Last week, we focused on the necessity of an alliance for all parties regardless of the vote rate. Just as the new alliance model is an opportunity for parties with a threshold problem to overcome this problem without giving up their party identity, it is also a necessity for other parties to overcome the 50% threshold for electing the president. The apparent situation for this is that it will be a double or triple alliance model. Last week, we tried to outline the way to follow in the case of a bilateral alliance model. This week, it is useful to talk about what can be done in the triple alliance model.
It seems that on one side of the triple alliance possibility, there will be the People's Alliance. On the other hand, the general opinion is that parties formed by breaking away from the AK Party after the last elections will not be included in this alliance. This actually shows that the People's Alliance has partially shrunk. If a third alliance will emerge on the other side, it will be formed by the disintegration of the Nation Alliance. Those who voiced a third alliance are especially the masses who are uncomfortable being seen side by side with the CHP and HDP. Let's call it a general conservative point of view, a nationalist reflex, or a typical right-wing mentality; As a result, it is certain that they are uncomfortable with the alliance with the left.
The party distributions desired by those who think of a third alliance are as follows: AK Party-MHP is one block, CHP-HDP is another block, and Iyi Party-Deva-Gelecek and Saadet are a third block. In the continuation of the article, an evaluation will be made taking into account such a classification. Of course, we should be aware that there may be different developments in politics. But we will try to make our assessment based on the apparent situation.
First of all, it is important to whom the triple alliance spectrum means. In the triple alliance model, it is highly likely that the president will be one of the candidates of the AK Party and CHP. Because in an election with three candidates, it seems difficult to have a winner in the first round. Naturally, there will be a race with two candidates in the second round. So, who could these two candidates be? If we look at the votes received in the last elections and the results of the surveys made in the last days, it is highly likely that the candidates of the AK Party and CHP will qualify for the second round. Therefore, the winner of the triple alliance idea will be the AK Party or CHP.
The parties forming the third alliance will be obliged to the candidates of the other parties if their own candidate does not make a surprise in the elections and cannot reach the second round. Even if they do not go to the polls in the second round, they have to accept the management of one of the other candidates. This is an unacceptable situation for the parties that claim to shape politics, as we mentioned last week. Those who have a chance to influence the determination of the presidential candidate as the alliance party in an election entered with two alliances will lose this chance when they take part in a third alliance. Because in the triple alliance model, the presidential candidate in the possible CHP-HDP alliance will be determined by the consensus of these two parties.
As a result, the new alliance model offers an opportunity to have a say in politics for the parties that do not reach their target vote rate.