Two political coalitions will hold primary elections this Sunday while an undetermined number of voters will have no representative option available in the process. One of the first questions that arises is how many people will feel compelled to vote in each coalition and how this will affect the period between the primaries and the first round of the presidential election. As such, those who are thinking of clever strategies to harm a candidate by voting in his or her primary may want to think twice.
As we all know, for citizens who are not members of a political party, the primaries are just like any other open election: when they arrive at the voting table they will receive a ballot listing all of the competing options, from both primaries, and all they have to do is express a clear preference for their vote to be valid. Therefore, although the coalitions represent mutually exclusive programs, for the vast majority of citizens Sunday’s offering ranges from Jadue to Lavín.
At least two candidates have made explicit appeals to “outside” voters. Gabriel Boric and his flirtations with the former Concertación in general, and the Socialist Party (PS) in particular, and Ignacio Briones, with his appeal—in his televised electoral slot—to cross the line. Lavín, faithful to his style, has opted for ambiguity and moderation, while Sichel is betting on recruiting the hard right votes that Lavín’s strategy neglects, and Desbordes, somewhat weakened after his internal defeat, seems more focused on saving face.
For his part, Daniel Jadue has moved full speed ahead and is betting on turning the primary into the first show of support for his program and style. At first glance, Jadue’s strategy has an advantage: it is supported by his hard-core votes and the hypothetical soft votes that Boric might attract. This is because the primary on the left is binominal, which means that by definition there is only one possible adversary, and that is the partner. Jadue, better positioned in the polls, could gain strength by being the candidate who wins a “massive” primary vote.
Following the final tally, the first inevitable comparison will be how many people participated in each primary, and it is likely that this indicator will be used as a predictor of each winning candidate’s chances in the first round of the presidential election. However, there is a non-trivial distorting effect in play: neither Yasna Provoste, whose poll numbers are respectable, nor Paula Narváez, for whom the same is not true, are in competition.
Given this theoretical void, Boric has bet on being the beachhead on which these orphaned center left voters can land. Furthermore, while he has not been seen directly pushing the calls for a strategic vote to “stop Jadue,” more than a few unofficial spokespersons are bent on pointing to the radicalism of the PC in their frankly open reflections. And beyond the familiar anti-communism refrain, the truth is that neither the party nor the communist candidate himself have bothered to soften their image to try and counter the traditional crusade to stop them.
To a greater or lesser extent, every day it becomes more evident that the strategy of Jadue and the PC is not to seek a majority or build a coalition but rather it is one of gathering strength. The bet is to cement his hegemony over the left and from there promote a political program that moves ahead due to lack of resistance more than massive consent. So, when Guillermo Tellier reads of the calls to vote for Boric to stop Jadue, it is very likely that, in silence and without witnesses, he will smile to himself.
(*) Camilo Feres is a Social Communicator UARCIS and holds a Master’s Degree in Social Sciences from the University of Chile. He is also Director of Social Studies and Policies at Azerta. Column published in Ex-Ante.
