Representing the will and needs of the people. This is the main duty of parliamentarians in a democratic system. We are approaching the election that will define who will occupy the position of maximum responsibility in the government, and so far the only certainty demonstrated by political scientists is that, regardless of who takes over the leadership of the country, dealing with the situation diplomatically will be a challenge that will require mastery. Whoever is the president of the Republic in the next term, he or she will not be exempt from debating issues that generate instability in public opinion.
In an extremely polarized environment, where one must move forward with criteria and coherence to achieve greater chances of governability, decision-making is sensitive. Especially when the topics on the latvia mobile database agenda are highly controversial and present a great opportunity for opponents to leave the game with some advantage. When the will of the people is equally divided between yes and no, is there any chance of deciding in favor of popularity?
In May of this year, a study conducted by BTG Pactual, in partnership with the FSB Institute, revealed the two positions most rejected by voters: candidates in favor of gun ownership and candidates in favor of the legalization of abortion. Around 45% of those interviewed felt less likely to support a presidential candidate who defended guns, while 54% said they were less likely to vote for candidates who supported the legalization of abortion.
The survey shows how a single issue can be decisive between pleasing and displeasing its electorate. In addition to the legalization of abortion and the release of gun ownership for the population, other equally controversial issues have been under discussion for years in the National Congress, but end up not moving forward because there is no consensus on how the law should be drafted or changed. This is the case of PLS 612/2011, or as it is better known, the Same-Sex Marriage Bill.