Talk:2015 Portuguese legislative election

Opinion poll table looking

So please comment here what your opinions on how best the article would look instead of keeping this edit war ongoing. Consensus will surely benefit us all. Cheers. Impru20 (talk) 20:40, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Since PSD and CDS formed a coalition just after the elections in 2011, and are now running together, the opinion poll graphic should reflect that and either just show them together, or show them together and autonomously at the same time. Vascostmr (talk) 11:56, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Copy of the discussion from my talk page concerning to this issue

September 2015

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Opinion polling in the Canadian federal election, 2015, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:07, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Shawn in Montreal Either in Portugal or in Canada, what's the point of displaying polls that clearly are repetitive and are done with the same people? If a poll is done, e.g., from 16-20 September and a following one from 21-25 September, I find it justifiable to display both. But what's the point of displaying a poll from 20-24 September and another from 21-25 September, since 80% of the people polled, at least, are exactly the same? It doesn't reflect any national reality, it just reflects the vote intentions of those few people. This is valid for Portugal and for Canada. Urgup-tur (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Copying my very exact answer here:

No, it isn't justifiable. You are not who to judge which polls are to be present and which not. If you find a valid source saying that these polls are invalid, then please go and share it with us. But as long as you can't provide any source that invalidates those polls, those are legitimate and considered as opinion polls, and the fact that you don't like them will be irrelevant. I've issued a level 3 warning to you for your repeated blanking of content and disruptive editing, on this and other pages, and next time I'll have to report you for outright vandalism. Impru20 (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

And I will add something: you seem to be an editor with an historial of disruptive editing and breaching of consensus. There have been at least two other users (aside from me) on this very same article telling you that your behaviour was not correct and, at least, openly disagreeing with you. If you want to make a change such as the one you are suggesting to do, you must first discuss it and only then, once consensus is reached, proceed to the change, not force the changes against all other editors' opinions and only then suggesting to discuss it (and I say "suggesting" because you seem keen on pushing forward your changes nevertheless, whether there is consensus or not). As of now, there's not consensus for your changes, your changes are not justified either and are potentially in violation of WP:NPOV, in the sense that you are only giving part of the information available on this given subject (Portuguese opinion polls). And you are doing it through illegitimate blanking of content, which in itself is also a violation of Wikipedia's policies (Wikipedia:Vandalism#Blanking, illegitimate). Impru20 (talk) 18:59, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment Ok, judging from recent edits from this user, it now seems apparent that his intention was to remove these polls because they gave the victory to the PSD/CDS-PP coalition (judging from his "not-so-loving" ways to refer to Passos Coelho in the article's edit summaries) and not because of a real need or urge of giving an explanation about why those opinion polls should have been treated differently to others. Now this user has went into a vandalizing rampage for not being able to push his edits forward, and it seems like he has now been reported for vandalism by a member of the Counter-Vandalism Unit, after repeated warnings, and subsequently blocked. I guess this settles the issue. Impru20 (talk) 20:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay, that is bad. I would like to add that there are some genuine problems with letting these tracking polls fill so much, because they likely give a very distorted picture. As I understand it Eurosondagem is considered the best pollster, Aximage the second best and everything else basically junk with various levels of right wing bias. So when the latest Eurosondagem poll from 23/9 shows Portugal Ahead basically tied with PS, while various tracking polls and Universidade Católica Portuguesa polls show Portugal Ahead leading by 5-7% (I can't make myself write Portugal Ahead ahead by.. ;-) ), this will give the user a distorted picture, since this is likely still a statistical tie between the two big parties. The problem is of course that knowledge of which pollsters are good or bad at their craft as expressed by neutral experts is rarely publicized in easily accessible sources (it is much more often shared informally to journalists or at seminars etc.), so it will be hard and take some work to source it (I definitely do not have time for it). So If the user was Portuguese (as I think he may have been) it is a shame he didn't want to go looking for sources about reliability and track record of various pollsters and their methodology instead of starting this silly edit war.--Batmacumba (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I can understand the issue... but I think that should be left to readers to check once final election results come out. Something similar happened in Greece this week, with polls predicting a statistical tie or even a ND victory and finally SYRIZA coming out on top by a large margin (something similar to what happened in the July referendum), and in that case, the anti-SYRIZA stance of the media publishing the polls was widely known. In Spain there's a similar problem with opinion polls, with doubts cast on NC-Report and Celeste-Tel about possibly being the same pollster using different names (and even rumours about those not existing at all), which is of serious consideration as those two tend to highly overestimate PP and PSOE and underestimate Podemos. But while there are rumours, there is not any definitive proof, and in the case of Spain there is no pollster that is considered the best (maybe GESOP, but even they, together with all other polls, have been shown to fail miserably in their predictions with each recent election; Metroscopia is heavily pro-PSOE, the CIS is heavily pro-government (since they are the ones who control it) and most other pollsters are basically pro-PP). This, to put some examples.

