It is the confirmation of the theory of the scare. With the exception of imponderables, the presidential elections of this year will be solved by the "worse" option. This is perceived in words and also in numbers. Clarin agreed on Thursday for an exclusive survey that shows the high electoral rejection of the main candidates. A sample of data: of the seven candidates measured, six have more than 50% in the category "never would vote".
The poll is from Opinion, a consultancy created in 2010 and that differed from the beginning by making measurements online. It works more for the business and business world than the politician. But he had good electoral forecasts in 2015 and 2017.
His latest monthly work includes the National survey of 2,979 cases, done from February 8 to 21, with a margin of error of +/- 1.8%. In his previous report, which this newspaper also advanced exclusively, showed another side of electoral disenchantment: of 13 candidates measured, 11 had more than 50% negative image.
Regarding the new measure, in one of the elements of the elections, the consultant asks about what is known as "voting potential". "Thinking about possible candidates for the president for the elections this year, Vote, can you vote or never vote? ".
The last element is key for politicians and consultants because it marks the maximum limit of a candidate. And there are almost everyone disapproved. O Only one that separates between the seven monitors is Roberto Lavagna, with 45% of "I would never vote". The rest exceeds 50%, with Mauricio Macri (52%) and Cristina Kirchner (54%) quite even. Sergio Massa, with 56% rejection, is in the middle; and close Juan Manuel Urtubey (60%), Alfredo Olmedo (69%) and José Luis Espert (70%).
These data are fundamental thinking above all in an electoral ballot: A candidate who has more than 50% "would never vote" would be impossible to win a second round … unless he competes with another with similar or superior rejection. This is the case that could happen, according to today's polls, between Macri and Cristina. One feeds back to the other. The benefits of the crack (for them).
When the positive side of the potential of the vote is observed, Cristina appears with stronger and more consolidated support: 33% "I would definitely vote for it", a tall floor, against 25% Macri at this point. But the president increases a bit when he adds that "he could get to vote": 48% in total, compared to 46% of the former president.
In a possible vote, always according to this inquiry, Cristina drives Macri for two points (43% to 41%), although still with a high level of undecided (16%).
What Exceed both of the potentiality of the vote is Lavagna: without so much hard vote (16% surely would vote), it grows when it is added that it could vote (39%).