begun naming members of his cabinet, including a person who previously provided legal representation to an al-Qaeda terrorist and played a role in shaping the kind of migration policy pursued by Biden. The team also includes violent criminals, antisemites, and individuals who campaign against the police and law enforcement. Nan Dani then, on his very first day in office, repealed New York’s decree standing against antisemitism and launched major restructuring efforts. And this is the person whose victory Gergely Karácsony was among the very first to congratulate—and whom he welcomed with great enthusiasm.
1️⃣ Religious Shock Framing & Fear Triggering
“Sworn in on the Quran, New York’s new radical Muslim left-wing mayor…”
This is not information – it is a trigger phrase.
The religious oath is irrelevant to governing a city.
The fusion of “Muslim + radical + left-wing” is designed to automatically evoke threat.
The goal is emotional reflex, not rational evaluation.
👉 This is religious fear framing combined with a dog whistle.
2️⃣ Guilt by Association
“someone who previously provided legal defense for an al-Qaeda terrorist”
This is the core maneuver:
Legal defense ≠ ideological support, but that distinction is deliberately erased.
One individual’s professional role is inflated into collective moral guilt.
The word “terrorist” shuts down analytical thinking instantly.
👉 Classic moral panic construction.
3️⃣ False Causal Bridge: New York → Budapest
“What better proof that the mayor of Budapest is completely misguided…”
Here lies the central manipulation:
A New York political event
is presented as proof of the incompetence of a Budapest mayor.
There is:
no decision-making link,
no responsibility,
no causal mechanism.
👉 This is non sequitur propaganda: it does not follow, but is framed as if it does.
4️⃣ Indirect Character Assassination
“he admired him”, “cheered for him”, “followed him with great sympathy”
No quotes. No sources. No context.
“Sympathy” is subtly transformed into identification, then into complicity.
👉 Even the Brussels media are now predicting Viktor Orbán’s victory!
“Who would bet against Viktor Orbán leading his national conservative party to yet another parliamentary victory?” — asks Politico.
📲 The Western mainstream news outlet published a detailed analysis of the upcoming elections. The paper considers our victory likely with a two-thirds majority. The article explicitly notes that patriotic forces have a strong chance of winning again, seeing precisely a two-thirds probability of success.
Last time it was The Economist, now it’s Politico. It is becoming clear that even in Brussels they no longer believe in Magyar Péter; they are forced to admit this is already a lost cause. The leader of the left is stumbling from scandal to scandal, and even his own superiors are no longer pleased.
🟠 The West also knows that Hungarians will decide wisely. We will not give in to migration pressure, and we do not want to be dragged into a meaningless war.
April is our turn! Only 99 days to go!
Propaganda & Rhetorical Analysis (concise, no fluff)
1️⃣ Appropriation of external authority (authority laundering)
The names Politico and earlier The Economist are used as credibility seals.
Trick: it does not accurately present what the articles state, but reframes it as “even they think so.”
The “two-thirds chance” is not an electoral forecast, but an opinionated interpretation — recoded as near-certain victory.
👉 Goal: reassure the undecided — “it’s not us saying it, the West is.”
2️⃣ Pre-announced victory (bandwagon effect)
“Who would bet against…”
“likely victory”
“two-thirds chance of success”
👉 Message: if you’re not with us, you’re on the losing side. Classic herd logic: don’t decide — join.
3️⃣ Delegitimising the opposition instead of debating
Magyar Péter is not challenged on policy, but portrayed as:
“a lost cause”
“stumbling from scandal to scandal”
“no longer supported even by his bosses”
👉 No substantive critique — only character assassination plus insinuation of internal collapse.
4️⃣ False dichotomy: security vs. chaos
“migration pressure”
“meaningless war”
“we will not give in”
👉 Simplified message:
Fidesz = peace + security Others = migration + war
This is emotional blackmail, not political debate.
5️⃣ Pre-emptive legitimacy construction
“They know it in the West too”
“Hungarians will decide wisely”
👉 If they win: it was proven in advance. 👉 If they lose: external and internal enemies interfered.
This manufactures legitimacy before the outcome.
🎯 The post’s real function
It does not inform. It:
calms uncertainty,
manages voter fatigue,
replaces decision-making with reassurance.