On the issue of Portugal polls, I myself found it kinda weird for those later polls to give such a large margin to the PSD/CDS-PP coalition without a noticeable event being the cause for it, but Universidade Católica and (to a less extent) Intercampus polls are known for being more pro-right-wing than others, so we can assume some inherent bias to them (still, they more or less accurately predicted the 2011 results). Nowadays, opinion polls are more directed towards influencing public opinion rather than providing true information, so we can't really know which of them is telling "the truth", if they do at all.

Yet, unless a clear and undisputable source is found to dispute their inclusion in the main table, we must treat them like all other opinion polls (in 2011, for example, it was Eurosondagem the one that made a lot of tracking polls, and those are in the main table). And only after the election could we put some footnotes, if that's to be the case, about how opinion polls accurately predicted the results (or not at all). Don't forget that this is intended as an encyclopedia, after all, and we are basically bound to show what others publish. Impru20 (talk) 21:17, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Opinion polls and campaign

Hi! It's the first time i write in a talk page. I'm from Portugal and i see that a lot of discussion is being made about polls and the acuracy of them. Opinion polls in Portugal are usually very reliable, but, of course, there's also some more acurate than others. Eurosondagem is very well regarded and respected but they have had a number of flops in the past. For example, in 2009 they got it so wrong in tue EU election that they didn't made a poll for the last week of the 2009 general election; in 2011 the made a series of traking polls that showed the PSD losing support in the last day of the campaign whie all of the other polls showed a increase of the PSD; and in the local election in 2013 theY made a considerable number of polls for diferent municipalties and got it wrong on bassicaly all of them, especially in Funchal and Oporto. I'm not saying that Eurosondagem poll numbers are wrong, i'm just saying that they've had some problems in tha past. In my opinion, i consider UCP-CESOP and Aximage the best polling companies in Portugal. Intercampus makes not very good opinion polls but they make the most acurrate and on the spot exit polls. That doesn't mean that the polls are not strange, in fact, they are telling a really strange story but if look more closer you'll kinda understand. The campaign is heading for it's final week and polls show no change for either the PS or the PSD/CDS. One thing that is most strange in this campaign is the awful campaign of the PS. They had some problems back in August about posters showing pictures of people that weren't really unemployed and now their campaign is looking very bad. The PSD/CDS campaign is also not that great, but it looks professional and Passos Coelho and Paulo Portas look like their really bonding together. This is one reason why i think, and many political analysts, believe the election is leaning towards the PSD/CDS coalition and why the polls may not be that wrong. Tuesp1985 (talk) 14:06, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Well, the last Aximakge poll has a statistical tie. What do you think of the tracking polls? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batmacumba (talk • contribs) 14:55, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Traking polls have been somewhat similar. There are 3 polling companies making daily taking polls, UCP-CESOP, Aximage and Intercampus. Aximage publishes their polls only the Correio da Manhã newspaper and not in their website but the last traking poll, from yesterday, gave the PSD/CDS coaltion 37% and the PS 33%. The main message the traking polls are suggesting is that the PS is having a huge dificulty on spreading their message that with them things would be better and more just, while the coalition is being very successful saying that the PS is not willing to compromise nothing with them, in an event where there's no absolute majotity, and that would translate in political caos. Tuesp1985 (talk) 15:10, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

The best tracking polls are whatever you like. When there are polls shown here with 2% of the voters from Alentejo and 59% that are women, I doubt that they may be reliable. And for sure I'll look at Eurosondagem's polls in 2011 and I'll take my own conclusions. But obviously that polls that display women as 59% of the voters and 2% from Alentejo are not reliable at all. El-Kelaa-des-Sraghna (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@Tuesp1985: I watched here at the polls of Eurosondagem in 2011 elections and I didn't find any significant discrepancy concerning to the final results, neither I found them about the ones displayed by other polling firms. Actually, the most accurate ones were by Aximage. Though we can't assume that some are more accurate just because they were 4 years ago and others are less accurate than they were 4 years ago. What I doubt most is that a poll that has 2% of interviwed people from Alentejo and 59% interviwed people that are women, may be accurate. El-Kelaa-des-Sraghna (talk) 23:41, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

