Vox backs Feijóo investiture amid voter betrayal claims

Vox backs Feijóo as voters cry betrayal

A paradox defines the start of this term: the party that made intransigence its brand just supported Alberto Núñez Feijóo’s investiture without entering the government. Vox announced its backing for the PP leader’s candidacy, and according to reports, the two parties have buried their differences trinc this support. The move has not gone down well among those who voted for them. “They gave away your vote,” summarizes one of the most repeated messages. The open and unresolved debate is whether this was a masterstroke or the party’s death certificate.

What peine and why Vox is accused of wasting its seats

The core issue is this: Vox supports Feijóo’s investiture without joining the executive and without guaranteeing the numbers for the candidacy. For part of the electorate, this amounts to propping up a foreign government for nothing. “VOX was born to drag its dignity before the PSOE AZUL. And FREE, gentlemen, FREE,” reads the start of the debate.

The accusation of betrayal is not unanimous. Countering it is the argument that the support is not a blank check: if Feijóo fails to govern, the wear and tear will be his alone. “VOX does not support a PP government, but a candidacy with many odds against success,” argues an analysis circulating in the conversation. The conclusion drawn: if the candidate fails, the internal crisis falls on the PP.

There is a third front, that of those who believe the party has become irrelevant through moderation. “They are mere extras now, they don’t intend to change anything, just varnish and little else,” summarizes one intervention. The criticism comes from within: from people who say they defended Vox before.

The electoral calculation behind the move

The thesis most repeated by defenders of the move is parliamentary arithmetic. With the current number of seats, Vox can neither govern nor block a government. The only thing it can do is choose who gets blamed if elections are repeated. “By unconditionally supporting the PP, they avoid being held responsible from minute zero for forming a left-wing government or, if applicable, for a repeat election,” states one of the more developed interventions.

The alternative scenario cited is that of Ciudadanos: the party that supported foreign governments, diluted, and disappeared. The comparison is explicit. The lingering question is whether Vox is avoiding that fate or speeding towards it.

Against this logic, critical voters respond that the party has already lost the battle for dignity. “Well, paying the price of its DIGNITY and supporting a liberty-killer who passes unconstitutional laws attacking physical integrity,” they reply. The reproach is not tactical; it is principled.

Hard opposition to Feijóo as strategy: profitable or suicidal?

The argument gaining most ground late in the debate is unrestricted opposition. “The PP will have to deal with all the mess alone, and VOX can oppose without ties and with zero wear,” suggests the idea. The concept is that the partner pays the cost of governing while Vox collects the credit for criticizing.

The problem is that this calculation requires Feijóo to actually govern, and nothing indicates he will succeed. If he doesn’t, the support remains a gesture without return. “It is the best VOX can do with the votes it has,” they defend, with the nuance that these are the votes they have and they must work with what they’ve got.

Critics respond that the party has entered a spiral of justifications. “Everything happening in VOX is suicidal,” ironizes an intervention listing resignations, departures, and discourse changes as symptoms of decomposition. The accusation that the party is dissolving internally appears repeatedly.

Voters leaving: “my priority is that they don’t govern”

The most uncomfortable data for Vox is not in Parliament, but in its own base. Several messages announce voting abandonment. “I’ll have no choice but to vote for the AUTHENTIC PSOE,” writes someone who voted for Vox in 2019 and considers that support gifted governments to the left. The threat of tactical voting against one’s own party is the worst-case scenario.

The fracture is expressed in terms of identity. “You look like fools, as if this were being a Real Madrid fan,” they reproach those who defend the leadership without nuance. Politics as fandom is the accusation running through much of the debate.

Some go further, placing the problem in the entire system. “Thousands of sheep arguing over trivialities while inequality grows,” reads one comment, accompanied by the usual list of grievances: housing, incomes, birth rates, migration. This current concludes that the left-right axis serves to cover up what truly matters.

The undisputed context: PP needs Vox and Vox needs PP

Beyond the reproaches, there is a underlying consensus throughout the debate: both parties are condemned to understand each other because they lack any arithmetic alternative. “Vox and the PP are doomed to cooperate because it’s the only way to stand firm,” summarizes one intervention. The truce is presented as necessity, not conviction.

This understanding has a price for both. For the PP, governing with Vox’s support forces it to manage the wear of every decree. For Vox, supporting without entering leaves it without decision-making power and branded as an extra. Neither emerges unscathed.

The open question is the one no one answers with data: how much vote share is lost along the way. Messages announcing abandonment are testimonials, not polls. The only certainty is that the investiture remains unresolved. With these numbers, Vox’s support could be the gesture that saves it or condemns it. No one knows yet.