In one sentence:
“Don’t think, don’t weigh — it’s already decided, just fall in line.”
Do you know what a New Year’s Eve looks like in Germany? 👉 400 people were taken into custody and 24 police officers were injured during clashes between migrants and police — and this was not the first such incident. The situation is no better in France either: 1,173 cars were set on fire this year, mostly by illegal migrants, which is 20% more than last year.
❌ This is exactly what we do NOT want in Hungary! As long as Fidesz remains in government, our country will remain migration-free, a place where the New Year can be celebrated in safety and peace.
— In Germany, on New Year’s Eve, 400 people were detained and 24 police officers were injured when migrants and police clashed. Yes, in Western Europe this is now what New Year’s celebrations look like in many places, and in Berlin this has been the norm for years.
The police had prepared based on the lessons of previous years, but to no avail: despite posting warnings even in Arabic, they were unable to prevent the chaos.
Well, this is exactly what we do not want in Hungary, and as long as we are in government, Hungary will not become a migration country. Until then, Christmas can be celebrated normally, and New Year’s Eve can be spent safely in Hungary.
Szentkirályi Alexandra – Propaganda Analysis
This text is textbook security- and fear-based propaganda, built from multiple, layered manipulation techniques.
1️⃣ Real events → distorted framing
The starting point relies on real news (detentions, injured police officers, car burnings), but:
no precise sources are cited,
perpetrators are merged into a single, homogeneous group: “migrants”,
no distinction is made between:
citizen / immigrant / illegal immigrant,
organized riots / isolated violent incidents.
👉 This is a classic construction of collective guilt.
2️⃣ Dehumanization and enemy-making
The text does not talk about people, but about a threat:
“clashes”
“chaos”
“migrants and police”
The narrative message is simple:
“They are violent. We are peaceful.”
This is moral polarization:
Western Europe = chaos
Hungary = order
Migrant = danger
Fidesz = protection
3️⃣ Selective comparison (cherry-picking)
Only countries with unrest are mentioned, and only the aspects that reinforce the narrative.
❌ There is no mention of:
other European cities where there was no violence,
the fact that alcohol-related disorder also occurs regularly in Hungary,
the reality that police presence and legal frameworks are not comparable across countries.
👉 This is not analysis, but selective fear-mongering.
4️⃣ “We will protect you” – conditional security
Key sentence:
“As long as Fidesz remains in government…”
This is a conditional promise of safety:
security is framed not as a right, but as a political reward,
the implied alternative is chaos, violence, migrants.
This is the core of the protective authoritarian narrative:
“Do not change anything — or things will go wrong.”
5️⃣ Linguistic manipulation: repetition and emotional conditioning
The same message is stated twice, slightly rephrased.
This is deliberate:
repetition creates emotional imprinting,
it appeals to reflexes, not to reasoning.
🎯 Conclusion – what is really happening?
This message is not about New Year’s Eve. It is not about:
❌ solutions, ❌ real comparisons, ❌ security policy.
It is about:
✅ fear-generation, ✅ collective scapegoating, ✅ tying “protection” to political loyalty.
One-sentence takeaway:
“The West equals chaos, migrants equal danger, and Fidesz is the only shield.”
Destroying takes only a moment, while building requires years of work — yet only the latter moves us forward. From the perspective of sixteen years, it is easy to forget where we started, and we tend to treat our achievements as if they were natural givens. But nothing is self-evident: with a single bad decision, we could put at risk a decade and a half of shared effort, development, and hard-won security. We must not allow momentary forgetfulness to destroy everything we have created over such a long time, through difficulty and sacrifice.
(In the video) After sixteen years, you can no longer imagine that something you’ve grown used to might no longer exist. It is very difficult to ask people to imagine something that is absent — how do you even do that? Young people, in particular, are in a very difficult position. I would very much like it not to be the case that people have to experience it on their own skin — that sudden realization of “damn, so this really can disappear,” something we currently take for granted — because four years later we won’t be able to return to the same point.
It’s not complicated to understand: building a sandcastle and kicking one over do not take the same amount of time. And to give up four years of our lives now, only to then spend eight to ten years struggling just to get back to where we would already be in 2026 and could continue moving forward from — that, in my view, is extremely irresponsible.