@El-Kelaa-des-Sraghna: Of course one can discuss the accuracy of the traking polls, in fact, in this campaign they are all over the place with diferent type of models but whatever the model, one thing they all agree on is the very high rate of undecided voters, around 25%, 23%, and this can swing the election one way or another. That's the huge question of this election. The undecided rate has remain very high and although the PSD/CDS coalition is ahead there's still the chance the PS could win if this undecided voters turn out to vote or it could be the other way around. The traking polls are showing a trend, but that trend could be terribaly wrong.Tuesp1985 (talk) 01:55, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Tuesp1985: That's not the point. The point is that some polls are done in a very awful way. Women are certainly not 59% of the Portuguese population and the people that live in Alentejo is certainly not 2% of the Portuguese population. El-Kelaa-des-Sraghna (talk) 03:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

In that point you're absoutly right. Women are about 52% of the population, but Católica polls have always done that. I have read the polls they did in the last four years and the model is the same. In terms of the population they are also making wrong estimates, Alentejo has more population than Algarve but Norte has aroud 36% of the population against 27% of Lisbon. In the polls, Lisbon has more population than Norte. I think, again, we should focus on the trend, who has the momentum, who has that will certanily win the election. Tuesp1985 (talk) 11:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Who has won?

Why are the newspapers saying the government has been re-elected when the three left parties have a clear majority of both votes and seats? Intelligent Mr Toad 2 (talk) 01:29, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Intelligent Mr Toad 2: Because the Socialist Party will never make an alliance with the CDU or Left Bloc. Plus, António Costa has already stated in his concession speech that he would not support a coalition the the leftwing parties and the he is willing to talk with the PSD/CDS coalition to support them in parliament. But the big question is if Costa will continue to be leader of the Socialist.Tuesp1985 (talk) 02:11, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

No, that is not the big question. The big question is a how a party which has polled 38% of the vote is declared the winner, while the opposition parties, who between them have more than 50% of the vote, are too divided to form a government. The Portguese people have voted against the policies of the current government, but will be made to endure them further. How is this democratic? That is the big question. Intelligent Mr Toad 2 (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

It stil needs to be explained why it isnt the party in the middle - PS - that will form a minority government in this case. It would be in many other countries. Another possibility would be simply calling a new election. I know about Portuguese politicial culture etc., but it s important that these things are properly explained. They are far from self-evident. Clear left wing majority/right wing government is a paradox and we should talk about how best to explain it, not just refer to a Costa statement.---Batmacumba (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Particularly when the PS did form a government after a similar result in 2009. Intelligent Mr Toad 2 (talk) 09:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

The problem is that the BE and CDU are in favour of things the PS is tottaly against. For example, the CDU wants to drop out of the Euro, leave the EU, renegociate the debt, nacionalize banks and companies. All of this plus the huge hate the PS and PCP have going back to 1974 at the height of the Revolution. The Left Bloc, is a different case. They had their chance to become the "CDS-PP of the left" but they prefer to become another protest party on the left and the bad result they achive in 2011 was prove of that.

