The dominance of Civic Platform supporters in our county has once again been confirmed. Almost 44% of county residents voted for the party. Law and Justice came second, with a much weaker result—almost 25%. Palikot’s Movement came third, with a little over 12%.
In the city itself, Civic Platform performed even better, receiving almost 48% (Law and Justice 23% and Palikot’s Movement 12%). Dariusz Kwaśniewski (Civic Platform) received 2,954 votes from Bolesławiec residents. In the city, the top candidate on the list—Grzegorz Schetyna—beat him by just 166 votes.
Residents cast a total of 590 votes for the two Law and Justice candidates from Bolesławiec (Mirosław Horzempa—410 and Irena Zatylna—180). Przemysław Moszczyński (Palikot’s Movement) received 308 votes from Bolesławiec residents.
The Same Old Marriage
The marriage Bolesławiec residents entered into with Donald Tusk is lasting and nothing threatens it. Despite quarrels and the customary complaining that “our old girl” is not making an effort, we meekly return to her in every election and vote for Civic Platform.
This year, our chance to have a representative of our own was Dariusz Kwaśniewski, who significantly improved his result from the presidential election. At that time, 1,495 Bolesławiec residents voted for him. In Sunday’s parliamentary election, the figure was almost 3,000. This was certainly the result of a well-run election campaign. It was the most visible and specific, and had a clear message: “Vote for me, for MP.”
Winning so many votes was also the result of the considerable work done by the candidate himself. Kwaśniewski primarily went out to meet people. Much more willingly than last year, he met with voters, giving up writing on his blog. This resulted in greater honesty and credibility in his message and, consequently, votes he can be proud of. Grzegorz Schetyna, who won more than 67,000 votes in the constituency, beat Kwaśniewski in Bolesławiec by only one percentage point.
Attractive Palikot
Palikot’s Movement is like a tempting girl for a faithful husband. Beside her, one can easily light a joint, fool around and have an affair. Such a change is supposedly good for relationships. In Bolesławiec, support for Palikot’s Movement was considerable—over 12% (the nationwide result was 10%).
The candidate from Bolesławiec was Przemysław Moszczyński, known only from local online forums. He ran his campaign without burdening taxpayers. More than 300 votes in Bolesławiec and over 1,000 in the constituency is an impressive result for an unknown person without party connections and without a specific campaign.
As we had previously predicted in our pre-election poll, Moszczyński came second after Kwaśniewski when considering Bolesławiec candidates and their results across the Legnica constituency. This was mainly the result of Palikot’s appeal, but undoubtedly also of the candidate’s work. Although Moszczyński had made himself known on the Internet as a difficult person, with more controversial than constructive ideas for repairing Poland, in personal contact he was able to reach many people.
Will it become a political force in the next local elections? It is difficult to say, but it will undoubtedly be worth following the activities of Palikot’s Movement in Bolesławiec. Before the mayoral election in three years, the Movement may seem tasty and useful to someone. Especially since the Movement’s meetings are held in a highly politicized eatery—Piwnica Paryska (in 2007 Civic Platform met there; in 2010 the venue’s owner ran for city mayor; today, Palikot supporters have moved from “Elite” to Paryska).
A City Without an MP
Bolesławiec residents could choose from ten candidates for MP from our county: two each from Civic Platform, the Democratic Left Alliance and Law and Justice, three from the Polish Peasant Party and one from Palikot’s Movement. Only two candidates from Bolesławiec received just one percentage point fewer votes than the top candidates on the lists. They were the aforementioned Dariusz Kwaśniewski (Civic Platform) and Przemysław Moszczyński (Palikot’s Movement).
It is possible that these two candidates were better able to persuade their fellow residents than the others. The results show that they failed to convince more people that voting for the top candidates—in other words, voting for the party—is not really a vote for the city.
It is astonishing that in a city where most people are convinced that everything can be arranged only through personal connections, no one thought that their own MP could act according to the same principle. Perhaps we simply do not believe that someone who goes to Warsaw would want to—or even be able to—do anything for us. Perhaps we do not believe in politicians’ altruism or their willingness to act pro publico bono.
Perhaps the candidates’ familiarity and knowledge of their activities also simply let them down. The campaign began late. There was not enough time to reach voters throughout the constituency and make an impression on them. Kwaśniewski was better known thanks to last year’s mayoral campaign.
One cannot shake the impression that in this campaign only the candidates themselves cared about victory—especially those who achieved good results. Voters approached the issue of having their own MP with relative indifference. The candidates’ home parties did not provide much support either. It was as if passion and the will to win were lacking. Sometimes that is how it is in long-standing relationships. A sense of stability and certainty that one’s partner will not leave until death makes it possible to forgive a little fling, because no one is fighting particularly hard for anything anymore.
(information: Grażyna Hanaf)