Average of polls before Urda: PP 134, PSOE 108 and Vox 67 seats, what will be the "voting revolution" that GAD3 anticipates?

Demócrata's closed aggregate as of October 27 placed the PP at 31% and the PSOE at 27.3%, with Vox at 18.9%. These data make it possible to know the starting point of 29N, but they still do not capture the electoral reaction to the accident: will there be changes and in what direction?

EuropaPress 7579805 presidente vox santiago abascal presidente pp alberto nunez feijoo visita

EuropaPress 7579805 presidente vox santiago abascal presidente pp alberto nunez feijoo visita

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

Last updated

2 minutes

Most read

Elecciones 29N · Encuestas

La media de las encuestas

Media a 1 de noviembre de 2026 · 14 institutos

  • PP30,8 %
  • PSOE27,3 %
  • Vox18,9 %
  • Frente Amplio6,4 %
  • Podemos2,7 %
  • ERC2,4 %
010203040ene 2024jul 2024ene 2025jul 2025ene 2026jul 2026

Media del último estudio de cada instituto en 30 días y su evolución semanal desde el 23J. Partidos con al menos un 2 %.

Todas las encuestas

Elecciones generales del 29 de noviembre · Demócrata

Before the Urda rail accident altered the political agenda, the polls were painting a parliamentary majority for PP and Vox. The aggregate of Demócrata, with a cutoff date of October 27, placed both formations at 201 seats, 25 above the 176 needed to reach an absolute majority.

The date is decisive for interpreting the results. The tragedy occurred on Wednesday, October 28, the day after the closing of this update. Therefore, the snapshot reflects the previous scenario: it does not allow attributing to Urda either the PP's lead, or the PSOE's position, or Vox's support.

Its usefulness now is to serve as a reference to compare the next measurements and check whether any sustained movement appears among voters.

See here the aggregate of Demócrata polls

PP was ahead of PSOE by 3.7 points before the accident

The average of vote estimates placed PP in first position, with 31%, followed by PSOE, with 27.3%. The distance between the two was 3.7 percentage points.

Vox reached 18.9%. The arithmetic sum of populars and Vox came to 49.9%, although that percentage should not be confused with the result of a joint candidacy.

Behind them were Frente Amplio, with 6.3%, and Podemos, with 2.9%. Among the territorial forces visible in the aggregate, ERC registered 2.3%; Junts, 1.5%; EH Bildu, 1.4%; and the PNV, 0.9%. Se Acabó la Fiesta appeared with 1.6% and Adelante, with 1%.

The 201 seats of PP and Vox and the role of Abascal

The average of parliamentary projections collected by Demócrata assigned 134 deputies to PP and 67 to Vox. Together they would reach 201 seats.

The data shows two different elements. On the one hand, both formations would surpass the absolute majority by a margin. On the other, PP would be 42 deputies short of achieving it on its own, so Vox's seats would be decisive for that parliamentary combination.

PSOE obtained 108 deputies, Frente Amplio nine and Podemos two. The rest of the chamber was distributed among ERC, with eight; EH Bildu, seven; Junts, six; PNV, five; BNG, two; and Coalición Canaria and Adelante, with one each.

What the Demócrata aggregate measures and why there are two different bases

The vote average brings together the latest study from each of 15 institutes within a 30-day window. Not all offer an individual estimate for all candidacies: the module indicates how many studies provide data for each party.

The 134 PP deputies or the 67 from Vox do not come from directly converting the national percentages of the aggregate into seats. They are the result of bringing together the available parliamentary projections.

Michavila anticipates a «voting revolution»: what remains to be measured after Urda

The president of GAD3, Narciso Michavila, has anticipated a possible «voting revolution» in an interview with Vozpópuli published this Sunday. As he explained, the Urda accident caught his team in the middle of fieldwork and they are observing the evolution of the responses. His forecast includes a decisive condition: if the movements he claims to detect are maintained, the electoral result could be «absolutely unprecedented».

Michavila links that possible change to the assessment of the management, the explanations about the accident and the solutions that are offered. However, he also recommends waiting before drawing conclusions from the first hours. Yesterday he predicted a stronger PP than on 23J, a PSOE that does not hold up and a Vox that brushes the 19% range.