I understand that this is hard for those who feel that sixteen years was already too long, and who simply want change for the sake of change itself. Not necessarily because they believe things will be better — but because they want to “see what it’s like.” The problem is that this is an enormous risk.
Szentkirályi Alexandra – Propaganda Analysis
The quoted text and the video statement are a textbook example of status quo propaganda, which operates not through arguments but through fear, uncertainty, and emotional pressure. Below is a point-by-point breakdown of the techniques used.
1️⃣ “Destroying is easy, building is hard” – false simplification
A classic false analogy (the sandcastle metaphor).
Political decision-making is not a one-way process of destruction → construction.
Change is automatically framed as “destruction,” without evidence.
🎯 Goal: to construct moral superiority for the government side (“we are the builders”).
2️⃣ “Sixteen years of work would be wasted” – emotional blackmail
The sunk cost fallacy.
Past investments are used to argue that changing direction is forbidden.
It never examines whether those sixteen years were spent in the right direction.
🎯 Goal: to induce guilt in those who want change.
3️⃣ “Young people can’t even imagine what would be lost” – paternalism
Patronizing young people as inexperienced and unable to grasp risk.
The “older, wiser authority” claims to know what is best.
🎯 Goal: generational division and reinforcement of uncritical obedience.
4️⃣ “If we change now, we’ll spend 8–10 years just clawing back” – fear-mongering
A completely data-free prediction.
An apocalyptic scenario: one decision equals a decade of chaos.
🎯 Goal: to create paralyzing uncertainty.
5️⃣ “They only want change for the sake of change” – delegitimization
Government critics are portrayed as irrational and irresponsible.
Real motivations are ignored: corruption, institutional decay, impoverishment, rule-of-law problems.
🎯 Goal: to discredit the motivations of opposition voters.
6️⃣ What’s missing: NOTHING concrete
❌ No:
measurable results,
data,
comparisons,
detailed vision for the future.
✔️ Instead, there is:
emotion,
fear,
risk rhetoric,
a loyalty test.
🔴 Conclusion
This statement does not inform — it demands conditional obedience:
“It may not be good, but you’re used to it — and you should fear that anything else would be worse.”
This is not governance. It is power-preserving propaganda built on uncertainty.
This is the “let’s cry together now, before we lose it” type of propaganda — just without the flag and the violin.
In short, what is actually happening:
It forces people to mourn something in advance, before anything has even happened.
It tries to create an emotional attachment to an abstract “state of being.”
It doesn’t make the absence of a person feel tragic — it tries to make habit itself lovable.
“You’ll miss it, you’ll see” — while never saying what exactly you are supposed to miss.
From a psychological standpoint, this is clearly:
🔹 anticipatory loss (projected loss)
🔹 learned dependency (habit = safety)
🔹 a deliberate inflation of status quo bias
The twist is that it’s not really trying to convince you. It’s aimed at the person who is:
tired,
unwilling to decide,
afraid of making the wrong choice.
The core message is this:
“Don’t think. Just stay.”
So relax 😏 If there’s anything worth shedding tears over, it’s the fact that after sixteen years, this is all that’s left to say.
The arguments are on our side! It is good to see that, despite the war taking place in our neighborhood, we made progress in 2025. What once was only a dream has now become something we take for granted. The family tax benefits coming into force from January, personal income tax exemption for mothers, various forms of support, and the 14th month pension all provide a guarantee that we can look toward 2026 with optimism.
“I recently came across a survey about a district in Buda. There were three questions listed next to each other. One asked how you see things going in your district: how things are now, where they are heading, whether prospects will be better or worse than they are today. Another asked the same about your personal life: how things are going for you personally, what you expect, whether things will get better or not. And the third asked about the country as a whole.
What the survey showed was this: in people’s personal lives, everything is great — even better than before — and their prospects are good. In their own district, where they live and what they experience directly, things are better and they expect good things ahead. But when it comes to the country — well, that’s a tragedy.
So I think this is the really big danger: that people no longer want to believe their own eyes.
