Every voter is more than a vote against the regime

Maybe we will already during morning of October 25th be able to estimate relatively reliably results of the parliamentary elections in Serbia, that is, whether this date will be written in golden letters in the historical calendar of these areas as the day when the country freed itself from the shackles of autocratic-kleptocratic rule which, like sulfuric acid, dissolved the state and society. Our interlocutors, as well as other political experts we read and listen to these days, are unanimous: high turnout is the key to the end of the fourteen-year (and change) rule of Aleksandar Vučić. If we see the huge queues in front of the polling stations during the morning hours, of course also later in the day, the thing is clear - an inglorious era is coming to an end.

Maybe someone from the top of the government that morning, observing the queues in front of the polling stations, will immediately start packing their things and slowly move to the previously reserved locations, and maybe some suitcases are already ready now. Others will figure out how to deceive or break the will of the citizens by force, but they will hardly succeed in this, because their main tool, the repressive apparatus, all with paramilitary formations, will be quite scared by the end of the election day: everyone will think first of all about how to save their own lower back. There are scenarios mentioned by the representatives of the executive power in the role of constitutional judges - that the regime somehow stops the election process during the day if it sees that the turnout is huge. But that too will be a desperate move, which will not end well for whoever pulls it. You can bet on that.

According to our interlocutors, a high turnout will be an indicator of whether the Student Movement, as an unexpected political force that emerged after the Novi Sad tragedy, succeeded in restoring hope to the citizens that it is possible to get out of the impasse in which we got stuck. At the same time, it will also be a sign that the progressives failed to drive a significant number of citizens who are against them into abstinence. And that, it must be admitted, they have been doing successfully all these years. In the end, they came to power thanks to abstinence, including the phenomenon called "white tickets".

YOU SHOULD WORK ON EXIT AND ABSTINENCE

In politics, things are rarely random or spontaneous: both turnout and abstinence need to be worked on. Numerous cases in which the authorities or other actors (including external ones) systematically encouraged electoral abstinence have been documented and scientifically processed. One of the more famous examples from recent history is the American case from 2016. The Senate investigation found that a Russian agency led a coordinated campaign on social networks, wanting to produce the greatest possible electoral abstinence among American voters, primarily African Americans, in order to facilitate the election victory of Donald Trump. Namely, African-Americans are considered to be Democratic-leaning voters. The main message was - no one speaks to us African Americans, Democrats and Republicans are the same, everyone is the same, it's better to stay at home than to be scammed again!

"Everyone is the same" - that idiotic cry is one of the key entrances to abstinence. Extensive analyzes of elections say that autocratic authorities during campaigns try to demobilize their opponents' voters by promoting this phrase. There are other platitudes, such as: "nothing can be changed", "the elections are decided in advance", "politics is dirty and dangerous, don't participate in it!" The progressives have been successfully pushing these "breakthroughs" all these years, and in this campaign they are working on it very diligently.

NUMBERS AND LETTERS

We will not now spread the story about the voter list and the problems that accompany it. Let's just say that about 6,45 million voters are registered in it, while the actual number of potential voters, according to estimates mentioned in political analyses, is somewhere around 5,4 million. What does that actually mean? That turnout percentage is a relative category. If, for example, the official turnout is 65 percent, it would, in relation to the estimated number of voters living in Serbia, amount to more than 75 percent. Therefore, when we talk about turnout and compare different election cycles, it is more useful to rely on absolute numbers. In some political analyses, it is estimated that for the victory of the Student List, it would be necessary for more than four million citizens to go to the polls. The higher the turnout, according to that estimate, the better the prospects of the Student List: the progressives are counting on a large, but still limited electorate.

When it comes to parliamentary elections, from 2000 until today, the largest number of citizens voted in 2008, when about 4,1 million people went to the polls. In other elections, the number of voters was generally around 3,8 million. However, if we bear in mind that the upcoming elections are being held in a referendum atmosphere, it is worth reminding that in the second round of the presidential elections of the same year, 2008, which also had a referendum character, because the European orientation of Serbia was decided, almost 4,6 million citizens voted.

High turnout has other consequences, important not only for the post-election outcome, but also for the future political life of Serbia. One of them is an increase in the number of votes needed to pass the electoral census, which will make it even more difficult for smaller lists to enter parliament. Perhaps for the first time since the introduction of multi-party system, we could see the SPS outside the assembly, which would probably be the end for that party. It would be the final balance of the "wise" leadership of Ivica Dačić, allegedly the best student of political science ever, who killed his party through long-term cooperation with SNS.

High turnout also increases the so-called natural threshold for winning parliamentary mandates, which makes it difficult for minority lists to enter parliament, that is, reduces the number of their mandates. However, this does not mean that the minority parties will not be a decisive factor in the formation of the new government. Such a situation could happen if, apart from SNS and the student list, only minority lists won mandates, and none of the two big lists would have enough MPs to independently form a parliamentary majority. Until now, the largest minority parties have mostly cooperated with SNS, but this does not mean that it will be so in the future. The Union of Vojvodina Hungarians is likely to carefully consider whether to tie its fate to Vučić, after getting burned by an alliance with the politically blessed Orbán. On the other hand, Rasim Ljajić has been harshly criticizing SNS in recent days and has even publicly distanced himself from the previous cooperation with that party, calling it immoral!

