The new method to foresee the results of presidential election

The new method to foresee the results of presidential election

Eminent journalist, president of the research center for study of mass and collective emotions OMF Savik Shuster developed a new method to foresee  the results of a presidential election. It is based on studying mass and  collective emotions of the voters. In this interview Savik Shuster tells how   the poll on mass emotions in Lithuania allowed to predict the results of the run-off of presidential elections on May 26. 

Watch the interview to find out more about the new method and why it allows to see how mass emotions convert into votes.

Host:

Hello, Mr Shuster! Nice to have you with us! 

Savik Shuster:

Nice to be live with you. 

Host:

I will translate your answers to the questions, so it will take a couple of moment between questions. Please can you tell us now how did the poll turn out and what are the results and what do the results say. 

Savik Shuster:

Well, Gitanas Nausėda elicits 43,5% of hope among Lithuanian voters. I say Lithuanian voter because our poll was conducted in a very professional manner. The selection is precise it reflects the population of Lithuania. Therefore I am talking about the Lithuanian electorate. So it`s  43,5% of hope and Ingrida Šimonytė .. I am sorry. I am looking at the numbers because I’ve just receive them so it`s very fresh and I don’t know it by heart. So for Ingrida Šimonytė it`s 26%, so basically, the difference is quite substantive. Then we are going into two negative emotions. Negative emotions are even more…

Host: 

Even stronger correlation, yes?  

Savik Shuster:

Well, I suppose. It`s very difficult to talk about correlation today because it`s Friday and the vote is on Sunday and we will see the results on Monday, but we see that Gitanas Nausėda elicits 2,3% of humiliation in voters, which is very little. Very little. I`ve being doing this for about two and a half month. Ukraine is obviously the most evident example, but 2,3% of humiliation is very little. Very little. Because if you compare it say to Volodymyr Zelensky or Petro Poroshenko it was much much higher. It was around 20%. So here is 2,3% and as far as fear is concerned he elicits 7,5%. So, all together, we can say that negative emotions about 10%. Ingrida Šimonytė – 11% of humiliation and 19,3% of fear. So here we are coming to almost 30%. So it`s three times as much negatives emotions she elicits in Lithuanian voters. So, what do we say about the reasons, which are very important. As far as hope is concerned , people hope in Gitanas Nausėda because they believe that he is going to achieve social justice and he will be efficient in fighting corruption. They do not think of Gitanas Nauseda as a person who is going to be very I`d say determined, very strict, very taught in foreign policy especially if we talk about Kremlin. As far as Ingrida Šimonytė is concerned people believe that she can fight for social justice. People do not believe that she is going to be efficient in fighting corruption at all. We are talking about 3% among the people who hoping her. And people believe that she will continue the taught policy vis-à-vis Kremlin, continue the policy of Dalia Grybauskaitė. So, basically, we see immediately with differences. People do not believe that president of Lithuania, if it’s going to be Nauseda, he is going to be very efficient in foreign policy and but he is going to be efficient in domestic policy and they do not believe that Ingrida Šimonytė going to be efficient in domestic policy. She is going to be more efficient in foreign policy. So that is as far as hope is concerned. 

Host  

I will interrupt you and translate in to the viewers and then we will preside to the next question. 

Host 

Savik, what should be the correlation between the results of the poll between the outcome of the election in Lithuania and is Lithuanian society any different in terms of correlation, in terms of possible correlation from the Ukrainian population?

Savik Shuster:

It`s not a easy question to answer. Look. (говорит что-то на литовском) Sociology is a very difficult matter. You really need to be very good in the language. So, the correlation is very difficult to determine before the vote, it`s much easier after, but before the vote I can tell you that. My experience in Ukraine, as we did the first round and the second round, was that negative emotions, especially humiliation, play a very important role. And what is important to understand the reason why people feel humiliate by that or another candidate. So here I see, as you said and this true, and I said, but negative emotions are much higher that respect of Ingrida Šimonytė , but there are reasons. Ingrida Šimonytė evokes negative emotions because she is going to serve not the interests of the people, but the interests of her entourage, surroundings, let`s say political friends. 

Host:

But that is the responds of the voters, yes?  

Savik Shuster:

Yes, obviously. It`s not mine. Nothing of what I was saying is mine, everything is from the responds of voters. And that is a very difficult thing even on the eve of Presidential debates, which are going to take place on Friday night and that is very difficult to break 52% of people who feel either humiliate or they feel fear if she becomes president, think that she is not going to serve their interests, but she is going to serve the interests of her political friends, close circle as it says. So that is very difficult to break in the minds of voters, in hearts of voters. As far as Nauseda is concerned…

Host:

Very short. Excuse me. Because we are running out of time. So just finish your though. 

Savik Shuster:

As far as Gitanas Nauseda is concerned, people are concerned that he is going to serve the interests of the rich, that he is going to serve the interests of the banks and that he is going to serve the interests the bureaucrats of the European Union, but the numbers are quite different. It`s less in the case of votes for Gitanas Nauseda. So my conclusion is and it`s a risky conclusion, you understand, I take all the responsibility, obviously, it`s a new way of studying public opinion. So anyway, my conclusion that Gitanas Nauseda is quite far ahead. 

Host:

Thank you. Thank you for your poll, thank you for your opinions. Savik, it was nice having you with us.

The source