Because if you ask someone and say, let’s take a look at how things were 15 years ago — how many days they could go on vacation, what their job was like, how much they earned, how much they had to pay for their children or how much support they received, whether school textbooks or meals were provided for the children — if you put all this down on a sheet of graph paper, weighing the pros and cons, if voting worked this way, then I think our list of arguments would certainly be much longer than the list of counterarguments.”
1️⃣ “Everything is fine around you, only the country is a tragedy” – Reframing cognitive dissonance
“In their personal life everything is great… in their district things are better… but the country? That’s a tragedy.”
What is happening here?
She acknowledges lived experience (personal and local improvement)
But she does not explain national-level problems with facts
Instead, she reframes dissatisfaction as a psychological error:
👉 “People no longer want to believe their own eyes.”
🎯 Purpose: System-level criticism is presented not as reality, but as misperception.
2️⃣ “The country isn’t failing — you’re interpreting it wrong” – Soft gaslighting
This sentence is the key:
“This is the huge danger.”
What does she call dangerous?
Not corruption
Not inflation
Not institutional decay
👉 But the fact that citizens think critically.
This is classic gaslighting:
The problem is not the system
The problem is how citizens perceive it
3️⃣ The “graph paper” argument – Fake rationality
“If we took a sheet of graph paper and listed pros and cons…”
This is a very common technique:
It pretends to offer objective evaluation
But she defines what counts as a “pro”
And she closes the argument in advance:
“Our list of arguments would certainly be much longer.”
🎯 The trick: Appearance of rational debate → non-verifiable conclusion
No data No metrics No actual list
Just self-validation.
4️⃣ The 15-year comparison – Selective nostalgia framing
“Let’s look at how things were 15 years ago…”
This is not a structured comparison. It is an emotional nostalgia frame.
What is conveniently left out:
housing crisis
healthcare collapse
education degradation
institutional dismantling
erosion of the rule of law
👉 Only what sounds good in messaging remains.
5️⃣ The real message in one sentence
Implicit claim:
“If your personal life is going well, you have no right to say the country is doing badly.”
This leads to:
Depoliticization
Privatization of systemic problems
Criticism reduced to a “perception issue”
🧠 Why this speech is dangerous
Because it:
does not debate
does not refute
does not provide evidence
Instead, it pathologizes dissatisfaction.
This is no longer governance — it is:
reality management
⚠️ Short summary
This speech:
does not argue
does not prove
does not explain
👉 It tries to convince you not to trust your own experience.
A new year is coming, and in some countries that means the next year will begin with austerity measures, cutbacks, or even war loans. Hungary, however, will not be a country at war, which means we will not spend the money of the Hungarian people on a war. Therefore, we will have the resources to support the Hungarian people and Hungarian families. A lot of things will happen from the beginning of next year, so I will cheat a bit to make sure I don’t leave anything out of the list.
Let’s begin with support for families, as the tax allowance for children will be doubled. This will mean 20,000 forints for families with one child, 40,000 forints for families with two children, and for those raising three or more children, it will mean 66,000 forints per child in assistance and relief.
A lifelong personal income tax exemption will be launched for parents under 30 with one child, and for parents under 40 with two children. The increase of the minimum wage and the guaranteed wage minimum will begin. For the minimum wage, this will mean 322,800 forints, and the guaranteed wage minimum will rise to 373,200 forints.
Furthermore, the 11-point corporate tax reduction program will begin. This means that small and medium-sized enterprises will be able to save a total of 80–90 billion forints.
The 13th month pension will also arrive, and alongside it, the introduction of the 14th month pension begins — its first installment will also arrive — and the general pension increase continues, meaning that the average pension will now exceed 250,000 forints.
A net 1 million forint housing support program will be launched for public-sector employees, because our aim is that everyone should be able to live in a home of their own according to their means.
Six months of “weapon money” will be provided to armed forces and law enforcement personnel, and teacher salary increases will continue. This means that next year the average teacher salary will rise to 936,000 forints.
In addition, the wage increase for those working in public administration, social and cultural sectors will also begin at the start of the year — this is a 15% raise, which they truly deserve. The three-stage wage increase for judicial employees will also continue — I won’t go into details, but judges, clerks, and court employees can expect significant pay raises as well.
