Search

The author of the entry assessed that Krakow was the beginning of a wave of opposition, and the Poles had enough of Donald Tusk's government, referring to the slogan #JustNotTusk. He wrote that the authorities disregarded Polish women and men and should take their anger into account at the polls. He added that after three years, voters had the right to demand accountability for — as he claimed — lies and high prices. https://t.co/5Xl93HjzuA #Kraków #Polska #Wybory #PL (translated)

Michał Drewnicki assessed that Kraków opted for change, and the residents had enough of stagnation, networks, and cliques. He also wrote that they did not want Tusk's candidate, and his voters contributed to the removal of the current governing arrangement in the city. He thanked his voters and congratulated Łukasz Gibala on his victory. He wrote that he was counting on cooperation on important projects for Kraków and announced that he would support good decisions and react to bad ones. He added that Kraków remained the most important to him. #Kraków #wybory #zmiany (translated)

Artur wrote that in this matter he definitely agreed with Trump, who — in his opinion — accurately summarized his voters. He compared them to PiS voters, claiming that they applaud everything Kaczyński tells them, and to the viewers of Republika. In the end, he used an insulting term towards these groups suggesting a lack of intelligence. #Polska #Polityka #Wybory (translated)

The author wrote that the second round of the mayoral elections in Krakow on Sunday promised to be particularly interesting. He presented it as a clash between a determined candidate and a political wanderer, stating that the voters in Krakow would decide whether the will for change was stronger or political loyalty. #Kraków #wybory2023 #prezydent #PL (translated)

The author wrote that, in his opinion, many political groups did not distance themselves from the openly pro-Russian option, fearing that after the elections it might be necessary to gain a majority in the Sejm. He emphasized that as a Polish voter, he does not agree with this and added that action must be taken firmly and ruthlessly. #Polska #Polityka #Wybory #PL #RU (translated)

Marcelina Zawisza from the Together Party wrote that the New Left opposed discussing the agreement to increase the hourly minimum wage by 90 groszy, despite rising costs of electricity, gas, water, and rent. She also pointed out that salaries in the public sector were supposed to increase by 3 percent, while inflation was at 4 percent, which — as she assessed — could mean a real decrease in wages next year. Zawisza added that voters from different parties had asked her about further increases in fees this year, while the minimum wage had increased, as she wrote, only by 90 groszy. She claimed that public officials earning 10 thousand zł net felt the rise in costs less than other citizens. She accused the New Left, the Civic Coalition, PSL, and Poland 2050 of not wanting this topic to be discussed. #Polska #Gospodarka #Wybory (translated)

The author of the entry agreed with Fogiel that Poles should choose their authorities, but called for the consistent application of this principle. He pointed to the presidential elections of 2025 and questioned the method of constitutional verification of their results. He recalled that Article 129 of the Constitution, as he wrote, guarantees voters the right to submit protests, and the election oversight should be conducted in a procedure that meets constitutional standards. He stated that 55,274 protests had been submitted to the Supreme Court. He also claimed that the National Electoral Commission indicated the need to address the protests and to determine the validity of the election by a Supreme Court panel whose institutional and personal status would not raise doubts. According to the author, the Electoral Commission recorded recurring errors in the protocols of some polling stations and called for a more thorough analysis of their causes. The author emphasized that the validity of the election was determined by the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs, whose status as a court established by law—as he noted—remained a subject of dispute. He added that proceedings regarding irregularities in vote counting were still ongoing. He mentioned cases of incorrect assignment of votes to candidates, allegations against commission members, and acts of accusation. He stated that in one of the cases, the prosecutor accused 24 commission members of dishonestly counting votes and preparing protocols. He noted that he did not claim that a change in the overall election result had been proven. As he wrote, the prosecutor is examining individual commissions separately, which allows establishing what happened in a specific commission but does not determine the overall scale of irregularities in the country. According to the author, it cannot be assumed that the errors confirmed in successive commissions could not be significant in a cumulative sense until their scale has been established. The author considered that the mere assertion that Poles elected a president does not end the discussion about the integrity of the elections. He asked whether all votes were counted correctly, whether the protests were addressed in accordance with constitutional requirements, and whether the body stating the validity of the election met the Supreme Court's standard required by Article 129. He also wrote that Speaker Szymon Hołownia was aware of these doubts, yet convened the National Assembly, allowing the office to be assumed. He emphasized, however, that he could not say that politicians chose a president instead of citizens, because it was Poles who voted. #wybory #Polska #konstytucja (translated)

Przemo75 wrote that before next year's elections, the "Orange" may openly threaten that Poland will not have a base if Poles do not vote for PiS. According to the author, PiS members and Batyr will repeat this message. He expressed confidence that voters will not succumb to what he described as blackmail. #wybory #Polska #PiS (translated)

