In the run-up to the presidential elections, the question stands: who will be the Civic Platform’s standard-bearer? Two respected scholars weighed in on the matter in a discussion that underscored a clear view. Rafał Chwedoruk, a political scientist at the University of Warsaw, and Jarosław Flis, a sociologist from the Jagiellonian University, agree that the governing coalition’s largest party is most likely to nominate Rafał Trzaskowski as its candidate. The sense shared by both is that Trzaskowski is the person with the strongest organizational footing and the broadest appeal within the party as it heads toward the national ballot.
Chwedoruk believes Trzaskowski is the closest to securing the nomination for the presidency. He would be surprised by any option other than Trzaskowski, and he notes that Radosław Sikorski faces a significantly tougher path. When asked who, during the era of Donald Trump’s US presidency, had the best odds to become the PO’s candidate, Chwedoruk remarked that Trzaskowski might have rested easier in recent weeks if he had followed the bookmakers’ sentiment, a contrast to Sikorski who did not share the same positioning.
The analyst adds that Trzaskowski’s profile, though perhaps less flamboyant, comes with less personal baggage that could complicate his first foreign trip. He emphasizes that a calmer public persona can sometimes translate into steadier sailing on the international stage, especially for a candidate who would be negotiating complex transatlantic dynamics from day one.
Chwedoruk observed that Trzaskowski’s circle seems to have learned moral lessons earlier in the campaign and has avoided overcommitting in public debates. He also reminded readers that decades ago, one of the participants in a notable Polish political program was the International Republican Institute, a significant American think tank. While the IRI has links to various US political currents, the current landscape involves careful navigation of domestic and foreign expectations in Poland.
There are those who think Trzaskowski explored several possible directions, but chose restraint and avoided public statements that could be construed as reckless or ill-considered. This prudence, according to the expert, may help him avoid unnecessary controversies and maintain a steady campaign tempo as the party plots its path toward the vote.
Chwedoruk also stated that it would be difficult to imagine Sikorski occupying the long-term role of Foreign Minister in a country that remains strongly pro-American and deeply engaged in domestic political battles. He suggested that a candidacy of Sikorski would have to grapple with testing questions, including public remarks by his wife that touched on Trump policy and on risky scenarios involving missile defenses. These factors, in the political scientist’s view, reduce Sikorski’s odds of prevailing in a crowded field.
Prof. Flis: PO has a serious problem with the choice of presidential candidate
Flis argues that the Civic Platform faces a genuine dilemma in selecting its presidential candidate. He believes it is more likely that Rafał Trzaskowski will take decisive steps aligned with a strategy that could neutralize potential attacks from PiS aimed at Sikorski. In Flis’s view, Trzaskowski remains the most probable option for the party, while Sikorski carries vulnerabilities that could be exploited in a high-stakes race.
Asked whether the outcome of the US presidential election could influence the PO’s choice, Flis described a complex web of dependencies. In this framework, both Radosław Sikorski and Rafał Trzaskowski hold strong advantages alongside notable weaknesses, and the ultimate decision depends on how those dynamics play out as the campaign unfolds.
The platform surely has bite, Flis notes, and he highlights the delicate balance the party must strike. For Sikorski, controversial statements, his wife’s outspoken views on Trump, and the fact that his son serves in the US armed forces create potential attack lines for opponents. The challenge is to determine how such topics could be used without turning voters away, and how to frame them in a way that clarifies a candidate’s position rather than deepening fault lines.
It comes down to what a candidate can be attacked on and how that pressure might influence voters. Flis points out that there has been little systematic study of how far these tactics can go, because past campaigns show that even a strong talking point can overheat. A notable example cited is when a political party threatened Donald Tusk during the last parliamentary elections, a tactic that backfired and allowed new voices to gain traction.
The idea that the race is a kind of misunderstanding is a recurring theme for Flis. He describes a political reality in which a candidate who behaves like a passenger in a moving car, unable to steer, can find themselves with limited authority once in office. In a landscape marked by harsh and confrontational campaign styles, Poland ends up selecting a leader who is often pressed into a role with real constraints on power.
Ultimately, Flis suggests that the national election process, while vigorous and dramatic, is still shaped by the tension between image, substance, and the willingness of voters to tolerate a candidate’s authority under pressure. The result is a dynamic that rewards resilience and strategic restraint, even as the country voices strong opinions about its next president.