After 2002, a segment of the sociology that had become involved in politics, especially before the 2018 elections, thought, “Let there be a change, let’s see others in power for once.” In the 2019 elections, this segment gave the opposition a not-insignificant share of the vote. In the 2023 elections, part of this electorate voted in favor of the government’s continuation. In the 2024 local elections, they again gave the opposition a chance in local administrations while simultaneously sending a message to the ruling party.
One of the key aspects here was precisely that notion of “Let there be a change, let’s see others in power.” Indeed, especially voters outside the opposition’s core base witnessed the results of such change after these two rounds of local elections. They gained the experience necessary to compare the opposition and the government from every angle.
A considerable portion of voters who supported the opposition, as well as government voters who strongly criticize their own party, are now making these comparisons. They are following the judicial proceedings involving the acts and transactions of metropolitan mayors elected from the Republican People's Party (CHP), especially in Istanbul. They are closely observing the debates and the consequences of political change.
For a while, due to the polarization in politics, opposition voters refrained from publicly criticizing those they had elected. In fact, they built their official discourse around the argument that “this happened because of the government.”
However, they are now witnessing firsthand that the problems in their cities are increasing day by day – that new service areas are not being developed, and that investments are not being made. They are personally experiencing that even existing services can no longer be properly managed.
In recent times, people living in major cities have begun to raise their voices in criticism. Public opinion polls conducted in these cities show that dissatisfaction is steadily growing, and criticism is increasing by the day.
Because of this, CHP politicians have sought to harden their relations with the government through a politics of insult. Indeed, a radical political rhetoric is being deliberately escalated, and its purpose is clear.
As polarization intensifies, it is assumed that the problems of the metropolises, the lack of services, and the corruption and bribery allegations that have reached the judiciary will go unnoticed. The aim is to shape the political agenda through a cycle of insults and counter-insults, thereby obscuring public discussion of the charges contained in indictments.
For this reason, CHP politicians will continue to harden and polarize the political climate. They will seek to keep their core base away from corruption allegations involving mayors and municipalities amid this atmosphere of extreme polarization.
Society weighs the pros and cons of both the government and the opposition with a fine balance. Radicalizing the political climate cannot conceal the truth. I always say this, and let me repeat it as I close: the political literacy of the Turkish electorate is remarkably high.
This has been demonstrated time and again throughout Turkish political life in general, and throughout the 23 years of Justice and Development Party (AK Party) rule in particular.
