Eduardo Paladini
04/04/2021 16:15
Clarín.com
Politics
Updated 04/04/2021 16:15
It's like turning the traditional table upside down.
Or sort it by the most uncomfortable data.
In times of rift, who are the Argentine politicians with the most
"very bad" image
?
Based on the numbers of the last national survey of the
University of San Andrés (Udesa)
,
Clarín put together the ranking
.
That includes
20 leaders
.
With a peculiarity: in this case, it is convenient to be unknown.
The Udesa survey included
1,027 interviews
between March 3 and 15.
This newspaper advanced part of this work, where it was warned by a general drop in the valuation of official and opposition politicians.
In the evaluation of 20 of the most well-known leaders of the country (Máximo Kirchner, among others, does not appear), the survey raised six options to measure their image.
Very good, something good;
something bad, very bad;
does not know it;
don't know
.
The first two items make up the "positive" assessment and the second and third, the "negative".
Initial conclusion: the
20 ended with a differential against
, that is, with more negative than positive.
But when the numbers crumble, the alarm sounds louder.
What is most visible is the
dark red of the "very bad" weighting
, in tune with the polarization that governs the current scenario.
Horacio Rodríguez Larreta, Alberto Fernández and Axel Kicillof.
The head of government surpasses the President and the governor in image.
The uncomfortable ranking is led -to badly-
Cristina Kirchner
.
It has
65
"very bad"
image
points
.
The rejection of the vice president is almost all
hard
: it barely adds 8 points of valuation "somewhat bad".
Similar to what happens to
Axel Kicillof
.
The Buenos Aires governor combines
56%
of "very bad" and 11% of "somewhat bad."
It is enough for him only to be below his political boss.
The top 4 is completed by the other two strong men from the Frente de Todos: President
Alberto Fernández
(
48%
of "very bad" and 15% of "somewhat bad") and the head of Deputies,
Sergio Massa
(
48%
of "very bad "and 20% of" somewhat bad ").
In fifth place appears
Mauricio Macri
, the worst of the opposition.
The leader of the PRO adds
46%
of "very bad" and 18% of "bad".
Complicated figures if you are seriously thinking about a second half.
Sixth, outside the crack,
Nicolás del Caño
, from the FIT,
mixes
with
41%
of "very bad" and 20% of "somewhat bad": And one step below, come
two
strong and high-profile
women
from Juntos for the Change:
Elisa Carrió
(
39%
of "very bad" and 18% of "somewhat bad") and
Patricia Bullrich
(
38%
of "very bad" and 13% of "somewhat bad").
Then, although another woman from the same opposition space is located, she does so with a little friendlier figures:
María Eugenia Vidal
ends up with
31%
of "very bad" and 16% of "somewhat bad".
And in 11th place comes the other key JxC leader,
Horacio Rodríguez Larreta
: the head of government has
25%
of "very bad" and 19% of "somewhat bad".
For now, its moderation seems to favor it, although it has a
downward trend
.
They complete the table
10th
Miguel Angel Pichetto
:
29%
of "very bad" and 20% of "somewhat bad".
12th
José Luis Espert
:
25%
of "very bad" and 17% of "somewhat bad".
13th
Javier Milei
:
24%
of "very bad" and 13% of "somewhat bad".
14th
Ricardo Alfonsín
:
22%
of "very bad" and 20% of "somewhat bad".
15th
Martín Lousteau
:
21%
of "very bad" and 18% of "somewhat bad".
16th
Rogelio Frigerio
:
20%
of "very bad" and 16% of "somewhat bad".
17th
Cristian Ritondo
:
19%
of "very bad" and 12% of "somewhat bad".
18th
Ernesto Sanz
:
17%
of "very bad" and 15% of "somewhat bad".
19th
Alfredo Cornejo
:
16%
of "very bad" and 12th of "somewhat bad".
20th
Emilio Monzó
:
13%
of "very bad" and 13% of "somewhat bad".
From the middle of the table down (the least rejected), perhaps
the most meritorious is Lousteau
, because he has a level of knowledge higher than 85% and a relatively low negative.
Ricardo Alfonsín
also shows
good numbers
with little ignorance
.
Although with a
complex antecedent
: something similar happened to him in 2011 and when he ran for president it went between fair and bad.
Much of the rest is
helped by their lower level of knowledge at the national level
.
People do not see them "very bad", but not "very good" either.
Basically because some of the respondents are not very clear about who they are.
