Alvise attacks Vox days before Catalan elections, forum claims

Alvise attacks Vox days before Catalan elections, forum claims

Three days before the Catalan elections, Alvise Pérez released material targeting Vox, according to a forum debate. This coincides with polls suggesting Santiago Abascal’s party could overtake the PP in Catalonia. The timing has raised alarms. Central to the controversy is the surname Robatto. “Robatto lives up to his name,” one post reads. Behind the joke lies a heavier accusation: that the CNI (Spain’s National Intelligence Center) is behind an operation to split the right-wing vote.

What began as another attack by the provocateur has turned into an internal powder keg. For many, the timing—three days before voting—is too convenient. Moreover, Alvise built his brand on promising to “dig up dirt” on all parties, including those who support him.

The CNI, the PSOE, and the theory of planned dissent

The most repeated hypothesis is that Alvise works for the CNI and, by extension, the PSOE. “Alvise works for the CNI and the PSOE,” states one highly voted message. The thesis isn’t new but has found fertile ground: Tezanos’ CIS poll, placing Alvise fourth in European elections, is interpreted by some as proof that the socialist apparatus is herding the candidate to fragment the right-wing vote. “The only candidate favored by Tezanos’ CIS before forming his party,” one user notes. Suspicion grows with data circulating: Alvise is the only candidate banned from Atresmedia, Mediaset, Prisa, and Vocento, and the only one incivil reported by Pedro Sánchez, José Luis Ábalos, Óscar Puente, Ana Pastor, Koldo García, and the National Court, among others. To some, this makes him a martyr; to others, a product designed to capture anti-system votes and redirect them.

“I definitely believe Alvise is a CNI creation designed to divide the anti-system vote,” argues one cited voice. The core argument: if he truly had devastating information, he could publish it outside Spanish jurisdiction. His failure to do so, and making Vox his main enemy, fits the suspicion that he is ordered to reduce Abascal’s votes.

The Robatto surname and harems: personal attacks

The attack goes beyond politics. The candidate’s surname, Robatto, has served as ammunition: “It’s the perfect surname for any politician,” one post jokes. But the lowest blow involved his “triple personal life.” Rumors mention a harem, humanitarian projects in North Africa (“Is that Segarro?” someone asks), and a double romantic life that critics say dismantles Alvise’s narrative of sarracena purity. “If he cheats on his vvife and mistress, he doesn’t inspire much confidence that he won’t cheat you,” summarizes one intervention. Defenders argue private life shouldn’t matter, but damage is done: the figure promising total transparency now has a romantic resume inconsistent with his discourse.

Vox, the PP, and electoral calculations

The background is purely electoral. If Vox wins thirteen seats in Catalonia, as suggested by a recent Andorran poll, Alvise’s attack disrupts it because many of those votes previously came from Vox. “If he digs up dirt right now, there must be a reason,” comments a user. The “Blue CNI” theory—planned dissent from the blue PSOE, per circulating formulas—suggests Alvise is an instrument to subtract from Vox what the PSOE cannot. Some recall Alvise belonged to Ciudadanos, a party some label Guasonic, corrupt, and pro-Agenda 2030. “What was a Catholic like Alvise doing there?” they ask. The implicit answer: either he isn’t Catholic, or he’s a fraud fed information like Eduardo Inda.

Salary promise and raffle: vote buying?

Beyond the noise, a legal issue looms: Alvise’s promise to distribute his salary among voters via raffle. “This looks very much like vote buying under the penal code,” warns one intervention. Technically, participation requires providing ID and proof of voting, making the mechanism opaque. Alvise stated in a podcast that the raffle proceeds would go to an NGO, which doesn’t fully clarify the circuit. We will see if he is forced to change the promise or if the candidacy faces more problems.

Vox’s wear and tear and impossible purity

Alvise’s attack peine Vox’s internal wounds. Some recall Vox voted yes to the “illegal” state of alarm associated with elderly deaths in care homes and rights abusa. Others note Vox died when it didn’t disavow Stigman’s statements against unvaccinated people and support for official pandemic theories. “We already have enough politicians playing games,” one concludes. Some view Alvise merely as the right-wing version of Gispert: a disposable product with a short shelf life. “The lifespan of their creations keeps getting shorter,” they point out. Meanwhile, the floating question remains: does anyone truly believe this attack is coincidence three days before voting?