Iliana Yotova won the presidential election, but Prime Minister and, until 10 months ago, President Rumen Radev was quick to cash in on her victory as a vote of confidence in the government—one that no one had given him.
But why did she win—and why will she not only be the first woman president, but also the president with the longest tenure at “Dondukov” 2—15 years in total, once her term, which begins next January, is added?
The easiest answer is that whoever wins the first round also wins the runoff. The more difficult question is whether the governing parties won the presidential election by turning the runoff into a referendum on their own power—or whether Gyurov lost because he failed to turn it into one.
In the second round, Yotova managed to increase her lead over the first round several times over. After that vote, she led Gyurov by less than 3 percentage points, or 42,715 votes. The final vote count established a lead of more than 300,000 votes in favor of the incumbent head of state.
Did Yotova win—or did the alternative lose?
Yotova won not only with the votes of Rumen Radev’s supporters, with whom she shared “Dondukov” 2 for almost nine years, but also with the support of voters who had preferred other candidates in the first round. According to “Alpha Research,” 76% of “Vazrazhdane” supporters who voted in the runoff backed Yotova, as did 72% of the voters of Ivelin Mihaylov from “Velichie.”
The “peace versus war” rhetoric clearly found fertile ground among these electorates, although the data do not show how many votes it brought in by itself. Gyurov attracted 75% of GERB supporters who voted and 56% of those who supported the MRF, but that was not enough.
Neither of the two parties represented in parliament nominated a candidate for the presidential election. In the second round, nearly 60% of GERB voters and around two-thirds of MRF voters did not go to the polls at all. This time, the usual mass mobilization in the mixed-population regions was not seen, and the low turnout raised the question of why the MRF did not want to use its full electoral potential, including in Turkey. Interior Minister Ivan Demerdzhiev boasted that the credit belonged to the Interior Ministry, which had prevented the election from being compromised.
With turnout below 30%, Yotova won a convincing majority among those who voted, but not broad public support for the government of “Progressive Bulgaria.” Although the prime minister boasted, “We have 1 million votes—and in a presidential election, at that,” and interpreted the result as confirmation that the course was the right one, “Vazrazhdane” and “Velichie” also deserve credit. They managed to mobilize part of the nationalist vote by setting peace against war. But a significant part of the public did not take part in the election.
The young chose Gyurov, the old decided the vote
Exit-poll data from “Alpha Research” and “Market Links,” as well as the demographic profile of the first round outlined by “Trend,” clearly show a generational divide. Younger voters preferred Gyurov, but the election was decided by Yotova’s broader and older electorate.
According to “Alpha Research,” Gyurov received 61% support among voters aged 18 to 30, while Yotova won 63% among people over 60. “Market Links” recorded 50% for Gyurov versus 40% for Yotova among Generation Z, but among baby boomers the ratio was reversed—59% for Yotova versus 37% for Gyurov. Different methodologies and age limits produce different percentages, but the direction is the same: support for Yotova increases with age, while support for Gyurov declines.
According to “Alpha Research,” the two candidates’ leads in the youngest and oldest groups were almost mirror images—29 points for Gyurov among younger voters and 28 for Yotova among those over 60.
The divide is also geographical and educational. Gyurov has stronger positions in Sofia and among university graduates, while Yotova is stronger in villages and among voters with secondary education. Already in the first round, according to “Trend,” 65.5% of Gyurov’s voters were university graduates, compared with 47.1% for Yotova, while the share of Sofia residents among his supporters was 31.8%, compared with 12.2% among hers. Thus, the runoff revealed not merely a clash between two candidates, but a divergence between generations, levels of education and places of residence. And the demographic profile does not prove that the “peace versus war” message won the election.
Why Gyurov failed to stop Yotova
Setting “peace or war” against each other may mobilize the hard-core supporters, but it can also alienate moderate voters. Especially when the actual choice for president is presented as a decision on whether Bulgaria will be dragged into war—a question that does not depend solely on the head of state.
The war Russia started against Ukraine became the main argument in the presidential campaign, but with the roles reversed. The candidate who insisted on supporting the attacked country was portrayed as a threat to peace, while the one who warned that Bulgaria could be drawn into the war was presented as its defender.
Yotova loudly trumpeted a nonexistent danger, while Gyurov was forced into a position of explaining that no such danger existed. To his own voters, this was obvious. But while rebutting Yotova, he relegated his vision for the presidency to the background. This was particularly evident in the only televised debate between the two.
In the week before the second round, which was critically important for the final result, the campaign focused on which of the two candidates was more dangerous, rather than on what kind of president Bulgaria needed. Fear can mobilize voters, but it does not convince those who are undecided.
The governing parties presented the runoff as a choice between peace and war, while their opponents presented it as a choice between democracy and authoritarianism. Radev, the leadership of “Progressive Bulgaria” and Yotova brought the false threat of the “assembly” being revived back into circulation.
There were no grounds for claiming that support for Gyurov meant the revival of the governing alliance between We Continue the Change–Democratic Bulgaria and GERB–SDS, supported by the MRF of Delyan Peevski. But the runoff was presented not as a choice of president, but as an attempt to restore a discredited political model.
A new start
The loss of the presidential election could prove to be a new start for Gyurov, who entered politics in 2021 as a member of parliament from We Continue the Change. On election night, he said that “the best is yet to come” and that the campaign had created a platform on which further progress could be built.
He called for unity around common goals and values, but clarified that he did not mean a political merger. Asked whether he was preparing a new political project, he did not rule out such a possibility, explaining that they still had to discuss how they would move forward.
Even before the election, speculation emerged that Andrey Gyurov was preparing to take on the role of unifier of the fragmented right and even to become the leader of a new political project. The presidential campaign gave him name recognition and support beyond We Continue the Change–Democratic Bulgaria. But gathering support against a common opponent is one thing; turning it into lasting influence is another. Gyurov left open not only the question of his future role, but also that of the political form in which he might continue.
The presidential election showed that seven months after Radev’s significant victory in the parliamentary election, there is an opposition—but it is not enough to win. The question now facing Gyurov and the right is whether they can offer something more than opposition to Radev. Because in this election he was not a candidate, but he won it.
For Yotova, the first challenge is the new 2027 budget, whose submission to parliament the governing parties postponed until after the runoff. Next will come the election of a new prosecutor general by the future Supreme Judicial Council (SJC)—a test of the promises to break with the existing model of governance of the judiciary. As president, Yotova will have to sign the decree appointing him.
Radev has already declared the presidential victory confirmation of his policies. Yotova said that in almost 30 years in politics, no one had yet emerged to tell her what to do.
We have yet to find out who won the presidency—Rumen Radev or Bulgaria.
This text expresses the author’s personal opinion and may not coincide with the positions of the Bulgarian editorial team or of DW as a whole.
Source: www.dw.com