Medián poll: Tisza widens lead as Fidesz loses support

Medián’s party preference poll shows a modest rise in support for the Tisza Party and a more substantial decline for Fidesz, according to reports by HVG and Telex. The results reported by the outlets put support for Tisza at 55 per cent and Fidesz at 16 per cent among the population as a whole. However, the widening gap between the two parties does not mean that everyone who stopped supporting Fidesz chose Tisza instead.

What do the figures for the population as a whole show?

According to HVG and Telex, support for Tisza rose by 1 percentage point compared with the September poll, while support for Fidesz fell by 6 percentage points. Calculated from the published figures, the gap between the two parties is therefore 39 percentage points. Fidesz’s decline thus played a greater role in widening the lead than the increase in support for Tisza.

When interpreting support figures for the population as a whole, it is important to remember that they do not cover only people who have already chosen a party and say they are certain to vote. This measure also includes those who are undecided and those who intend not to vote. These proportions therefore answer a different question from the party preferences of people who are certain to vote.

According to another Telex summary, support for Mi Hazánk stands at 9 per cent among the population as a whole. This figure can be compared directly with the results for Tisza and Fidesz across the whole population. Mixing figures for different voter groups would give a misleading picture of the parties’ relative positions.

Percentage points are not the same as percentage changes

In reporting on changes in party preferences, distinguishing between percentages and percentage points is particularly important. Percentage points express the difference between two levels of support, while a percentage change measures the movement relative to the previous value. They can describe the same change, but the terms are not interchangeable.

It is therefore incorrect to describe the 6-percentage-point decline in support for Fidesz reported by Telex simply as a 6 per cent fall. Similarly, the 1-percentage-point increase for Tisza reported by the outlet does not mean that the party’s previous support base grew by exactly 1 per cent. The scale of a change can only be described accurately if the appropriate basis for comparison is specified.

Not every departing supporter turns to the strongest rival

According to the interpretation offered by 24.hu and Telex, Tisza gained little directly from those moving away from Fidesz: the shift instead increased the ranks of undecided voters and support for Mi Hazánk. The reports therefore do not suggest a simple transfer between two parties. Moving away from the governing party does not necessarily mean immediately committing to another party.

According to 444’s summary, the proportion of undecided voters rose by 3 percentage points. This reported change matters because a decline in one party’s support does not necessarily translate into a gain for its opponent. A voter can become undecided without immediately naming a new party.

Aggregate figures alone, however, cannot trace every individual’s changing decisions. It is worth distinguishing between how much a party’s support has fallen and where its former supporters have individually moved. The former involves comparing the published proportions; the latter is a claim about more detailed movements among voters.

Committed voters with a party preference present a different picture

According to HVG’s report, support among those who are certain to vote and can name a preferred party stands at 68 per cent for Tisza and 20 per cent for Fidesz. Telex reports that, compared with the September figures, Tisza gained 4 percentage points in this group, while Fidesz lost 7 percentage points. These results must be treated separately from the figures for the population as a whole.

The difference is not a contradiction: the voter groups have different compositions. The group of committed voters with a party preference focuses on people who can name a party and have a firm intention to vote. The resulting distribution does not express the proportion of the whole population supporting a given party.

Comparisons should therefore always be made between the same groups. Earlier figures for the population as a whole should be compared with the latest results for the whole population, while earlier figures for committed voters with a party preference should be compared with new results for a group defined in the same way. Otherwise, the effects of voting intentions and party choice can easily become blurred.

Which voter groups did the report identify as showing a decline?

According to 24.hu’s report, Fidesz lost the largest proportions of supporters among people with lower levels of education, Budapest residents, men and those aged 50–64. This list provides an indication of how the change was distributed across social groups. It does not, however, mean that these are entirely separate groups of voters.

A respondent may belong to several of these categories at once, so findings about the groups cannot simply be added together. Nor does the demographic pattern alone explain the reasons for the change. Identifying where support has declined does not establish why those affected changed their party preferences.

The poll is a snapshot, not an election result

An opinion poll examines the intentions expressed at the time respondents are questioned. When interpreting the results, it is worth bearing in mind sampling uncertainty, the survey method and the variability of voting intentions. A smaller shift should therefore not automatically be treated as a lasting political turning point.

Likewise, national party preference figures are not the same as a projection of parliamentary seats. Which party respondents support nationally is one question; the outcome of an actual election is another. The poll alone therefore establishes neither the certain margin of a future victory nor the results in individual constituencies.

The main takeaway is the composition of the change: in the Medián figures reported by HVG and Telex, Tisza’s widening lead is primarily associated with Fidesz’s weakening support, while the reports by Telex and 24.hu also highlight the role of undecided voters and Mi Hazánk. A more accurate understanding of voter sentiment therefore requires looking not only at the gap between the two largest parties, but also at those who have not chosen a party and at how the voter groups being compared are defined.