Propaganda campaign on the eve of the upcoming Presidential elections of October 15 is carried out to its full capacity. Presidential contenders are using all opportunities for propaganda. TV speeches, TV debates, multiplying of agitation materials, trips to regions and other means are being used by contenders. What is the influence of a two-week pre-electoral campaign on voters? Which politicians have better chances?

To answer these questions, the Center of analytical information and interrogation “Sel” held a sociological poll in the cities of Baku and Sumgait. Some 500 responders took part in the poll, 55 percent of which are men, 45 percent - women, and 57 percent of youth among them. Representatives of different professions, intelligentsia, unemployed and housewives were among responders. The results of this poll are given below:

I. Which of the following politicians are you going to vote for?

1. H. Aliyev or I. Aliyev - 61,7 percent

2. L. Shovkat - 8,7 percent

3. E. Mamedov - 8,2 percent

4. I. Gambar - 7,4 percent

5-6. A. Kerimli - 5 percent

5-6. Y. Oguz - 5 percent

7. S. Rustamkhanli - 2,3 percent

8. I Ismailov - 1 percent

9. G. Hasanguliyev- 0,3 percent

10-11. H. Hajiyev - 0,2 percent

10-11. A. Samedov - 0,2 percent

Note: Such ratio of political rating is directly connected with the effect of propaganda campaign of Presidential contenders.

1. Propaganda of Heydar Aliyev and Ilham Aliyev differs for its professionalism and efficiency. Real political steps, increasingly growing international and internal support, as well as professional preparation of agitation materials have raised rating of powers’ contenders. Compared to the last month, it is higher by 10 percent.

Balanced thoughts of Ilham Aliyev in TV speech and dignified behavior of Heydar Aliyev’s and Ilham Aliyev’s agents, representing them during TV debates, produced influence on responders’ point of view. One should add the impression after meetings with Ilham Aliyev as Prime Minister.

2. Promotion of Lala Shovkat in the rating table is the results of the fact that she is till stuck to the independent position chosen at the elections.

Propaganda effect, created in her first video block, second speech not accompanied by any accusations, in which she showed nationalistic position and attention towards main general national issues, give their results. The fact that in Nagono Karabakh issue, Lala Shovkat gives the main role to military and political alliance with Turkey is another factor, having positively influenced public opinion.

3. First two weeks of propaganda campaign may be considered successful for E. Mamedov. As compared to last month, thee appear no changes in his rating. BY the way, he did not seem as constructive as Lala Shovkat. However, E. Mamedov did not drive his radicalism to excessive level, as it was done by some of his colleagues.

He did not have thoughts causing indignation, besides one coarse expression against the head of the state. Despite of the fact, position of Mamedov cannot be considered as stable. As this contender has not revealed a part of his pre-electoral platform, related concrete fields. It is impossible to achieve permanent success basing only on populism.

4. Decrease of Isa Gambar’s rating is a normal phenomenon. His first and second TV speeches were very weak. I. Gambar does not correspond to pre-electoral image has been chosen by himself. The second factor may be connected with the fact that Musavat party has taken a radical course. Both functioners and printing organs do not show objective position.

A voter observes this and shows adequate reaction. Inability of I. Gambar to reveal efficiently his own pre-electoral platform is one of the reasons producing negative influence.

5-6. Ali Kerimli, we can say, has lost good positions. The representative of reformers looses political points collected at the beginning of the year. Radical behavior of his team and preconceived position of printed organs towards Presidential contenders, diminish speaker abilities, demonstrated during TV speeches to null. At the same time, A. Kerimli mainly accusing emotionally in his speeches, irritates public opinion. Insulting actions of his agent during recent TV debates badly influenced political rating of A. Kerimli.

5-6. Chairman of the Party of National Unity Yunus Oguz managed to preserve his previous position. He achieved it due to demonstration of independent and real position during propaganda campaign. TV speeches of Oguz raised serious reaction in public opinion. A way chosen by the Chairman of Party of National Unity in propaganda struggle for the post of President, gives chances to state that Oguz preserves chanced to growth of his rating.

7. The main reason of the fact that Presidential contender of the Party of State Solidarity S. Rustamkhanli could not manage to reach raise of his rating is in his non-sufficient activeness and efficiency of propaganda. His speeches and thoughts during TV debates cannot seriously influence public opinion. Agitation materials of this contender do not produce original impression. If it goes like this, S. Rustamkhanli may happen to be in one row with outsiders.

8.Candidate of the Justice Party, I. Ismailov is stuck to his traditional position. He carries out propaganda in the field in which there are not much chances for success. Neither system no efficiency is seen in propaganda campaign of this contender. His wish to look original is not taken by public opinion.

9. Due to TV speeches, Gudrat Hasanguliyev looses his social basis. Public opinion showed no interest towards his pre-electoral platform, because of being uncoordinated. In his TV speeches G. Hasanguliyev could not show his concrete political and ideological course. A part of constituency, devoted to tradition of PPFA cannot understand it.

10. It is difficult to say something about Hafiz Hajiyev in political aspect. The hope that the position taken by him in propaganda is able to bring success, comes to null. Responders’ reaction confirm this fact.

11. Abutalib Samedov mostly takes verbal maneuvers. As Hafiz Hajiyev, he does not show extra radicalism and cannot carry out efficient propaganda. Azerbaijani constituency has already quitted verbal sphere. That is why Samedov’s expressions do not reach their target and it is explainable, that responders do not vote for him.

II. What do you think, is it possible to raise political rating in present situation by means of meetings?

a) Yes - 25 percent

b) No - 71 percent

c) Difficult to respond - 4 percent

Note: Azerbaijani voter prefers political promises able to bring real results. At present, mass actions are not acceptable for success at the elections. This is the expression of a demand of new political image.