During the campaing, both parties were willing to talk to the PS to form a "Leftwing government", but this fell flat because no one seriously believed it and the PS would basically split between two is this someday would happen. All during it's history, the PS always looked for support on the right and never on the left. The leftwing parties in Portugal are stuck in time, unfortunately and until they don't have a major shift in their polices, a leftwing coalition with the PS will never happen. And the PS could still be asked to form a government. It's a very, very remote chance, but still viable. But the PSD alone elected more MP's than the PS so, by law, the President will ask the leader with the most seat in Parliament to form a government. The most likely outcome is PSD/CDS minority government that will last 2 and a half years, tops, with the support of the Socialist party that will likely enter a leadership contest in the next months. Tuesp1985 (talk) 11:53, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Still, the PS+BE+CDU command a majority of 122 seats in the Assembly; more than enough to block any PSD/CDS-PP government from passing bills through parliament. The PAF coalition has obtained 107 seats (considering that the abroad constituencies always end up in 3 seats for PSD and 1 for PS), 1 less than the PSD alone in 2011, and well short of the absolute majority they aimed to obtain. Plus the fact that they have lost around 750,000 votes and 12 percentage points together from 2011, and considering that they are still two parties (not a single one) that have just contested the election together. But on the other hand, the PS also comes out in a weak position from this election, being ahead in opinion polls until a few weeks ago and failing miserably in its objective of winning the election. Thus, it will be difficult to determine who won the election, strategically talking, aside from the BE (which has doubled its MP count and has obtained the best result in its history) and the PAN (which has entered the Assembly for the first time). Overall, neither the PSD nor the PS have achieved their objectives, and this could probably lead to a snap election sometime in 2016 or 2017, just as happened in the 2009-2011 period. Impru20 (talk) 12:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Again, the PS will not block a government of the PSD/CDS right now. That would be political suicide and it would look like their bad losers. And the PS at the moment has no real moral to do anything. They are the big loosers of this election. Costa was elected leader of the party last year after a very short victory for the PS in the EU elections and his main argument was that someone who wins elections by so litle cannot win the confidence of the electorate and win the general election. And, okay, you can argue that the PSD/CDS didn't achieve their goal of winning a majority but this is a govermnent that was trailing in the polls just 2 months ago, the simple fact the won the election is a victory because no one, and myself included, didn't expect this results. And yes, this legislature will not last 4 years and i bet election in 2017 or after the local election in October 2017.Tuesp1985 (talk) 12:21, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining all this. There is of course a similar situation in Germany. The SPD+Greens+Left have a majority, but the SPD will not form a government dependent on the Left (ex-SED, ex-KPD), so instead they have formed a "grand coalition" with the CDU. Is there any prospect of a PSD-PS "grand coalition" in Portugal? Intelligent Mr Toad 2 (talk) 21:35, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Intelligent Mr Toad 2: A grand coalition like in Germany i don't think so. What i think will happen is a Parliamentary agreement between the PSD/CDS and PS to pass budgets and bills in Parliament until the day, of course, the PS feels it can win an election and brings down the government. This situation isn't new, it happened in both Guterres governments between 1995-2002 and with Socrates in 2009-2011, but like i said, it will not last long.Tuesp1985 (talk) 23:25, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

From my Spanish point of view, a political suicide would be the PS supporting the PSD/CDS. But I guess that Spanish politics dynamics are somewhat different than those of Portugal, and that a PS support or abstention in favour of the PSD/CDS would not be seen in the same negative light as it would do here. Anyway, I believe the PS is in a bad political position either way. But is not a "big" loser, but rather "another" loser, since the PSD/CDS has not won big either. Remember that the PS is still one of the parties that have won the most votes compared to 2011, and probably the most seats (once the 4 seats awarded to abroad districts are allocated). They are in a bad situation strategically, but have still improved their scorings since 2011. However, indeed, this is a personal defeat of Costa, specially since it seems PS support has plummeted during the campaign and as a result of it, and he must have some responsability as to how he has managed it.

Comment It also seems quite weird that no Portuguese minority government (except for Guterres 1995-1999) has been able to survive for a full term. In Spain, which is Portugal's neighbouring country, minority governments are quite frequent and stable and they do usually last for the full term (or nearly). Impru20 (talk) 23:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

@Impru20: I have to agree Portuguese politics is somewhat quite diferent from Spanish politics. I argue the PS could commit political suicide because the party could very well split in two like what happened with the Labour Party in the UK in 1983. The party in divided between two main factions, the biggest is the centrist, mainstream faction in favour of European integration, more fiscal responsabilaty, but with a social touch; and the other is a more left-wing faction that defends a more tough stand about the EU, and wants to end austerity just because basically. Also this aproach between PSD and PS could actually introduce reforms like in sustainability of the Social Security or in taxes that a vast majority of the electorate wants to be implemented.Tuesp1985 (talk) 00:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Nobody can actually claim victory, as it is evident there was a big change in the composition of the parliament, as the coalition who had the most seats is now a minority in the assembly. In my Portuguese point of view, if the Socialist Party forms a coalition or makes an agreement with the coalition that ruled in the last 4 years it would probabily be a political suicide, just like what happened with the Greek PASOK, and from that the Portuguese Socialists will continue to lose its electoral base for Bloco de Esquerda and Portuguese Communist Party, especially the first one. And it seems like that the Portuguese Communist Party has already understood this, which is quite remarkable since it never happened before, and introduces something new; an willing from the Portuguese Communists to support a government headed by the Socialists, which would might be a Portuguese sort of a re-edition of the French Socialist-Communist coalition led by Lionel Jospin. Will happen something like this? Only time will answer this question, as negociations between the political parties will follow in the next few days and, maybe, weeks. —B.Lameira (talk) 08:22, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

