Croatia conducted its third electoral event in less than a year with the first round of presidential elections on December 29, 2024, following early parliamentary elections in April 2024 and the European Parliament elections in June 2024. The results of the first round, which saw both Zoran Milanović and Dragan Primorac advance to the runoff, indicated several implications, consequences, and lessons learned regarding the ongoing political transformations in Europe.
Diverse Implications
The results of the first round of the Croatian presidential elections carried varied implications, as follows:
Milanović’s Inability to Conclude the Election in the First Round: Most pre-election polls favored Zoran Milanović, but none of the candidates showed a clear path to victory in the first round. Ultimately, Milanović received 49.1% of the vote, just short of the 50% plus one needed for a first-round victory. In contrast, Dragan Primorac came in second with 19.4%, followed by Maria Silak at 9.3% and Ivana Kikin at 8.9%. This outcome ensured both Milanović and Primorac a place in the runoff on January 12.
Fragmentation of “Women’s Votes” in Favor of “Primorac”: Female votes represented by candidates Maria Silak and Ivana Kikin amounted to 9.3% and 8.9%, respectively, revealing a fragmentation of the women’s vote that could have coalesced to challenge Primorac more effectively. If Silak and Kikin had united, their combined total of 18.2% would have been only 1.2% behind Primorac.
Relative Apathy Towards Participation in the First Round: The Croatian Election Guide reported a limited turnout of only 46.3% of eligible voters, approximately 3.4 million citizens, in the presidential first round. This turnout ranks among the lowest in the last five presidential elections in Croatia, significantly lower than the 51.2% turnout in 2020.
Impressive Spending with Modest Returns for Primorac’s Campaign: According to the Dnevnik publication, Dragan Primorac led all candidates with campaign expenditures reaching approximately €774,000, over three times Milanović’s €167,000. Despite this spending, Primorac’s funding did not significantly narrow the gap between him and Milanović but merely widened the distance from the third and fourth place candidates.
Variation in Candidate Numbers: A report by Bild indicated a notable decline in the number of presidential candidates from 13 in the 2005 election to only eight in the current race, highlighting a significant trend in candidate participation over the years.
Only One-Fifth of Candidates Secured Citizen Signatures: A recent survey showed that only one-fifth of presidential candidates managed to gather the requisite 10,000 citizen signatures, with others resorting to party nominations to qualify. The three candidates who achieved this were Milanović, Primorac, and Mirobulj.
Potential Consequences
The results of the first round of the Croatian presidential elections could have several potential consequences for the runoff and the broader political scene:
Voter Preferences Leaning Toward “Milanović” in the Runoff: A recent Ipsos poll indicated that 57.7% of respondents favored Milanović in the runoff against Primorac, who was estimated to receive only 29.5% of the vote.
Skepticism Surrounding “Lost Votes” in the Runoff: About 7.8% of respondents expressed intentions not to vote in the runoff, with another 5% undecided. This could amount to over 12.8% of potential votes possibly eroding the support for either leading candidate.
Milanović Capitalizing on Pre-Trump Momentum: Some politicians have labeled Milanović as “Croatia’s Trump,” highlighting their shared populist rhetoric and criticism of NATO and the EU. Milanović seems to be leveraging the momentum preceding Trump’s inauguration to solidify his political standing.
Ongoing Political Rivalry Between “Milanović” and “Plenković”: Prime Minister Andrej Plenković continues to support Primorac against Milanović, marking a significant internal division. Plenković framed the runoff as a referendum on Croatia’s future in the EU amid political scandal.
Continuation of Negative Campaigning by “Milanović” and “Primorac”: The first round was marked by a rise in inflation, corruption, and workforce shortages, with both candidates engaging in significant negative campaigning that included mutual insults and accusations about foreign alignment.
In conclusion, the first round results of the Croatian presidential elections highlighted notable trends: significant public hesitation to participate, Milanović’s near success in the first round, and a favorable voting trend toward him based on pre-runoff polls suggesting a potential 20% lead over Primorac. Nevertheless, the possibility remains for Dragan Primorac to leverage his significant campaign spending to impact the runoff results.
