On Sunday, November 16, Chile held presidential and parliamentary elections under a system of automatic registration and compulsory voting, reaching turnout levels close to 85%. This figure places the country at an unusual level of mobilization and shows that when access conditions are eased and civic responsibility is reinforced, citizens respond forcefully. High turnout, however, does not dilute the tensions currently running through the country; on the contrary, it casts them into sharper relief looking ahead to the December 14 runoff.
Preliminary results confirmed an open scenario: the communist candidate Jeannette Jara obtained 26.8%, the far-right candidate José Antonio Kast 23.9%, and the populist Franco Parisi around 19.6%. Far from clarifying the landscape, these numbers reveal a country that no longer distributes its support according to traditional cleavages. Competition among three poles marks the end of stable bloc dominance and reinforces the notion of an electorate that rewards options capable of dialoguing beyond their borders, even when ideological differences seem difficult to reconcile.
In the parliamentary arena, the picture is even more complex. The right and far right made significant gains, but did not achieve uncontested control that would allow them to govern without broad agreements. At the same time, an institutional development of considerable weight takes on special relevance: a significant number of parties failed to reach the legal threshold needed to maintain their formal existence. Among them are historic groups such as the Radical Party, as well as centrist and liberal-right forces like Evópoli and Amarillos por Chile. The forced reduction of the party map reshapes not only the political supply but the very structure of the Chilean political system, creating a scenario where fewer labels converge, though not necessarily with greater cohesion. This contraction generates both opportunities and uncertainties: it simplifies processes, but also eliminates intermediate spaces that, at other times, facilitated cross-cutting agreements.
In this context, the failure of José Miguel Insulza to win a Senate seat becomes a symbol of a broader generational and political shift. His absence deprives the center-left of a figure with vast experience in negotiation and consensus-building—elements needed in the fragmented Congress now emerging. Chilean politics thus loses a voice widely recognized for its ability to build bridges between ideologically distant sectors.
The left enters the runoff with an evident challenge. Although Jara leads the first round, her percentage reflects the difficulty of expanding her base toward moderate sectors that, in other elections, served as a meeting point. The task for progressives will be to appeal to those who seek institutional stability and coherent public policies without resorting to polarizing rhetoric. In a context of profound transformation, the left has the opportunity to present itself as an anchor of democratic responsibility—provided it manages to combine renewal with institutional continuity.
On the right, Kast’s surge has been significant, supported by the centrality of issues like security, migration, and public order. But his leadership coincides with an internal reorganization in which different visions coexist. Although Kast mobilizes a relevant segment of the electorate, he does not control the entire right-wing space nor fully absorb those who identify with a liberal or moderate approach. Parisi’s sustained emergence—with a vote that shuns labels and formal structures—confirms that there is a broad segment that does not feel represented by any of the traditional coordinates. That electorate is not captive and will likely be decisive both in the election and in subsequent governability.
The road to the runoff, then, is not merely a confrontation between two names. It is a dispute over the type of country that people want to build amid a political process in transition. Kast may draw support from the conventional right, while Jara can appeal to the broader progressive camp and to those seeking to avoid political hardening on sensitive issues. How each candidacy interprets the signals of a plural, demanding, and complexity-weary country will be crucial. Participation—thought by many to be depleted in previous cycles—again appears as a key factor: a mobilized electorate tends to favor broader proposals, while lower turnout could tilt the process toward more segmented options.
The institutional impact of this election cannot be underestimated. With a Congress lacking automatic majorities and a party map undergoing contraction, the next government will require real negotiating capacity. Governability will be built project by project, with agreements that must be more solid and transparent than in previous cycles. The disappearance of several traditional parties, added to the departure of seasoned political figures, alters the internal dynamics of Parliament and demands new leadership capable of engaging in more pragmatic and less doctrinaire dialogue. For the center-left, this means rebuilding its capacity for articulation; for the right, moderating or expanding its range of action to govern a diverse country.
The 2025 elections mark a turning point in recent political history. Unprecedented turnout reaffirms the vitality of the democratic system, while electoral and parliamentary fragmentation redraws the landscape with greater complexity. The runoff will determine not only who will lead the country, but also how governability will be shaped in an environment where no single force can impose its agenda.
Chile thus enters a stage in which dialogue, moderation, and institutional responsibility will not be rhetorical gestures but necessary conditions for maintaining political stability. Turning this balance into an opportunity will depend on the maturity with which political forces understand that the country demands fewer soapboxes and greater capacity for agreement. And it may be here—more than in the immediate outcome—where the deeper meaning of this electoral cycle is decided.
Autor
National Coordinator of Electoral Transparency for Mexico and Central America. Master in Governance, Political Marketing and Strategic Communication from King Juan Carlos University (Spain). University professor.
