I don't know if you are aware of this, but as someone who follows the field closely, I can easily say this: The perception of the “irreligious CHP”, especially among right-wing voters in Turkey, has been one of the biggest barriers to the party for many years.
This perception was not a superficial or temporary opinion; on the contrary, it had accumulated over the years, reinforced by examples, and had become a strong code that shaped voter behavior.
As a matter of fact, this wall could not be overcome during Muharrem İnce's presidential candidacy. In fact, some symbolic moments caused this perception to become even more entrenched. The images given in the daytime during Ramadan or the speeches during the call to prayer may seem small politically, but they were breaking moments with great sociological significance.
Politics is not only about what you say, but also how you look.
At this point, some people still do not grasp the issue. There is an understanding that politics can be done with the comfort of “let them think what they think”. Of course, individual lifestyles are not a matter of discussion, but for a political movement aiming for power, ignoring the value world of society is strategic suicide.
Because winning elections is possible not only by talking to your own neighborhood, but also by getting votes from the opposite neighborhood.
And this was precisely the CHP's chronic problem: A political space that relies on the bone vote but cannot expand.
In the midst of this deadlock, a different political language was tried.
Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu's approach during the 2023 presidential campaign differed markedly from the classical CHP reflexes. While trying to lighten the burdens of the past with his “Halalization” discourse, he established an inclusive ground that appeals to all segments of society with the “Halil İbrahim Table” metaphor.
This discourse was not only a political strategy, but also a search for cultural contact.
“The expression ”Halil İbrahim Table" is a reflection of the culture of sharing, abundance and coexistence that is embedded in the collective memory of Anatolia. The language based on this metaphor found a serious response among right-wing voters for the first time.
The result speaks for itself: Around 15 million votes and a performance that reached 48 percent.
This was a historical threshold for the CHP.
It was no coincidence.
Correctly read sociology was the result of correctly established language.
But the real issue is why this success has not been sustained.
The picture that emerged after the elections clearly showed that this strategic initiative could not be institutionalized. Intra-party bickering (change of leadership), inconsistencies in discourse and a return to old reflexes led to a rapid loss of the psychological advantage gained.
More importantly, the sincerity of this new language has come into question.
The voter asks:
“Was this approach an electoral strategy or a permanent mindset shift?”
If there is no clear answer to this question, the trust gained will erode very quickly.
At this point, there may still be attempts to write a success story based on polls. However, politics is shaped by the will that emerges at the ballot box, not by desk-based data.
Perception management is effective up to a point;
but the ballot box measures reality, not perception.
It is important to make this clear:
A political movement that wants to be in power in Turkey has to read the belief world, cultural codes and sensitivities of this society correctly.
This is not a compromise, it is the nature of politics.
Mosquitoes for those who understand, drums for those who don't!