And the residential energy storage program will be launched. This is a relatively recent announcement, meaning that a non-refundable grant of 2.5 million forints will be provided to families who have or plan to install solar panels for the purchase and installation of a battery or, if needed, an inverter.
So this means that while others — other countries — will start the new year by burdening their people and pouring enormous amounts of money into fueling the machinery of war, we will resist this pressure, and we will spend the money that our economy allows us to spend on the Hungarian people.
🧠 Fidesz Communication Techniques in This Text
1️⃣ Panic framing: the world is dark, Hungary is the exception
“There are countries where austerity… war loans…”
Technique:
Constructing an external threat
“Others struggle → we alone are smart / safe”
➡️ Identity-building: Hungary = the island of peace.
2️⃣ False causal connection
“We don’t spend money on war → we can support families”
Manipulation:
Well-being is presented as dependent on external factors (war)
Distracts from actual economic causes (tax system, inflation, frozen EU funds)
➡️ Artificial linkage: peace → economic success As if the country’s finances simply depended on “not being at war.”
3️⃣ A list of cash giveaways — directly aimed at voters
“doubles”, “arrives”, “continues”, “launches”
Communication goal:
A stream of small benefits → illusion of prosperity
The government framed as a generous giver rather than responsible manager
➡️ Voters should feel: “I’m getting something, I should be grateful.”
4️⃣ Number manipulation
No reference to inflation
Real value of minimum wage raise omitted
“Average pension above 250,000 HUF” → median ~180,000 HUF unmentioned
➡️ Only the nominal success exists — the real reality does not.
Using “average salary” → distorted by highest earners
Missing fact: this raise was forced by the EU reforms
➡️ Framed as if the government raised wages out of benevolence.
6️⃣ “Us vs. Them” — emotional polarization
“other countries… burden citizens… fuel war machine”
Enemy designation:
Whoever isn’t with us → war supporter
Criticism = serving foreign interests
➡️ Polarization: “only we protect the people.”
7️⃣ Economic “success” is the property of the ruling party
“the potential of the Hungarian economy allows it”
Technique:
Success is owned by the government
Failures blamed on external actors
➡️ Classic populism: government = benevolent father figure.
📌 Summary — What is the message?
Hidden Claim
Communication Function
The world is drifting into war
Fear induction
Only we protect the country
Creating dependency
Support us → your benefits are safe
Reward framing
Economic well-being is in our hands
Centralization, loyalty pressure
🧩 This is not economic policy: this is a campaign speech using the budget as a tool. Core message: “Vote for us, or there will be war and you lose your benefits.”
It’s hard to even list the countless government measures that, as of today, further strengthen Hungarian families and pensioners:
✅ The tax allowance for children is being doubled ✅ Income tax exemption for mothers continues to expand ✅ Minimum wage and guaranteed minimum wage are increasing ✅ An 11-point corporate tax reduction program is starting ✅ The 13th and 14th month pensions are arriving ✅ A 1-million-forint home support allowance is provided to public sector employees ✅ Six months’ worth of “fegyverpénz” (security service bonus) is granted to workers in armed and defense forces ⚠️ The teacher pay raise continues ⚠️ Salary increases begin for employees in the administrative, social and cultural sectors ⚠️ Judges’ salaries continue to rise ⚡ A new household energy-storage support program is launching
Hungary continues to send neither money nor weapons to the war. We spend the results of the Hungarian economy on the people — everyone deserves it!
🟠 Actions instead of words!
🧩 RHETORICAL & PROPAGANDA ANALYSIS OF SZENTKIRÁLYI’S POST
🎯 1️⃣ Main Frame: “The government as the benevolent savior”
The list only highlights:
handouts
wage increases
tax benefits
👉 It removes why these are needed (inflation, austerity). 👉 Core message: “All good things come from the government.”
🧨 2️⃣ Eliminating Context — Half of the Story
Missing from the narrative:
real wage loss due to inflation
budget cuts to municipalities and public services
13th–14th month pension = restoring something once taken away
minimum wage increases driven by the market, not generosity
🔧 Technique: Only the positive effects, never the costs.
🦸 3️⃣ Self-Mythology: “We protect the Hungarian people”
Quote:
“Hungary will not send money or weapons to the war.”
