The claim that politicians are not interested in polls is just a pleasant lie. Even if some truly ignore them, polls are crucial for political and marketing strategists within parties.
Pre-election polls are not merely street surveys—they create campaign momentum and influence how parties communicate with their voter base and with undecided voters. That’s why it’s important to analyze them even after the election. A retrospective look can reveal where parties went wrong—or, conversely, how they managed to use polling data to achieve a better outcome.
Poor polling numbers don’t have to be a handicap
The most common argument for manipulating pre-election polls is the so-called “voter siphoning effect.” In societies where people like to back the winner, a few extra percentage points in the polls can amplify the perception of dominance over other parties.
From that perspective, the agencies most underestimated the winner—Andrej Babiš’s ANO movement. According to a STEM poll from September 21, ANO was expected to get 28 percent; STEM/MARK on September 19 gave it only 27.5 percent. By contrast, the Kantar agency in August 13 estimated over 33 percent for Babiš’s party.
Reality turned out the other way around—ANO received 34.51 percent (1.94 million votes). This result exceeded both expectations and Babiš’s 2017 record of 1.5 million votes, even surpassing Miloš Zeman’s 1998 presidential tally (1.93 million).
The lower poll numbers pushed the ANO campaign team into higher gear. Andrej Babiš, known for his frenetic work pace, held one rally after another, which helped secure his unexpectedly strong mandate.
Similarly, the SPOLU coalition could complain about being underestimated. A poll on September 21 put it at 21 percent, and some—such as STEM/MARK’s September 19 estimate—even at just 18 percent.
These low numbers were likely influenced by the political topics of the summer campaign, especially the Bitcoin affair. Justice Minister Eva Decroix was supposed to explain the scandal to taxpayers, but her efforts only made it more confusing. The double publication of the case timeline without concrete names will go down in Czech political history as a peculiar attempt at transparency.
Nevertheless, SPOLU achieved a better-than-expected result—23.36 percent. For a government that left behind huge budget deficits, that’s not a bad showing. These two examples show that underestimated polls can motivate parties to campaign harder. It’s too simplistic to see only manipulation or deliberate “vote suppression” in the numbers. Conversely, overestimated forecasts can be dangerous because they foster overconfidence.
Resting on one’s laurels
High polling numbers before the election proved fatal for two anti-establishment parties—SPD and Stačilo. Both are considered system-critical and view polls as tools of the “system” that is biased against them. They believe the surveys intentionally downplay their support to weaken them.
This time, however, the situation was reversed. SPD stood at 13.8 percent in the final pre-election poll, and the media speculated that it might even overtake the SPOLU coalition. This expectation was based mainly on the Fiala government’s poor performance.
But voters often decide emotionally rather than rationally. The possibility of a strong ANO–SPD coalition mobilized SPOLU’s supporters, who did not want such a scenario to happen. The result was a harsh awakening for SPD—Tomio Okamura’s party won only 7.78 percent.
The left-wing Stačilo alliance fared even worse. Its leader, Daniel Sterzik—known by his nickname Vidlák—didn’t believe the polls. The STEM/MARK survey from September 19 gave Stačilo 7.9 percent, which led the party leadership to expect around 10 percent.
They already envisioned negotiations with Andrej Babiš to support his government. Reality was different—Stačilo failed to cross the parliamentary threshold and won only 4.3 percent. Their campaign strategy had collapsed. Instead of dismissing polls, they should have emphasized that nothing was guaranteed and that every vote mattered.
The quiet winners
The Motorists took the opposite approach. Pre-election polls had them at around five percent, leaving their entry into parliament uncertain until the very last moment. Yet they didn’t relent—instead, they stressed that every vote counted. Their final 6.77 percent result was a success for the new party.
They now have the chance to be part of the government, which will be a major test. Governing successfully is difficult—especially given the unpopularity of the previous government—which could jeopardize the Motorists’ future prospects. Still, they show confidence and are already seeking ministerial positions.
A similar but longer-term story unfolded for the Pirates. A Median poll from January 19, 2025, gave them only 4 percent. After leaving the government in October 2024 due to the failed digitalization of the building permit system, they had to convince voters to forget their participation in the unpopular coalition.
Low polling numbers worked to their advantage, as the rise in their popularity became the central theme of their campaign. From four percent in January, they climbed to 8.97 percent in the election—a result that, under the circumstances, was their realistic maximum.
For completeness, it should be noted that the only party whose results matched polling predictions was the Mayors. Most polls gave them between 10 and 12 percent, and they ultimately received 11.23 percent. Pre-election polls are imprecise—but that’s precisely their strength. They give strategic teams the chance to show who can read the public mood and time a campaign to extract the maximum benefit from uncertainty.
What can we conclude from this? Election polls are not just a measure of public mood—they’re a driving force in politics. Paradoxically, weak results can strengthen parties, as seen with ANO and the Pirates, who turned low expectations into a campaign engine. Conversely, those lulled by favorable numbers faced disaster.
Polls are not only a reflection of voters’ opinions but also a mirror of politicians’ self-awareness: they reveal who can perform under pressure and who becomes complacent in popularity. In an age of media manipulation, polls serve as a reality test—it’s not about who leads, but who can turn setbacks and obstacles into opportunity. That’s where the true art of power begins.