More key points, information and questions with FREN

AI-GENERATED CONTENT

What is the current stage of the legal mechanisms process to call elections following significant shifts in public opinion such as those caused by the Urda accident?

There is no record of a reform in process to call elections due to significant changes in public opinion following the Urda accident. What is approved and published is the call for general elections on November 29, 2026, agreed upon before the incident. Therefore, it is important to distinguish between a hypothetical modification of electoral rules and an electoral process that is already underway.

The call is already formalized

The Royal Decree 806/2026, dated October 5, published in the BOE on October 6, dissolved the Congress and Senate elected on July 23, 2023. Its article 2 states: "Elections to both Chambers are called, which will be held on Sunday, November 29, 2026."

The decree invokes article 115 of the Constitution and article 42.1 of the Organic Law of the General Electoral Regime. It also notes that it was adopted at the proposal of the Prime Minister, following deliberation by the Council of Ministers on October 5. It is not pending parliamentary approval: the call has already been made and is in execution.

The timing sequence is decisive: the dissolution was published on October 6 and the accident occurred on October 28. Consequently, that call cannot legally be attributed to a reaction after the incident.

Public opinion does not automatically trigger elections

The current constitutional framework does not establish that a drop in polls, a loss of social trust, or the shock caused by a tragedy automatically obliges the calling of elections. These events may generate political pressure but do not constitute a legal basis for dissolution.

  • Early dissolution: article 115 allows the Prime Minister to propose it, after deliberation by the Council of Ministers and under his responsibility. It is formalized by royal decree.
  • Limits: it cannot be proposed while a motion of no confidence is pending; nor is a new dissolution allowed within one year of the previous one, except for the constitutional exception of failed investiture.
  • Failed investiture: article 99.5 provides for the dissolution of both Chambers if two months pass from the first investiture vote without any candidate obtaining the confidence of Congress.

These are existing mechanisms, not new instruments pending processing as a consequence of Urda. The sources consulted do not show a formal initiative introducing automatic elections linked to changes in public opinion.

What actions are actually underway

The administrative development of the electoral process is documented. The Order HAC/1062/2026, dated October 7 and published on the 8th, set subsidies for electoral expenses. The Resolution of October 9, published on the 10th, determined the centers abroad authorized to deposit votes in ballot boxes. Both actions develop a call prior to the accident.

Regarding Urda, a voluntary appearance by the Minister of Transport before the Standing Committee is scheduled for November 3 at 5:00 PM to explain the Government's management, according to the Congress communication. This is an accountability action, not a phase to call elections.

In conclusion: as of November 1, 2026, the November 29 call is formalized and underway; there is no record of an electoral or constitutional reform in progress that automatically links changes in public opinion with new elections.

What are the competencies and professional background of Narciso Michavila, president of GAD3?

Narciso Michavila is a sociologist, businessman, and president and founder of GAD3, a consultancy dedicated to social research, public opinion, and strategic communication. His career combines training in sociology and statistics, military experience, and work in business and teaching. His competencies should be understood as areas of professional specialization, not as powers of a public authority.

Academic and technical training

He holds a doctorate from the Complutense University of Madrid and a master's degree in Statistics from the same university. The biographies consulted describe the doctorate as in Sociology or Political Science and Sociology. He also has specialized training in Social Research Design from the Center for Sociological Research and trained as an Artillery officer at the General Military Academy of Zaragoza. These credentials appear in his GAD3 profile, his professional profile, and the presentation at Nueva Economía Fórum.

Main professional competencies
  • Social research and surveys: design of research, statistical analysis, and interpretation of responses to study opinions, attitudes, and behaviors.
  • Electoral analysis: study of voting intention, voter behavior, and political trends, as well as preparation and interpretation of result estimates.
  • Strategic communication: application of opinion studies to the needs of companies and institutions and to political communication.
  • Public policies and sector studies: applied research on issues such as education, health, housing, and mobility within GAD3's activities.
  • Security and defense: analysis of the relationship between public opinion and strategic matters, an area connected to his military and academic background.