PROGRESSIVES ARE TRYING TO REDUCE TURNOUT

Political scientist Dejan Bursać said in an interview for "Vreme" that he agrees with our statement that the SNS campaign is aimed at reducing voter turnout. The huge turnout is a problem for them, says Bursać and underlines that SNS has a relatively fixed number of voters, with which it has won elections so far.

"The great advantage of the SNS in the previous elections was that there were many opponents of the regime, but also that the opposition parties failed to mobilize voters. Many people did not go to the polls, they were disappointed, they thought that voting was meaningless and that no one could defeat the SNS. That has changed now, the situation has turned upside down with the student movement and hope has appeared among a large number of voters. We can assume that every new voter who goes to the polls is potentially a vote against the government. "They will most likely vote for the Student List as the biggest competitor. With its 1,7 to 1,8 million voters, the SNS cannot win if, say, 4,2 or 4,3 million voters go to the elections," says Bursać.

Another reason why progressives are not satisfied with a large turnout is that in that case some post-election combinations fall away, according to Bursać. With high turnout, SPS and NDSS could remain below the census. He does not consider Bursać NDSS to be a regime party, but says that many MPs of this party have cooperated with SNS before. He fears that there is a great potential for them to fly over.

"In an effort to reduce turnout, SNS decided to force debates. They go to debates on Nova and N1, even though they previously boycotted these televisions, in order to address the audience that is against the regime, to tell those people and prove that those they want to vote for are not worth their vote. They are trying to arouse suspicion and divide the voters. It is also very important that they open topics that can potentially divide the voters of the Student List. For example, there is the insistence on national issues that not all people who would vote for the Student List try to impose, even though they are not the most important in this political moment. However, they can change the decision for whom they will vote. And violence has the same goal dangerous activity, so some people don't he wants to take part in it, because he is afraid", he says.

STAMENKOVIĆ PROGRESSIVE "CEILING"

Political analyst Viktor Stamenković also says that SNS encourages abstinence because its electorate, although extremely disciplined, has its own "ceiling". The number of citizens who want political changes is significantly higher, and this is not new.

"How did SNS manage to maintain electoral dominance all these years? The answer basically boils down to two reasons: the voters who oppose the regime were not sufficiently motivated and mobilized to go to the polls, and the political actors who represented them were mutually disunited. Now, however, both circumstances have changed. On the anti-regime side, a political actor appeared who managed to raise the mobilization to an unprecedented level and at the same time gather the majority of opponents of the regime around him. For the SNS, this represents a serious problem, because among the voters that the student movement managed to mobilize were those who stayed at home or voted for the divided opposition. In addition, the students managed to attract a part of the previous voters. In other words, every new voter who goes to the polls is a voter against the regime, he says.

The SNS does not go so much to mobilize its own voters as to demobilize the other party. The goal, he says, is simple: create fear, uncertainty, disillusionment, or even enough doubt among people who want change so that they ultimately decide to stay at home. Hence the insistence on televised debates, the continuous presentation of political opponents as bullies and the message that a change of government would mean jeopardizing salaries, pensions and elementary economic security.

"However, one should be honest and admit that the campaign arsenal of SNS is largely worn out. A party that has been in power for almost a decade and a half, and its main feature is fabulous corruption, and despite all that, it is faced with widespread social dissatisfaction, it has no room to offer anything new. Practically, it only has one message left: 'Perhaps not everything is perfect, but with us at least you know what you are in for. Everything else is a path into the unknown.' The problem with such a strategy, which authoritarian regimes tend to fall into when they are expiring, is that it is almost entirely negative. Instead of offering voters a vision of a better future, they constantly warn them of the catastrophes that will supposedly happen if they lose power. And people do not want their politics to be reduced to constant intimidation and listening to negative messages. Especially when, on the other hand, they have a political actor who, on the contrary, offers them hope for a freer, fairer and more normal future. We could hear very similar messages from Viktor Orban and Milo Đukanović at the end of their careers," says Stamenković.

In an interview with Vreme, Aleksandar Ivković from the Center for Contemporary Politics recalled the local elections in Belgrade in 2024 and Vučić's statement that he deliberately had a more modest campaign in order to reduce the motivation of his opponents to vote.

"In other words - if he appeared a lot, it would have a counter-effect because it would irritate those who are against SNS and increase the likelihood that they will vote. It seems to me that a similar tactic is now being applied in big cities. In addition, in the last few days we have statements from Vučić that he will win convincingly and that in fact everything is already over, which should demotivate opponents of the government and send them the message that there is no point in voting because change is impossible. Also, attempts to Presenting the Student List, on the one hand, as a continuation of the old Democratic Party and, on the other, as an anti-patriotic option, they aim to turn away a part of the potential voters of the Student List, who were probably abstainers before," says Ivković.

photo: strahinja aćimović / tanjug

HIGH TURNOUT DESPITE EFFORT

Stamenković believes that, despite the efforts of progressives, the turnout in the elections on October 25 will be very high, "probably a record in this century", which is not in favor of SNS.

