[ad_1]
The importance of the second round is very high, but it is not easy to predict. There were several scenarios: a great victory for one match (2016), the first round winners falling to third place in terms of number of seats (2012) or the consolidation of the victory achieved in the first round (2008).
The situation is complicated by several factors. Congressional district boundaries are being redesigned and some Seimas members cannot even seek re-election in their constituency because they simply do not remain. The outcome of the second rounds at the national level may be suggested in part by the parties’ second-choice rankings. However, the data from the surveys carried out by different companies before these elections to the Seimas do not coincide significantly.
Furthermore, voters whose candidates do not qualify for the second round will not necessarily be willing to vote again at all. The opposite scenario is also possible: someone can feel that they have done their job just by seeing which candidates will compete in the second round. Repetition of active voting traditionally comes down to the first round. Finally, when the boundaries of the Seimas constituencies do not always coincide with the boundaries of the municipalities, it is only every four years that we can find out which parties are popular in them in general.
The opposite scenario is also possible: someone can feel that they have done their job just by seeing which candidates will compete in the second round.
Still, there are some benchmarks that can help at least give a rough idea of the possible outcome of the elections in the constituency. The difference in votes after the second round is important: if the advantage after the first is strong, it is not so often in the second round that voters rally around the candidate who ranked second in such a way that the leader leader loses. Another sign may be the relationship between the party’s votes and the candidate who nominated in a particular district. It shows whether a candidate has more support just because the nominated party or voters’ eyes look attractive as a personality. Finally, the data on historical voting in the district should not be underestimated (of course, taking into account that the limits sometimes change). What to expect in the second round this year?
The potential allies of the winning Patria Union (TS-LKD) are the Freedom Party (LP) and the Liberal Movement (LRLS). We could have boldly removed the Lithuanian Union of Greens and Peasants (LVŽS) from the list of possible conservative partners before the elections, and the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party (LSDP) clearly chose the field of the left. Viktor Uspaskich, leader of the Labor Party (DP), says he could work in any coalition.
Still, it is clear that TS-LKD will try to avoid binding with DP. It is real that “workers” may not be needed. Already after the first round of elections, TS-LKD, LP and LRLS had won 38 seats in the Seimas. Another 18 divisions of seats will be held where these political forces compete with each other, for which 56 seats are already guaranteed. Just 15 wins out of 39 possible in the remaining constituencies would be enough to secure an arithmetic majority. In terms of specific electoral districts, the most realistic scenario appears to be the fragile majority, just over 70 seats in three parties. The maximum number of seats is 95, which would even guarantee a constitutional majority.
However, in the event of a successful election, power negotiations would hardly be that simple. This is especially true in the Freedom Party. A party that has prepared a program that lasted 12 hours of reading will certainly not join the coalition unless it sees an opportunity to implement at least its most important provisions. Not all are acceptable to the conservative TS-LKD wing. If an agreement cannot be reached with the LP, a majority may not be possible without the Labor Party (DP). But an alliance with a party that has long been a great rival to the Conservatives would be a political earthquake. It is already more realistic to imagine a minority government.
It is realistic that in case of a miraculous appearance of the left bloc in the second round and the opportunity to form a coalition, the “workers” would also join the LVŽS coalition.
The “peasants” who are in second place at the election site have a partner who has already chosen their field: the LSDP. It is realistic that in case of a miraculous appearance of the left bloc in the second round and the opportunity to form a coalition, the “workers” would also join the LVŽS coalition. After the first round, the three parties together have 33 seats. Four more spots for this block will definitely go after the battles in the second round. The maximum number of possible seats in the Seimas would reach 78, so only an incredibly successful second round would allow at least an arithmetic chance of forming a majority. More realistically, the overall score for this group of parties will be around 53 to 57 seats.
Statesmen would probably also cooperate with representatives of parties that did not cross the 5% barrier. Lithuania’s Polish election campaign (LLRA-KŠS) will likely have three seats in the Seimas, and the Lithuanian Social Democratic Labor Party (LSDDP) should also win the way. Perhaps the support of independent members of the Seimas could be expected (six of those candidates are participating in the second round, one of them is Darius Kaminskas, who has a good chance of winning in Kėdainiai, this period he is a member of the LVŽS faction). Still, even those resources wouldn’t expand the possibilities that much. The number of guaranteed seats would rise to 40 in the second round (including only D. Kaminskas of independent candidates), the maximum, 82 seats, and the actual number would likely be just over 60 seats.
The final results of the elections will largely depend on the TS-LKD and LVŽS clashes, which will take place in up to 26 electoral districts. Six of them are in Kaunas, others are scattered throughout Lithuania. There were many such duels four years ago: 22. Then the “peasants” won 11: 1 in five main cities and 10: 0 in the regions. Now the balance of power should be different. The alternatives are much clearer to voters. The LVŽS is no longer the non-polarizing political force on which many still do not have a clear vision, as it was before the 2016 elections. The most realistic scenario is an approximate result, although with some victories in more battles, the ” peasants “will probably win. If they want to be back in power, it is almost necessary to repeat the four-year scenario and win almost everything in the second round.
Matas Baltrukevičius is an Associate Analyst at the Vilnius Institute for Policy Analysis.
[ad_2]
