First of all, because those who will be elected to local governments cannot in any way be responsible for the performance in the Saeima or the government. Even if they are representatives of the same parties, they are, so to speak, completely different categories or groups of party members.
Secondly, it should be remembered that local governments are elected not so much by the names of the parties, their alleged ideologies, what is written in the programs, but by the personalities of the candidates for deputies. Yes, there will now be larger local governments, candidates for deputies are no longer very personally known to every voter, but it is clear that unlike in the Saeima elections, people will vote for those they know and know who do, not just empty speakers.
Thirdly, we also have to reckon with a certain layer of dust that will cover the subject of the ATR for an election year after a year. Will there be so many who will remember which parties have adopted what they have voted for in the context of reform?
And more. This one issue alone – the implementation of the ATR – may not be decisive in a voter’s choice. Although we see it as an example of the nearest – Riga municipality – elections (although Riga is not affected by the specific reform), the negative attitude towards those who were previously in power is in the foreground, so there are expectations for change. The topicality of the accumulated problems and proposals for solutions (condition of streets and bridges, lack of places in kindergartens, etc.) are also important for the voters’ choice. Much will be decided by the already mentioned personality factor, although in Riga, of course, it is very rare which politician is well known to the majority of voters, where it is still known. It will also play a role in how politicians will be able to address voters emotionally – whether they will be noticed and, as they say, “fallen into their hearts”. Of course, the election result will also be determined by other factors.
But I want to agree with the thesis that the level of critical thinking is generally low. It should not be confused with a critical attitude – it is something else entirely, and often unrelated to critical thinking, because critical thinking also consumes the assessment of facts and processes, while a very subjective dissatisfaction is enough for a critical attitude.
–