"High turnout has several other important consequences that are often overlooked. The first relates to smaller political parties, primarily the SPS. Each voter at the polling station is one step closer to the SPS below the threshold. The second consequence relates to minority lists. They are exempt from the legal threshold of three percent, but they are not exempt from the fact that with the increase in the total number of votes, the number of votes that minorities need to win a mandate also increases. In the last elections, minority parties won 12 mandates, now they will go to the polls several hundred thousand more people will come out, and the number of minority mandates will therefore go down", he says.

He cites another important effect of high turnout – psychological. He, as he says, is equally important as the previous two.

"Imagine a situation in which it is three o'clock in the afternoon, and there are long lines of citizens waiting to vote in front of polling stations all over Serbia. Such a picture in itself becomes a political message. Just like there were lines of citizens waiting to give their signatures to the Student List. People who might have planned to skip voting can then get the impression that something big is happening, that the carnival of change has already started. And few want to stand on the sidelines while the victory procession passes by. After all, few want to to remain only an observer when he has the impression that history is being written before his eyes", he says.

Ivković says that the survey of Iri, which was conducted in May and June, showed that 68 percent of citizens will "very likely" vote, and another 15 percent "probably". As we said, this does not match the official turnout, due to the large number of citizens who are registered in the electoral register and do not live in Serbia, but it certainly shows the great interest of the citizens.

"Even before the formal announcement of the campaign, these numbers are an indicator of high motivation to go to the elections, and we have seen this through various signals in the meantime: the turnout in the local elections, the motivation of the diaspora to vote in the elections, the number of collected signatures of the Student List. In the week before the announcement of the elections, there were doubts that the student movement would succeed in organizing itself into the Student List, but when they were removed, it raised the energy and enthusiasm of their supporters. After that, nothing can prevent the turnout to be much higher than before. We have seen this from the examples of all local elections, as well as in the comparative examples of Hungary 2026, Montenegro 2020 and elsewhere, where the high turnout marked a change of government. It remains an open question whether the turnout will be higher than before, but whether it will be high enough to ensure the victory of the Student List," he says.

WHICH FACTORS AFFECT TURNOUT

Bursać says that two things have a key effect on turnout. First, that people have someone to vote for and believe that change is possible. In Serbia, there are many people who do not like SNS, but for years they did not believe that they could change something with their voice, he says and adds that this has changed with the appearance of students.

"Secondly, people have to believe that their vote will be preserved. That's why it's important that the students say they have the capacity to control the elections. SNS will try to manipulate, but it's not enough to just warn about electoral theft. You have to convince the voters that you can prevent, detect and document it. If you just say that the elections will be stolen, and you don't offer a way to oppose it, you're actually telling people that resistance is futile. This is where the opposition was wrong before, in part "And because she didn't have enough resources to control the election. The students clearly have the necessary resources. They're sending a clear message to the voters. That's what can push the turnout over four million, and maybe well beyond that number."

Stamenković tells us that voter turnout is influenced by a whole series of factors, from their individual characteristics, through the intensity of political competition and campaign mobilization, to the institutional circumstances in which the elections are held. There are even scientific studies that show that turnout can be affected by something seemingly banal, such as whether it rains on election day.

"However, if I had to single out one factor that is particularly important for understanding the current situation in Serbia, it would be the citizens' belief that they can really change something with their vote. People can be very dissatisfied with the government, they can think that the country is going in the wrong direction and they can want political changes without going to the elections. Why? Because between the desire for change and the decision to participate in the elections, there is another important step: the belief that change is even possible. If the citizen believes that the outcome is known in advance, yes his vote means nothing and the government will certainly remain the same, dissatisfaction easily turns into apathy. But that same dissatisfaction can become a strong driver of political engagement. In other words, dissatisfaction in itself does not lead people to the elections," he says.

The students did not only mobilize a large number of citizens who were previously politically passive. According to Stamenković, they managed to change the perception of political reality among a significant part of society, which is perhaps even more important. The idea that the SNS is invincible, which for years represented one of the most important psychological advantages of the regime, has been called into question.

"An additional factor is the importance that citizens attach to the elections themselves. Not all elections are equally important in the eyes of voters. The more citizens perceive them as important for their own future, the greater their incentive to participate. It seems to me that we are in just such a situation today. For a large number of citizens, these elections have an almost fateful character. Their personal exposure has become enormous, and for many of them the outcome of the election is no longer 'just' a political issue, but something that directly determines their life and future. Finally, it is important to understand that these factors do not "They act independently of each other. When people simultaneously believe that victory is possible, that the stake is high and that their fellow citizens have mobilized en masse, these effects are mutually reinforcing," says Stamenković.

Election time! And someone has to report to you independently. That's why it's in October annual subscription the digital edition of "Vremena" even 2.500 dinars cheaper. Choose now!