Portuguese Presidential Elections: Who wins on Sunday?

Afonso Almeida Brandão"

WThey call it moderation, but it's a method. A tested, effective method with enough historical memory to not be treated as a coincidence. António José Seguro didn't represent a risk because of what he said, but because of what he allowed: the use of Belém Palace as a political instrument to reconfigure power and return "Chuxalism" to the center of the regime, with white gloves and conciliatory discourse. Recent Portuguese history has offered a precedent too clear to be ignored. Jorge Sampaio also reached the Presidency surrounded by consensus, institutional leniency, and promises of neutrality. The result was anything but neutral: from Belém Palace, a legitimate government in office was overthrown, paving the way for a "Chuxalista" hegemony that lasted for more than a decade. They called it institutional responsibility. In practice, it was political engineering with a presidential stamp. InsuranceIt emerged as the second edition of that same script. Not to govern, but to condition. Not to confront, but to prepare the ground. Belém ceased to be a symbol of balance and became a strategic platform. The method is not, nor was it, new—only more discreet, more acceptable, and therefore, more dangerous. What truly disconcerted, however, is the attitude of sectors (so-called) of the Right. The support—explicit or shameful—for Seguro revealed not pragmatism, but ideological resignation. Voting alongside the "nonsense" of the Leftist candidate is not (and never was!) democratic "maturity," it is/was rather political insanity. And above all, it is abdicating one's own values in the name of a comfortable, media-rewarded, and politically sterile consensus. However, this "domesticated" Right confuses convergence with virtue and capitulation with responsibility. It prefers to be accepted rather than be an alternative. And then it is surprised when it ceases to represent those who vote for it. Meanwhile, André Ventura has always been (and continues to be) treated as a threat to Democracy. The accusation is convenient, but intellectually dishonest and ridiculous, let's be frank. Ventura is not anti-democratic; he is a finished product of the democratic process. He emerges precisely where the Right has ceased to exist and where the VOTER no longer feels represented. He does not threaten the Regime—he exposes its fissures. And that is much more unsettling than any declared rupture. Any doubt? The real danger to democracy lies not in political confrontation—that still requires ideas, courage, and convictions. The danger resides in permanent convergence, in that sticky embrace where Left and Right vote together and then feign surprise when the voter can no longer distinguish between them. They call it maturity; in practice, it's resignation disguised as institutional posturing. When everyone agrees in the name of consensus, someone is always left without representation. But it doesn't matter: they'll tell us it's for the good of Democracy. And while Belém smiles, the Right applauds and the "Chuxalismo" (a derogatory term implying political opportunism) thanks them, leaving the Voter to learn the lesson that the majority insists on ignoring, because in Politics what counts (apparently!) are the moderate kisses that the People give, because they are the most venomous... So, kisses from the BLACK & WHITE newspaper and see you on Sunday, when we'll FINALLY find out who will actually govern (or misgovern) Portugal from 2026 onwards, as President of the Republic of all Portuguese people. Only four days left to find out who won and who was left behind... See you later!

2025/12/3