Circus has arrived: Polish presidential elections explained
- Marceli Dziuba
- Sep 8
- 9 min read
Joint article with Zofia Pogorzelec and Mikołaj Miernik
At the beginning of May, the outcome of the Polish presidential elections seemed to be already decided. Rafał Trzaskowski (KO), a liberal mayor of Warsaw, was supposed to win them with ease, avenging his previous loss of 2020 elections. He held a comfortable 5% lead over his main opponent, Karol Nawrocki, backed by the Law and Justice party. However, the results of the first round of elections on the 18th of May showed a different reality. Although Trzaskowski won with 31.4%, the difference between him and Nawrocki (29.5%) was less than 2 percentage points. More shocking still was the combined result of far-right Sławomir Mentzen (Confederation) and even more extreme, openly anti-semitic Grzegorz Braun, which amounted to an alarming 21%. Together with Nawrocki’s result, this positioned the Law and Justice candidate as a favourite to claim the presidential palace.
The next two weeks posed quite a challenge for Civic Coalition election staff. Compared to the rest of the campaign in those last two weeks, they actually rose to the occasion, with a decent debate performance, a successful pro-democratic march in Warsaw and a coherent YouTube discussion with Mentzen. But it was not enough, despite disturbing allegations about the contender’s past. On the 1st of June, Karol Nawrocki achieved a result of 50.89%, becoming the President-Elect of Poland. To better understand what happened, we need to dive into what these elections were really about.
Who were the presidential candidates?
This article focuses on seven major candidates: Rafał Trzaskowski, Karol Nawrocki, Sławomir Mentzen, Grzegorz Braun, Szymon Hołownia, Adrian Zandberg, and Magdalena Biejat. Zandberg and Biejat shared most policy views, although the former opposes the current government.
While identifying candidates' political positions may seem straightforward, Poland’s political spectrum skews to the right compared to Western Europe, making traditional left-right labels less useful. Instead, we’ll review their positions on key campaign issues
Migration opponents to what extent?
All of the candidates were against so-called uncontrolled immigration. However, there were important differences. Between the two main candidates—Rafał Trzaskowski and Karol Nawrocki—the discussion centered on who was more credible in promising to stop migration. They both had proposed some legislation targeting recent immigrants to Poland, namely, Ukrainians. Trzaskowski wanted to stop child benefits for unemployed Ukrainians, and Nawrocki wanted to give priority access to healthcare specialists for Polish citizens.
Right-wing candidates Mentzen, Nawrocki, and Braun wanted to exit the EU Migration Pact. Braun took the most extreme stance, calling for “de-Ukrainisation” and promoting ethnocracy. Hołownia supported the current system. Biejat and Zandberg stressed human rights and asylum protections but offered vague proposals.
MAGA Sovereignty or EU-US balance?
For simplicity, we have assigned candidates to two camps: Euroenthusiasts (Biejat, Zandberg, Hołownia, Trzaskowski) and Sovereignists (Nawrocki, Mentzen, Braun). Euroenthusiasts wanted to fight for Poland’s interests within the EU and comply with the rules of European politics, while maintaining strong US ties. However, they promised a tougher stance in negotiations. As the main opponents of Polish geostrategic interests, they pointed to Hungary and Russia.
Sovereignists were Eurosceptical, leaning toward US influence. Nawrocki backed the US fully and opposed both Russia and the EU. Mentzen was less under MAGA influence, but still looked at the current American administration favorably. Braun pushed for PolExit and supported Russia over Ukraine. All three opposed EU climate policies, blaming the Green Deal for economic struggles.
Catholic or secular culture?
Abortion in Poland is only legal in extreme cases: pregnancy being result from criminal acts (rape, incest) or it endangers woman’s life or health. Trzaskowski, Biejat, and Zandberg advocated liberalizing abortion rights; Hołownia, who was opposed to it on religious grounds, favored a referendum. Nawrocki supported the current law, while Mentzen and Braun pushed for further restrictions and penalties.
On LGBTQ+ rights, Biejat and Zandberg backed same-sex marriage; Trzaskowski and Hołownia supported civil unions. The others opposed what they called “LGBT ideology.” Braun was the most extreme, promoting a Catholic monarchy and making openly homophobic and antisemitic remarks.
