Sánchez beats Feijóo with Jordi Wild: who wins in ratings and how it compares with TV

The interviews by Jordi Wild add up to 15.3 million views in the analyzed count. Sánchez leads the ranking with 6.3 million, followed by Feijóo, with 5.5 million, and Colau, with 3.5 million. The Frente Amplio candidate, however, obtains the highest proportion of "likes" relative to the views

Retrato editorial de podcast geométrico

Retrato editorial de podcast geométrico

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

Last updated

5 minutes

Most read

Elecciones 29N · Encuestas

La media de las encuestas

Media a 15 de noviembre de 2026 · 16 institutos

  • PP31,4 %
  • PSOE26,9 %
  • Vox19,1 %
  • Frente Amplio6,3 %
  • ERC2,5 %
01020304050ene 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

ELECCIONES 29N

¿Cuál es tu pronóstico? 29N

Reparte los 350 escaños del Congreso como creas que quedarán el 29 de noviembre. Puedes cambiar tu pronóstico hasta que cierren los colegios.

0 de 350 escaños

PP
PSOE
Vox
Frente Amplio
ERC
Junts
EH Bildu
PNV
Más partidos
Podemos
BNG
SALF
CC
UPN
Adelante
Aliança
Otros

Protegido por reCAPTCHA de Google: privacidad y condiciones

Pronóstico de DemócrataParticipación abierta, no es una encuesta

Pedro Sánchez leads in the election interviews of Jordi Wild. His conversation reaches 6.3 million views in the analyzed cut, compared with 5.5 million for Alberto Núñez Feijóo and 3.5 million for Ada Colau. Between the three of them, they bring together 15.3 million playbacks.

The gap between the head of the Government and the leader of the PP is around 800,000 views. Sánchez also tops the "likes" in absolute terms, although Colau holds first place when calculating how many of those interactions each interview obtains per thousand playbacks.

There are two different rankings: one measures the cumulative volume; the other, a ratio between interactions and playbacks. Neither lets you know on its own who has convinced more voters.

Sánchez changes the order in the first hours

The ranking has changed with respect to the first count published by Demócrata. At the time, Feijóo led in playbacks, ahead of Colau and of Sánchez, whose conversation had been the last to be released.

Now Sánchez is positioned ahead of both. With the rounded figures from the new cut, his interview accumulates approximately 14.5% more views than Feijóo’s.

Colau remains in third position by volume, two million behind the president of the PP. The distance describes the circulation of the videos, but it does not allow concluding that her participation had a negative electoral effect.

How many views and "likes" does each interview have

The count includes approximately 329,000 "likes": 138,000 for Sánchez, 108,000 for Feijóo, and 83,000 for Colau.

The following table incorporates an additional calculation: the number of "likes" per each 1,000 views. It allows comparing that specific interaction without confusing the total size of each video with its proportion of responses.

Jordi Wild interviews: views and interaction
Candidate Accumulated views Likes Likes per 1,000 views
Pedro Sánchez 6.3 million 138,000 21.9
Alberto Núñez Feijóo 5.5 million 108,000 19.6
Ada Colau 3.5 million 83,000 23.7

Cut of the count provided to the editorial office on November 15, 2026. Rounded figures and subject to update. Own calculations based on those values. Views do not equate to distinct people or complete interviews watched.

Colau leads in the proportion of "likes"

Colau’s interview earns about 23.7 “likes” per thousand plays. Sánchez records 21.9 and Feijóo, 19.6.

Expressed as a percentage, the ratio is approximately 2.37% for Colau, 2.19% for Sánchez, and 1.96% for Feijóo. This ranking places the Frente Amplio candidate ahead despite having the lowest number of views of the three.

The indicator has limited reach. It is not an approval poll, it does not measure all interactions, and it also does not reveal why someone clicks “like”: it may reflect valuing the guest, the interviewer, an answer, or the conversation as a whole.

It does allow for a precise conclusion: in this snapshot, Colau’s video gathers more “likes” in relation to its play count.

Who wins and who is left behind

Sánchez leads in two figures: accumulated views and total “likes.” Feijóo retains second place in both, although he has lost the first position he held in the initial count.

Colau is third by volume and first in the proportion of “likes.” Talking about a single winner or a single loser would hide that difference.

The absence of Santiago Abascal raises another issue. The leader of Vox ultimately did not participate in the special, so there is no equivalent interview with which to compare his performance. That absence kept him out of the published conversations, but the counters do not allow calculating whether the decision cost him votes.

The order among the three participants also cannot be considered definitive. To study who maintains higher growth, it would be necessary to compare two records taken at known times and with the same interval. Increases without a common time reference are not enough to project the final outcome.

Fifteen million views are not fifteen million people

The sum of the three videos measures plays, not a single combined unique audience. The same person can watch all three interviews or return to a conversation more than once.

YouTube distinguishes views from its estimate of unique users. It also separates the unique user of a video from the unique user of the channel: someone who watches several pieces may appear in the individual audience of each one, even if it is only one person within the set.

Without the channel’s internal data, it is not possible to determine how many different people have followed the special, how long they have been watching each interview, or how many have reached the end.

Therefore, the figure of 15.3 million expresses the accumulated volume of reproductions of the three conversations. It does not certify 15.3 million different viewers.

Jordi Wild vs. television: what viewer figures say

Television political interviews offer a reference point to gauge interest, although they use a different measure.

Sánchez’s visit to La Revuelta on October 22 recorded 4,387,000 viewers on average. Abascal’s on November 9 reached 4,815,000, while Colau’s the following day obtained 3,050,000.

Political interviews: digital reproductions and television audience
Content Figure What it measures
Sánchez with Jordi Wild 6.3 million Accumulated views in the analyzed cut
Feijóo with Jordi Wild 5.5 million Accumulated views in the analyzed cut
Colau with Jordi Wild 3.5 million Accumulated views in the analyzed cut
Sánchez on La Revuelta · October 22 4,387,000 Viewers on average during the television broadcast
Abascal on La Revuelta · November 9 4,815,000 Viewers on average during the television broadcast
Colau on La Revuelta · November 10 3,050,000 Viewers on average during the television broadcast

These are different metrics and do not constitute a joint ranking. YouTube accumulates reproductions; the average television audience estimates the average number of viewers during the broadcast. Television data published by RTVE and EFE.

The 6.3 million of Sánchez’s video numerically surpass the 4.387 million average audience figures for his visit to Broncano. But that does not prove that more people watched it with Jordi Wild: RTVE said that that broadcast reached more than 7.1 million unique viewers.

Television also generates subsequent consumption on the internet. In the report published the day after Sánchez’s visit, RTVE counted 38.42 million views on social media linked to the program. That figure included posts distributed across different platforms, not exclusively a complete interview. The Sánchez–Feijóo head-to-head in July 2023 also shows the difference between the measures: it gathered 5,911,000 viewers on average and 11,357,000 unique viewers, according to Barlovento’s report with data from Kantar.