Wojciech Kussowski wrote that "Tusk's sabotage" was supposed to consist of Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz not entering into an agreement with the populists, which the author described as based on cynical blackmail. He accused right-wing politicians of trading Poland's security to return to power, adding that their voters supported this. #Polska #wybory #polityka (translated)

The author of the entry wrote that a resident of the Bieszczady Mountains warned him that alarms in eastern Poland are meant to scare right-wing voters ahead of next year's elections. According to this warning, the activation of alarms would make voters not go to the polls and hide in basements. The author asked what others think about this. #Polska #wybory #Bieszczady #PL (translated)

Wojciech Kussowski wrote that his hairdresser, who went from supporting PiS to supporting Braun, reacted with strong agitation when he wanted to read her some pro-Russian statements by the politician. He gave up because he was afraid he would have a stroke, and the hairdresser denied everything. Kussowski predicted that Braun's voters would react similarly to his recordings. #Polska #Polityka #Wyborcy (translated)

Marcin Palade statistically referenced an IBRiS study from September 18-19, which asked opposition voters if they were concerned that Russia would militarily attack Poland in the coming years. He stated that 25% and 18% responded "yes," while 58% and 70% responded "no." He assessed that the cross-party "war party" found itself in deep defense, which he considered good for Poland. #Polska #Rosja #bezpieczeństwo (translated)

In connection with the problem of establishing contact with Monika Piątkowska's team, we present our proposal regarding the debate before the second round of elections in Krakow: 1. Date - October 8, 6 PM. 2. Duration - 1 hour. 3. Location - studio in the Main Market Square. 4. Producer - Telewizja Polska (Polish Television). 5. The producer will provide the signal free of charge to all interested media. 6. Moderator - to be determined. 7. Rules: During the debate, questions will only be asked by the participants. The moderator will manage the time. The number of questions and thematic blocks - to be determined. Participants will respond while standing. They will not have gadgets, notes, or use mobile phones. If Monika Piątkowska's team would be interested in this form of debate, we would jointly approach TVP with a request for its realization. TVP, in its history, has produced such events many times, providing the signal to other media. The format of the debate and the lack of an active moderator immediately cuts off any discussions about the media's bias. We prefer that voters focus on the substantive side of the debate rather than discussing who the host might favor. #debata #wybory #Kraków (translated)

Blocking government laws by Karol Nawrocki is pure madness when you calmly look at specific laws. In most cases, the same pattern occurs—ordinary people lose out while large corporations or the old system gain. Below are examples: 1. Tax Code Gained: the tax authorities, penalties for formal violations become harsher. Lost: taxpayers and companies that were supposed to receive lower penalties for formal shortcomings. 2. Oil, fuel, and gas reserves Gained: no one Lost: Poles, new rules were supposed to apply during the crisis 3. Mandatory insurance Gained: Insurance companies Lost: drivers and the market, if the amendment really simplified the OC; this was not checked before coming into effect. 4. Water supply and sewage Gained: the current tariff and municipal company system. Lost: municipalities and consumers, the law was supposed to regulate tariffs in their favor. 5. Road Traffic Law Gained: the old system Lost: carriers counting on EU e-permits that were to be implemented immediately. 6. Electoral Code Gained: the current, narrower voting model. Lost: voters who were supposed to receive a more widespread postal vote. 7. CIT and family foundations Gained: family foundations and individuals using them for optimization. Lost: the budget, i.e. Poles 8. Crypto-assets market Gained: crypto companies Lost: clients and supervision 9. Education Law Gained: schools and teachers sticking to the old calendar. Lost: the government's schedule for the new basis and the postponement of the eighth-grade exam. 10. Sugar tax and PIT on winnings Gained: beverage producers, stores, casino players; Lost: Poles, NFZ, and the budget 11. Alcohol excise tax Gained: breweries, distilleries, trade, alcohol buyers Lost: Poles, the budget 12. NCBR Gained: the current setup in the agency. Lost: greater oversight over NCBR 13. Active farmer Gained: individuals benefiting from agriculture without real farming Lost: farmers actively working, whom the law was supposed to strengthen. 14. SAFE Gained: Russia, USA Lost: Poland 15. Family Code Gained: no one Lost: childless couples who could part without court. 16. Shaping the agricultural system Gained: current land turnover restrictions. Lost: land buyers and companies wanting cheaper, simpler transactions. 17. SENT Gained: companies trading concrete and transport outside the broader SENT. Lost: Poles (1.2 billion) to the budget from tightening 19. Health care benefits Gained: the current NFZ benefits system. Lost: patients and facilities 20. Status of a close person Gained: no one Lost: couples, including same-sex ones, without a cohabitation agreement and the rights that come with it. 21. Public transport Gained: carriers with longer, 10-year contracts. Lost: eventually, passengers 22. Energy law Gained: the old system Lost: ultimately Poles 23. tax on extraordinary profits of fuel companies. Gained: big oil corporations, Lost: the budget. #Polska #Prawo #Społeczeństwo (translated)