These areas are reflected in his professional profiles and in the presentation at Forbes House. It is important to distinguish Michavila's personal specialization from the full range of services offered by the consultancy he leads.

Military career and transition to consulting

Before focusing on business social research, he developed a career in the Armed Forces. He is a reserve Artillery commander. He was responsible for statistical projects in the Army and lead analyst at the Spanish Institute of Strategic Studies, within the Ministry of Defense. In 2002, he served as spokesperson for the Western Multinational Brigade in Kosovo, according to biographies from Nueva Economía Fórum and the Compolítica interview.

His business career is linked to the founding and presidency of GAD3. Sources differ on the founding date: some biographies mention 2006, while the corporate history of GAD3 places the firm's origins in 2001. Therefore, it is advisable not to present both dates as equivalent. The company conducts sociological research, market studies, and electoral analyses, including work for media outlets.

Teaching and university responsibilities

He has taught postgraduate courses on public opinion, social research, and security. Among the cited experiences are the General Gutiérrez Mellado University Institute of UNED and the University of Tromsø in Norway as a visiting professor. His teaching career appears in this profile about his career. Since 2025, he has also served as president of the Social Council of the International University of Business, according to his GAD3 biography.

In summary, his profile combines quantitative analysis, interpretation of public opinion, business management, and defense experience. His regular presence as a political analyst does not equate to holding a partisan position: the biographies consulted do not indicate that he has been a deputy, senator, government member, or party official.

What were the results of the last general elections in terms of number of seats for PP, PSOE, and Vox?

In the last general elections held in Spain on July 23, 2023, the PP obtained 137 seats, the PSOE 121, and Vox 33 in the Congress of Deputies. These figures correspond to the definitive results of those elections, not to the estimates from polls published afterward (Demócrata, 23J comparison).

Seat distribution
  • PP: 137 deputies. It was the party with the most seats among the three you asked about and led the electoral distribution in Congress. Its advantage over PSOE was 16 deputies; compared to Vox, the difference was 104 (23J results).
  • PSOE: 121 deputies. It ranked second in number of seats. It was 16 representatives behind PP and obtained 88 more than Vox. Therefore, the difference between the two parties with the highest representation was much smaller than the gap between either of them and Vox (23J results).
  • Vox: 33 deputies. Its representation was lower than that of PP and PSOE. This figure is the electoral reference result to compare its subsequent evolution in polls; the numbers attributed to it by surveys do not replace the seats obtained at the ballot box (Results and estimates).
What those figures meant

The absolute majority in Congress is set at 176 seats. The PP result, with 137 deputies, was 39 short of that threshold. PSOE, with 121, was 55 short, while Vox, with 33, was 143 short. Consequently, none of the three parties reached an absolute majority on their own with their electoral result (Distribution and absolute majority).

The sum of seats for PP and Vox was 170: 137 plus 33. That sum was six deputies below the 176 needed for an absolute majority. This is only an arithmetic operation on the results: it should not be confused with a parliamentary vote or a statement about the concrete support a presidential candidacy might gather (The 23J sum).

Electoral results versus polls

It is important to keep two references separate. One is the number of deputies each candidacy obtained in the July 23, 2023 elections. The other is the number a poll attributes to it for a future election. The first describes a result already produced; the second is an estimate and may vary between studies.

This distinction is especially important when headlines show different figures for the same parties. A news item may mention, for example, a seat projection and compare it with the previous result. In that case, the historical reference remains 137 for PP, 121 for PSOE, and 33 for Vox, as shown in the comparison published by Demócrata on elections and polls.

Therefore, to strictly answer your question about seats obtained, the figures you should use are those of the definitive July 23 result, not the ranges or later projections.

Play

Test your knowledge with FREN!

How much do you know about this topic? Answer the following 3 questions.

What parliamentary majority did PP and Vox have according to the aggregated polls by Demócrata before the Urda accident?

Question 1 of 3

What percentage of vote estimation did PP have before the Urda accident?

Question 2 of 3

What does Michavila recommend regarding conclusions about the effect of the Urda accident on the vote?

Question 3 of 3