Economic, healthcare, and housing issues
There were three candidates that placed stronger emphasis on their economic plans: Mentzen, Biejat, and Zandberg. Mentzen proposed tax cuts and deregulation, but offered no specifics on spending cuts. He favoured replacing the National Health Fund with multiple state-funded private insurers, such insurance would be obligatory, similar to the German model.
On the other hand, Biejat and Zandberg sought to expand healthcare spending and social housing, funded by progressive taxes and a levy on landlords with multiple properties. Moreover, they emphasized the need for more state investments.
Trzaskowski and Hołownia offered vague proposals but leaned toward deregulation and reducing entrepreneurs’ insurance costs. Nawrocki sent mixed signals: he supported tax cuts like Mentzen but also painted himself as a defender of existing welfare programs.
Braun aligned with Mentzen rhetorically but lacked detailed policies. Both of them and Nawrocki blamed the EU, especially the Green Deal, for economic woes and advocated returning to coal. All three wanted to limit mandatory vaccinations.
Not so bright campaign
Even the announcement of presidential candidates stirred drama. Law and Justice (PiS) leader Jarosław Kaczyński handpicked Karol Nawrocki—an unknown figure framed as “independent” in PiS messaging. Meanwhile, the centrist Civic Coalition (KO) selected a candidate in the primaries, in which the Mayor of Warsaw, Rafał Trzaskowski, won against the more conservative Minister of Foreign Affairs, Radosław Sikorski, and ran for president again, after losing in 2020. While the far-right Confederation fractured after Sławomir Mentzen's candidacy led to a break with co-leader Grzegorz Braun, who entered the race himself. The left-wing also experienced division. The Left party, aligned with the current government, backed Magdalena Biejat, formerly of the Together party, which opposed the government and instead nominated its leader, Adrian Zandberg, as a candidate.
The conduct of a campaign varied between the candidates. Nawrocki focused on image-building with workouts and rallies. Trzaskowski stuck to traditional appearances, intensifying his engagement towards the end of the campaign. Both candidates received considerable attention from the mainstream media. Mentzen, meanwhile, had a very extensive campaign visiting all 348 counties in Poland, yet got little mainstream coverage. Biejat and Hołownia, due to their parliamentary roles, enjoyed more media attention than opposition figures like Zandberg. Social media was key for younger voters, especially boosting Mentzen and Zandberg’s appeal.
The campaign also had an international flavor. Nawrocki met with figures like Donald Trump, George Simion, and Giorgia Meloni to strengthen his right-wing credentials. Emanuel Macron visited Trzaskowski, while Mentzen stirred controversy with political videos filmed in Ukraine and Germany, which carried historical references and anti-immigrant undertones.
The trademark of this year’s elections was the frequency of presidential debates. However, they were of very little merit. Out of 10 debates, only two featured all 13 candidates. From an organisational point of view, the first debate organised by Public Television (TVP) proved particularly controversial since the invitations to the candidates, other than Nawrocki and Trzaskowski, were sent out just a few hours before it began. Another notable debate was the very last one organised by extremely biased and pro-PiS TV Republika, during which Karol Nawrocki was the only one debating, right before the final voting round. Without a doubt, the most professional discussion was organised by Super Express magazine, which managed to gather all candidates who interacted with each other for the whole duration of the debate. The impressions of the debates remain mixed, but it is agreed that they helped promote Nawrocki's programme proposals and shed light on other candidates with less support, which most of them skilfully exploited, at the expense of support for Trzaskowski, who desperately tried to remain ‘bland’ and appealing to both right-wing and left-wing voters.
Polls revealed shifting dynamics. Trzaskowski and Hołownia declined throughout, hurt by public disillusionment with the governing coalition. Nawrocki, after a rough start, experienced a rapid rise in popularity from mid-March onward. His support mirrored that of Mentzen, whose own numbers initially rose but later declined following a series of unsuccessful appearances. Zandberg and Braun capitalized on anti-establishment sentiment, eventually overtaking Biejat.