This has nothing to do with the list: It sneaks in fear-based polarization:
If you oppose the government → you must be pro-war
Opposition = danger
🧮 4️⃣ Basket Strategy: Give everyone something
The list covers:
families
pensioners
teachers
civil servants
business owners
judges
armed forces
👉 Goal: Everyone finds a reason to feel rewarded. 👉 Hidden purpose: vote maximization.
🎢 5️⃣ The Performance Illusion: Quantity > Quality
“It’s hard to even list all the measures…”
The many checkmarks create the illusion of achievement:
no data
no outcomes
no real impact assessment
📌 Irony: “Actions not words!” — but it’s entirely words.
⚙️ 6️⃣ Economic Populism
“We spend the results of the economy on the people.”
Implies:
money is produced by the state
debt, deficit, and taxes are ignored
→ False narrative: government wealth doesn’t come from taxpayers
🧠 Summary of Propaganda Techniques
Technique
How it appears
Purpose
Positive framing
Only benefits listed
Generate gratitude
Fear injection
“We stay out of the war”
Create a threatening enemy
Broad targeting
Benefits for all social groups
Electoral expansion
Context removal
No mention of inflation or cuts
Avoid accountability
Quantity storytelling
Bullet list overload
Illusion of competence
🎤 True Meaning Behind the Post
“The government is generous, your life depends on us, and everyone who criticizes us wants war.”
The post does not inform — it manipulates emotion: gratitude, fear, and dependency.
2️⃣ “We work hard” – same sentence, opposite meaning
Szentkirályi:
“We would help, but Karácsony is incapable.”
Trick:
Government makes the decisions → the city pays
Then the consequences are blamed on the city leadership 👉 Classic scapegoating
Karácsony:
“It is the workers of Budapest who keep the city running.”
Counter-frame:
Bus drivers, maintenance workers, public services
Budapest = community, not political spoils 👉 System narrative, not a personal myth
3️⃣ Autonomy vs. Subordination – the real dividing line
Szentkirályi / Fidesz:
Budapest should be a “good child”
Pay up
Don’t argue
Don’t sue 👉 Logic of central domination
Karácsony:
Ruling of unconstitutional takeaways
Winning lawsuits
Defending self-government 👉 Logic of municipal autonomy
Why Budapest is a threat to Fidesz:
“If Budapest can breathe, the whole country might breathe.”
4️⃣ Propaganda-level distortions in Szentkirályi’s messaging
What keeps disappearing from the narrative:
❌ the 100 bn HUF taken from Budapest
❌ the lawsuits the city has won
❌ the rule-of-law judgments
❌ the fact that the government decides, the city pays
👉 Not a ‘different opinion’ — but information suppression
5️⃣ Summary Table
Aspect
Szentkirályi (Fidesz)
Karácsony
Cause of conflict
The mayor himself
Government financial takeaways
Rhetoric
Personal attacks
Institutional, legal
Proposed solution
Obedience
Rights protection
Image of Budapest
Failure
Autonomous community
Political goal
Offload responsibility
Create legal precedent
🔚 One-sentence essence
Szentkirályi’s propaganda does not defend Budapest — it hides the fact that the government is deliberately squeezing the city. Karácsony’s message is precisely to expose that, using law and facts.
No comment… Hungarian propaganda and economics in one picture.
We are paying attention to pensioners! In 2026, pensions will be increased by 3.6%. In addition, the 13th-month pension will be paid, as well as the first quarter of the 14th-month pension.
“COMING IN 2026! THE 13TH-MONTH PENSION AND THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE 14TH-MONTH PENSION.”
The pro-government media is loudly citing The Economist to claim that Fidesz will win the 2026 election — now let’s look at the reality Domestic news
December 31, 2025 – 16:43 Zách Dániel
Only a few dozen votes per day are being cast in an online poll that has been running since November 12 and will continue until next May, in which the British Economist asks its readers whether they think Fidesz will win the most seats in the 2026 parliamentary elections. Based on the current results, around 57 percent of respondents believe that Fidesz will not have a majority in the new parliament, nor will the ruling party’s list win the most mandates. 21 percent think Fidesz will have a majority, and 17 percent believe it will not have a majority but will still win the most seats.
