On the X platform, Jakub Dymek floated a controversial view about a potential victory for Law and Justice, suggesting that it would stem from institutional advantages embedded in the current electoral framework. A PiS member of the European Parliament and the head of the party’s campaign, Joachim Brudziński, briefly weighed in after the journalist shared his take.
Dymek circulated four messages on social media in the run-up to October’s balloting.
An unconventional take articulated by Dymek argued that a significant PiS win in October would not be driven by the party’s program alone. Instead, it would hinge on two structural features of the electoral system that seem to tilt the map in favor of the governing side:
1) The expansion of thousands of electoral commissions across rural zones, the careful drawing of districts, and the distribution of voting influence between metropolitan centers and more sparsely populated areas. The system, increasingly inspired by American practices, appears to be designed to reinforce advantages for particular regions. The absence of a recent census and the way seats are allocated across districts are seen by some as a domestic form of gerrymandering that concentrates power in certain locales.
In a broader context, the debate touched on turnout logistics. Dymek acknowledged support for boosting turnout in rural communities and expanding universal voting facilities. Yet he cautioned that such measures might be perceived as a means to tilt results toward those already in power, especially if implemented within an election year. He suggested delaying broad implementation until the next term as a way to minimize confusion and suspicion.
2) A financial edge enabling a large-scale online campaign with substantial spending, far exceeding what other committees can muster. Dymek claimed the government leverages both favorable ties with major internet platforms and state-owned enterprise funds to orchestrate a campaign that advantages the incumbents.
– the remarks outlined by Dymek.
Joachim Brudziński, who leads PiS’s national campaign, responded directly to the comments, signaling an ongoing strategic contest over the interpretation of the electoral landscape.
From Brudziński’s perspective, the focus was on resisting complacency. The party’s leadership highlighted that victory would depend on hard, disciplined work by its candidates, extensive voter contact, and persistent grassroots engagement rather than relying on polls or speculative analyses. He stressed that only through relentless effort—meeting voters, listening, and adapting on the ground—could the campaign overcome skepticism and secure a win, even in the face of uncertainty.
The exchange underscored a broader tension in Poland about how electoral rules and campaign financing can influence outcomes. It also reflected a wider conversation about how governments abroad might manage information, turnout, and accessibility, with implications for political strategy and public trust during campaign periods.
In the wider public discourse, observers noted that while ideas about procedural advantages and campaign capacity are common in competitive elections, turning such discussions into decisive results depends on many moving parts. The intersection of electoral design, resource allocation, and voter behavior continues to be a central topic for policymakers, analysts, and the electorate alike.
As the October election approached, the central question remained whether these structural factors would translate into a tangible edge for the incumbent coalition or whether opponents could mobilize enough cross-cutting support to shift the balance. The focus for many voters and commentators was on the conduct of campaigns, the clarity of policy proposals, and the ability of candidates to connect with diverse communities across a wide geographic landscape.