Unfortunately, the elections were filled with unprecedented controversies, mainly concerning the president-elect. The major scandal was the case of the public housing flat which Nawrocki bought for preferential price (circumventing the law on public housing) from an elderly sex offender to whom he had previously lent money on usurious terms, without paying the amount due despite a false declaration in the notarial deed, as he himself admitted in interviews. Later, when Mentzen confronted Nawrocki with allegations of involvement in brawls as an ultras, he did not deny it. The same week, during a live TV debate with Trzaskowski, Nawrocki couldn’t resist chewing snus—a habit he had displayed in earlier interviews, but which was not widely known before this incident. Finally, it was suggested, among others by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, that Nawrocki had links to the prostitution ring, which he denied, yet at the same time did not file a lawsuit under the election procedure to clarify the matter. Trzaskowski, meanwhile, faced allegations of illicit campaign funding via a foundation tied to his party. Namely, the Research and Academic Computer Network has raised the alarm about attempts to interfere with the election campaign on the internet. Following a journalistic investigation, it was revealed that the likely source of funding for advertisements slandering Nawrocki and Mentzen was the “Action Democracy” foundation, whose chairman is associated with the Civic Coalition. The way in which Jakub Stanowski, one of the presidential candidates, and a journalist who reported on the election campaign, is also worthy of special attention. Stanowski, who ultimately received over 1% of the vote, pointed out a number of structural irregularities concerning, for example, the procedure of candidates’ registration and the quality of dialogue during the campaign — all from the position of an ‘insider’. After the first voting round, Mentzen followed in Stanowski's footsteps.
Right-wing shift or political genius?
Sławomir Mentzen’s 15% surprised many. His success wasn’t necessarily ideological but driven by social media savvy, especially on TikTok, with simple messages like “no new taxes, no immigration, no Ukraine in NATO.” His authenticity attracted youth, surprisingly overlapping with Zandberg’s base.
Mentzen’s rise reflects not just a rightward shift, but growing frustration with the political duopoly that has dominated Poland for two decades. His 15% result made him the real winner of the first round, with his party achieving its best performance and emerging as a key power broker.
Instead of endorsing a candidate outright, he hosted both contenders on his YouTube channel to discuss his voters' priorities. He presented an 8-point pledge rejecting tax hikes and EU power transfers—Nawrocki signed immediately, while Trzaskowski declined but engaged in a calm, substantive discussion, resisting Mentzen’s populist traps. Their meeting, followed by a photo shared by Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski, caused a stir online and discomfort within Konfederacja.
Days later, Mentzen posted a photo with Nawrocki and indirectly endorsed him, saying he saw no reason to support Trzaskowski.
The Aftermath: A Wake-Up Call for the Coalition
Karol Nawrocki’s surprise victory unsettled many, not only due to his far-right leanings and limited experience, but also because of unanswered questions about his past. The result also revived hopes within PiS, whose leaders now believe a return to power is once again possible — despite the party’s infamous, scandal-ridden eight years in government. PiS now actively seeks ways to unseat Tusk’s coalition. If Nawrocki lost this election, as was expected, that would have marked the beginning of a funeral for Kaczyński’s party. Instead, it begins to look like a resurrection. For PiS leader Kaczyński, it’s another display of political calculation. But it’s less a Nawrocki triumph than a Trzaskowski collapse.
The Civic Platform seemed to have learned nothing since the spectacular loss of Bronisław Komorowski in 2015. Trzaskowski’s campaign was poorly managed, particularly online, where he failed to engage younger voters, of whom 52% voted for his opponent. Moreover, the broader ruling coalition, once seen as a vehicle for democratic renewal, now faces criticism for slow reforms and political opportunism. Disappointed, many who waited in queues to cast their vote in the October 2023 elections, stayed at home.
So, if Trzaskowski lost the election, and Nawrocki didn’t so much win it as wasn’t Trzaskowski, then who truly won? The answer is Konfederacja. With the highest result in the party’s history, Konfederacja appears to be riding a wave of growing popularity. This was the lowest combined PO-PiS result in decades, and with Konfederacja securing third place, it is now well-positioned to criticize both dominant parties and build its position ahead of the 2027 elections.
These elections have been a yellow card for the Coalition, which now needs to wake up and start showing Poles that they are capable of keeping promises and are more than just an anti-PiS government. The most important reforms, like the judiciary reform, will be hard to implement in the traditional ways, given the non-cooperating presidential palace. Other issues, such as abortion decriminalisation—a slogan that won the ruling coalition election—and civil partnerships will probably be left untouched. The Coalition has a difficult task ahead. They must set aside their disagreements and get the work done. After all, over 10 million Poles trusted them with their votes, and the last thing they want to see is a government led by PiS and Konfederacja.
Comments