In contrast, Tények.hu, in a paid Facebook post, claims that The Economist says Fidesz–KDNP will win the 2026 elections — a claim also reported by Magyar Nemzet and Hirado.hu. Among the pro-government outlets mentioned, only the first indicated in its headline that this is not the opinion of the British weekly, but merely the current state of an ongoing reader poll.
Even the liberal Economist now predicts that Fidesz will win the elections! More than half of respondents believe that the national government will receive a renewed mandate for another four years.
Public opinion polls show the same trend. FIDESZ is continuously gaining strength, while Péter Magyar keeps stumbling from one scandal to another.
People can see clearly: Hungarians reject the Tisza Party’s austerity package, refuse illegal migration, and stand firmly behind the Hungarian government’s anti-war policy!
The events of recent months have shown the direction ahead. We are the frontrunners — in April we must show our strength together!
Looking Back: An Evaluation After the Last Municipal Assembly of the Year
Together with Budapest Fidesz, we have worked throughout the year to make the daily lives of the people of the capital better. There is no doubt that it is not always easy to operate actively against left-wing headwinds, and many of our forward-looking proposals have fallen on deaf ears.
Nevertheless, in December the Assembly supported two proposals that we initiated. This allows us to provide housing utility support for those in need and to give special assistance to our senior fellow citizens with free access to baths, cinemas, or even the zoo.
Next year we won’t slow down — in fact, we will continue with doubled strength the work that the citizens of Budapest have mandated us to do.
Budapest deserves much more! 2026, we are coming!
🎯 1️⃣ Framing: “We work, they obstruct”
Core claim:
“We are improving the lives of Budapest citizens → the left is blocking us.”
This is an excuse-narrative:
if something doesn’t succeed → it’s not the ruling party’s fault
responsibility is constantly shifted onto the opposition
Function: ➡️ no accountability → only victimhood posture
🏆 2️⃣ “Small handouts = big victory”
They cite free tickets and utility subsidies as concrete achievements.
These are:
short-term benefits
low-impact social policy fillers
not addressing real strategic urban issues (transport, housing, environment)
👉 Classic populism: expect big gratitude for tiny gifts.
🦸 3️⃣ Self-mythologizing: “We are the saviors”
Phrases like:
“our forward-looking proposals”
“the people of Budapest mandated us”
Meanwhile, election results in Budapest show the opposite.
This is reality-reframing → a manipulative victory narrative.
🚀 4️⃣ The promise of a greater future—always
“We continue with doubled strength”
“Budapest deserves much more”
“2026, we’re coming!”
No concrete program, no data. But a strong campaign message:
“Things are bad now → we will make them better.”
➡️ Fearmongering + redemption narrative.
🧠 Overall Picture
Element
Purpose
Headwind narrative
Scapegoating, shifting responsibility
Emphasis on small benefits
Vote maximization through gift-politics
Success propaganda
Reality rewritten for political gain
Grand promises
Campaign building without content
📌 Conclusion
This text does not inform — it markets politics:
it aims at emotional identification,
casts Fidesz as both victim and hero,
replaces civic responsibility with dependency on handouts.
Q: Was there a favorite moment for you in this year’s municipal assembly, and what was the worst decision?
A: I’m glad that there were quite a few decisions that brought joy to the lives of Budapest residents, showing that even though it’s not easy with a left-liberal majority in the assembly, it is still possible to push through positive initiatives from time to time. Overall, those were my favorite moments — when we could bring proposals to the assembly that genuinely improve people’s everyday lives.
For example, at the most recent session two proposals were adopted based on our initiative. One is related to support for housing utility costs, which will help those who need it most. The other was aimed specifically at pensioners in Budapest, giving them the opportunity to participate in cultural programs — for instance, visiting the zoo or going to the cinema for free with their grandchildren — helping to make the holiday season a bit nicer and more enjoyable for them.
🎯 1️⃣ “Success within failure” narrative
Core framing:
“It’s not easy in a left-liberal majority, but sometimes we still succeed.”
🔧 Technique: pre-emptive excuse + self-absolution
If achievements are few → “they blocked us”
If anything passes → “see, even despite them, we delivered”
👉 This isn’t performance evaluation — it’s excuse-management.
🏆 2️⃣ Inflating tiny handouts into major achievements