@B.Lameira:Hi there! Nice to see a fellow Portuguese user. Look, i understand your point of view but i strongly disagree with it. Making an aliance with CDU and BE, the PS, as i siad in may previous comment, will probaly split or in the best case scenario will form some cracks. And altough the PCP have that astonishing press conference, even thought what they've said of the PS in the campaign, i find really hard to believe that they change like that, from day to night. Either way or a colition PSD/CDS minority or an PS monotity with the support of the CDU and BE in Parliament, this legislature will not last more than a year and it will a very unstable legislature in a time where Portugal needs a stable and strong government. And although the PCP is willing to support a PS super-minority government, i don't have the slightest doubt that they won't aprove a budget with all of European rules and principals, that would be against everything they stand for and this also aplies to the Left Bloc. So you could have a PS minority support be the PCP and BE but negociating budgets and financial bills with the PSD/CDS coalition. So, look at this moment every thing is very confusing, no one knows what the hell António Costa is doing if it's only bluff or something he really wants, but above all this is a very, very fragil balance that will not last long. The stand and positions of all of the parties during this time will determine the winner of the upcoming elections just around the corner, unfortunately.Tuesp1985 (talk) 15:22, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Instability at sight in Portugal?

The President of Portugal, Aníbal Cavaco Silva, has decided to nominate Pedro Passos Coelho as Prime Minister. However, the PSD/CDS-PP coalition only have got a plurality of 107 seats from the last legislative elections, well bellow of the 116 of 230 seats needed to form a majority, and against the 122 seats of PS/BE/PCP-PEV post-electoral alliance. He said that he would not call on the leader of the PS to form a new government, mainly because he does not have a consistent solution of government with the left-wing parties (no signed document or whatsoever, as I read from his speech). The most likely thing to happen, in the following next weeks, is the PSD/CDS-PP government programme being rejected by the overall majority of the members of parliament and the leader of PS presenting a signed government agreement with the left-of-centre parties, which the president can refuse. On the limit, Portugal might will become on the situation of a caretaker government and new elections to be called on April next year. —- B.Lameira (talk) 01:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@B.Lameira:Well, the events of the past two weeks have really been surprising and a bit worring honestly. The colapse of the talks between the PSD/CDS and PS was the stongest evidence that the PS doesn't not want to negociate nothing with the PSD/CDS coalition and, in my opinion, it is a terrible mistake but only time will tell. On the other hand the President's speech, altought very violent agaisnt the so call "Popular Front" coalition, didn't close the door for an PS led goverment. I think the President put adiccional pressure over the PS to make a real strong and stable agreement for 4 years with the BE and CDU. I don't think seriously he wants a caretaker government until April or May, that would be disastorous for the country and for his legacy also. At the end of the day, both solutions, the PSD/CDS minority or the PS super minority with the parliament support of the BE and CDU are very fragil and very unstable. This Parliament will last, in my humble opinion, 2 years tops and i would be surprised if next year the PS led goverment colapses. New elections are inevitable and we need a new President, Mr. Cavaco Silva has become, unfairly in my opinion, a very devisive figure. We need stability and until a new president is elected nothing can be done unfortonaly.Tuesp1985 (talk) 04:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@B.Lameira: On the issue of if Passos Coelho is Prime Minister-designate or not, take into consideration several things. The Portuguese Constitution establishes the following on the election of the Prime Minister:

Article 133 -> The election procedure starts with the President of the Republic appointing a Prime Minister, according to what article 187 says. Ok, this has been already done yesterday, with Cavaco Silva appointing Passos Coelho to do this. Here, however, we may enter into some kind of legal issue, since article 187 establishes that the President must appoint the Prime Minister in accordance of electoral results, and the reason why comes in articles 192 and 195.

Article 192 -> "Within at most ten days of its appointment, the Government shall submit its Programme to the Assembly of the Republic for consideration, by means of a Prime Ministerial statement."

Article 195 -> "Resignation or removal of the Government: d) Rejection of the Government’s Programme."

Source.

Thus, effectively, the vote on the Government's Programme turns out to be some sort of investiture vote, similar to what happens Spain, but in reverse: in Spain the investiture vote appoints the Prime Minister to Government, while in Portugal, the Government's Programme vote forcibly results in the removal of the Government.

