The new front of conflict in the centre-left, in view of the primaries on 7 April, is that of the polls. The attack was launched by the supporters of the criminal lawyer Michele Laforgia, who will challenge the environmentalist Vito Leccese in the competition. According to the Laforgians, a poll would have been released which would see Leccese win with 56% compared to the criminal lawyer’s 44%.
A certainly legitimate act, given that there is no law that regulates its publication before the primaries, but inappropriate on a political level. “The news has been circulating for a day but who knows why the result is only emerging now, ten days after the vote and after the storm that hit the city in the last week.”
The controversy flares up a few days after the gazebos and also reignites mistrust towards the consultation. «National law prohibits the dissemination of surveys within fifteen days before the date of the consultation. But the primaries are do-it-yourself elections, with variable geometry rules”, continues the attack of the Laforgians. For the organization of the gazebos in the Apulian capital “the choice was left unilaterally to the Democratic Party”. Therefore, the Laforgians respond to the survey with a survey.
“We also commissioned a survey on the same days, which we did not publish out of fairness.” According to the monitoring commissioned by Laforgia’s supporters, the criminal lawyer would be rewarded with 68% of the preferences of all those interviewed, compared to 32% of Leccese (50% chose not to give indications). However, 65% of those interviewed are certainly inclined towards the criminal lawyer, while only 35% would lean towards Leccese (with an indecision rate of 43%).
«It would be interesting to compare the clients and the pollsters, because the result is not simply different, but opposite, and at this point we have no reason to keep it confidential any longer. Who knows, someone will change their minds”, concludes the pro Laforgia front.
The PD’s response was not long in coming. «We have not published any polls until now, as can be seen from the history of our posts, nor do we feel that we have been incorrect in any way in these weeks leading up to the primaries. Therefore, without any controversy and in the belief that surveys are a useful but not infallible tool, we publish what we have seen online.”