Hi @SlizPawel, your party mate hasn't responded to my complaint to the court for a week, which he is obliged to forward to the Administrative Court. Maybe you can help? You know, you are a lawyer; you should have some respect for the judicial control of the entity. Or at least for me as a voter, who has already spent over 1000 PLN out of my own pocket on court fees because of you. What can I do to get you to get the guy in line? #prawo #sąd #wybory (translated)

Emocje powoli opadają. Moja kampania się skończyła, więc czas spokojnie, metodycznie przyjrzeć się wynikom📈. Nie tylko samym procentom, ale także warunkom, w których przyszło nam walczyć. Kraków od lat jest dla PiS trudnym miastem. Analizując poparcie w Krakowie w zestawieniu z wynikami ogólnopolskimi robi się ciekawie. W wyborach do Sejmu w 2023 roku, do Parlamentu Europejskiego w 2024 roku i w pierwszej turze wyborów prezydenckich w 2025 roku wynik Prawa i Sprawiedliworci lub popieranego przez partię kandydata wynosił tutaj około 70% wyniku ogólnopolskiego. Czyli jeśli PiS w Polsce miał poparcie 40%, to w Krakowie około 28%, jeśli w Polsce było 30% to w Krakowie 21%. Dzisiaj średnia ośmiu zestawionych sondaży, daje PiS 20,62%. Gdyby więc uwzględnić to statystycznie mój wynik powinien wynosić 14,32%, bo jest to te historycznie udowodnione 70% poparcia ogólnopolskiego. Ale wynik jest wyższy! Uzyskałem 17,50%. Ponad 3 punkty procentowe więcej. Około 21% ponad poziom wynikający z tej historycznej proporcji. To nie jest prognoza ani porównanie identycznych wyborów, ale jest to konkretny punkt odniesienia. I na jego tle nasz wynik jest wyraźnie lepszy. Głosowało na mnie wielu wyborców, którzy na PiS nie głosowali. Jestem im wdzięczny, że wybrali konkretnego czlowieka, kierując się wiarygodnością i aktywnością, a nie tylko znaczkiem. Warto pamiętać też o kontekście. Kiedy w 2018 roku startowała Małgorzata Wassermann, wrześniowy sondaż CBOS dla Polski pokazywał PiS 43%, a jej wynik w Krakowie wyniósł 31,88%. To pojedynczy odczyt, który dobrze przypomina, w jak innych warunkach politycznych odbywały się tamte wybory. PiS był na fali, odnosił sukcesy. Zobaczcie na wykresy- żółty po lewej stronie to różnica poparcia, dzisiaj jest minimalna, co pokazuje że dobrze wykonaliśmy pracę. Dziś mieliśmy również znacznie silniejszego Łukasza Gibałę, budującego wizerunek kandydata sprzeciwu wobec miejskiej władzy i partyjnym centralom („każdy byle nie ktoś z KO”). Sięgał także po głosy prawicy. Nie pomógł rozłam w naszym środowisku. Nie pomogły sygnały płynące od z Rozwoju Plus, gdy jeden poseł publicznie mówił, że „trzyma kciuki” za Gibałę. Mimo tego potrafiliśmy zainteresować naszą kandydaturą również ludzi spoza PiS. Według sondażu głosowali na mnie także wyborcy Konfederacji, a nawet Lewicy czy Koalicji Obywatelskiej. Pokazuje to, że moje poparcie nie zamykało się w jednym partyjnym środowisku. Nie osiągnęliśmy celu, jakim była druga tura. Ale nie przekreśla to pracy, którą wykonaliśmy, ani wyniku lepszego od historycznego punktu odniesienia. W tych warunkach uważam go za sukces naszej aktywności i wiarygodności. Rozmów z mieszkańcami. Obecności na osiedlach. Lat pracy, a nie tylko kilku tygodni kampanii. 44 772 osoby obdarzyły mnie zaufaniem. Dziękuję każdej z nich. Nie przyjechałem do Krakowa na wybory i nie wyjadę po wyborach. Dalej będę tutaj pracował. PS. Nie kandydowałem, by uzyskać stanowisko, dlatego nie aspiruję do funkcji wiceprezydenta. #Kraków #wybory #Polityka