Here, we enter into some sort of legal conflict. Passos Coelho has not a majority in the Assembly. Cavaco Silva knew this, yet he still "appointed" him as Prime Minister, yet without taking into consideration the Assembly's composition (potentially violating article 187). This results in the Government's Programme is most likely not going to be approved, and Coelho will be removed from office. Question is: who should we consider as Prime Minister-designate? In my opinion, as of now, Passos Coelho is still some sort of acting PM until he can obtain the support of the Assembly for his Government's Programme (because otherwise he would go). But until then, the PM-designate is still to be determined, because the election procedure to elect a Prime Minister is not over with the Presidential appointment, but rather, with the actual vote on the Government's Programme. Though I understand there may be complications arising from this, as I believe this is a never-seen situation in Portugal. Impru20 (talk) 18:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

This is the first time in many years that a Government Program has a vote of rejection. Since ever they pass without any vote. But this time, with this divided political scene, the vote will bring down the government and create more confusion. But after this hole mess, i believe Mr Costa will likely be invited to form a government even if the President throws up. At the moment Passos Coelho is the Prime Minister designate, he will take office and present his program. The rest, well, let's see what happens.Tuesp1985 (talk) 21:40, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

That's what the Constitution say. Officialy, the PM election procedure is not over until he/she presents his programme to the Assembly and it is approved, since a defeat on that vote would result in the entire Government's resignation. I don't know if in other occasions they were put to vote, but, I think this time it has to do with President Cavaco Silva violating article 187 and appointing a Prime Minister candidate which does have a majority of parties against him in the Assembly (which I believe is also a first in Portuguese politics). So, if Coelho is forced to resign, would we be forced to remove him from the "Prime Minister-designate" section in the infobox since he, effectively, wasn't able to obtain the support of the Assembly? If that is to be true, then it doesn't make sense to add him right now. Impru20 (talk) 22:05, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

I understand your point of view. At the moment no one knows how this is going to end. But because that at this moment he is the Prime Minister chosen by the President and because he will take the oath of office next week, i think we chould add him right now and if 3 weeks from now Mr. Costa is chosen then we change it. The President in my view didn't violate the Constitution, he simply designated the leader of the biggest party in Parliament, the PSD, to form a government as was expected by everyone. And the fact that, at this moment, Mr Costa doesn't have a formal agreement, just vague and scatter declarations, doesn't obligate the President to appoint him. We can only wait and see.Tuesp1985 (talk) 22:52, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Tuesp1985: Or adding an extra line for 2 Prime Ministers appointed right from the results of last elections. — B.Lameira (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

@Impru20: Indeed, Prime Minister Passos Coelho was designated, which means "indigitado" in Portuguese (word that appears in the President's speech). And just to be absolutely sure about the meaning of the word I have consulted an online dictionary that supports what I have written here: [1]. Additionally, the Government takes office unless an absolute majority (116 out of 230) rejects it, simple majority is not enough. So, the "investiture" is more an act of consenting more than of approval and that gives importance on the role of selecting the Prime Minister to a figure such as the President of the Portuguese Republic. — B.Lameira (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Two things, firstly, the Prime Minister is not, and never was, elected in the Portuguese Third Republic and the vote of no confidence is what the name says, the cabinet is subject to parliamentary confidence, otherwise it would not be semi-presidential. And, secondly, the President did not violate Article 187 of the Constitution, because the President has the initiative to name the Prime Minister. The only thing the Constitution obliges to is the meeting with the parties after legislative elections, in order to name a new Prime Minister, which can be the incubent or not. --B.Lameira (talk) 19:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Case closed (for now)

The appointment of António Costa as the new Prime Minister ends this chapter on the elections (as it seems so). Ending with the approval of the state budget for 2016, we will have a new Socialist Party government in Portugal with parliamentary support from the left-wing parties represented. Over time, we will see how much stable is this solution. No matter what opinion transmitted by the media might say about this, a PSD/CDS-PP government is certainly no more stable than this solution. - B.Lameira (talk) 20:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank God is finally over! This government formation was really tiresome. Every day, left and right calling each other names and accusing each other of ridiculous things. It's over finally! Some peace is needed. But you are right. This government isn't stable nor a PSD/CDS government would be. New elections in 2 years, tops, are almost but certain, but only time will tell.Tuesp1985 (talk) 20:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Opinion poll graph

@Impru20:Could you finish the current opinion polls graph? It seems odd that it was never finished. Thanks!Tuesp1985 (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

The graph is not the same as on the original page of the polling (the one linked to right above the graph). The line for the PS, for example, is shifted by about 3 months. But it seems this is not the only issue: The line for BE right before the election is completely off. I guess until that's fixed, the graph should be removed. Jafado (talk) 21:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)