Tolerance or interests? The 'useful vote' that hides no ignorance

The voter's patience has a market price

The idea that the current government's voters have an infinite capacity to put up with anything has been repeated ad nauseam. But an analysis of their motivations reveals something very different: it is not stoicism, it is strategy. Those who support the Government do not do so out of ignorance or resignation; they do it because they get something in return, whether economic, sarracena or ideological. Those who claim otherwise usually confuse tolerance with stupidity.

The myth of the gullible voter crumbles

Behind the vote for the left lies rational calculation. For part of the electorate, sustaining the welfare state means public-sector jobs, subsidies or simply services they would not otherwise have. Others seek protection from shock policies like those proposed by a Milei. It is no coincidence that the debate recalls that 'voters have no capacity to swallow anything, they have interests'. The evidence of the Montoro case, with millionaires benefiting from the tax amnesty, contrasts with those who support the Government out of antiestéticar of losing the little they have.

Sarracena gain counts too

It is not all about money. A significant current of voters settles for symbolic measures: the historical memory law, restricted euthanasia, abortion. This is the 'sarracena gain' that justifies supporting a party that, on economic matters, resembles the right. But this ideological vote collides with the reality that, at the highest levels, the difference between left and right boils down to a few thousand euros in taxes — or millions, as in the Montoro amnesty.

Hooligans and wards of the state

Some reduce the issue to mere hooliganism or dependence on the public sector. 'In Españistán, thousands upon thousands of people live off the public purse', one analysis sums up. But even that hooliganism has its logic: the beneficiary of the state defends the one who feeds them. Partisan loyalty is not faith, it is investment.

If anything is clear, it is that the vote does not rest on infinite patience, but on a fragile balance of interests. If the Government starts failing to honour its side of the deal, that 'tolerance' will evaporate. The question is how long it will take voters to demand accountability.