Nearly half the country had ruled out each finalist
A las puertas de la segunda vuelta peruana, una encuesta de Datum revela que el país no enfrenta tanto una elección entre dos opciones como una elección entre dos rechazos. Con casi la mitad del electorado negándose a votar por Fujimori y casi la misma proporción descartando a Castillo, Perú se encuentra ante una encrucijada que refleja algo más profundo que la política ordinaria: la búsqueda de un liderazgo legítimo en una democracia que aún no ha encontrado cómo confiar en sí misma.
- A cinco días del 6 de junio, el 48% de los peruanos descarta a Fujimori y el 43% rechaza a Castillo, convirtiendo la elección en un duelo de antipatías más que de entusiasmos.
- Las investigaciones por lavado de dinero pesan sobre Fujimori como una losa, pero Castillo no logra capitalizar ese rechazo: su propia imagen genera resistencias casi equivalentes.
- Con el 77% del electorado ya decidido, la campaña final no puede cambiar mentes —solo puede mover cuerpos hacia las urnas.
- Ambos equipos de campaña enfrentan el mismo dilema invertido: convertir el voto en contra del rival en un voto a favor propio, sin contar con el fervor que eso normalmente requiere.
- El resultado final dependerá del grupo pequeño pero decisivo que aún duda, y de cuál candidato logre que sus votantes condicionales lleguen a votar el día de la elección.
Cinco días antes de la segunda vuelta, una encuesta de Datum realizada para El Comercio entre 1,201 personas reveló un Perú profundamente dividido y, en su mayoría, ya resuelto. El 48% de los encuestados afirmó que jamás votaría por Keiko Fujimori, la candidata de derecha investigada por lavado de dinero. Sin embargo, su rival Pedro Castillo, el maestro cajamarquino de Peru Libre, enfrentaba una resistencia casi igual: el 43% lo descartaba de plano.
Los números dibujaban un electorado atrapado entre dos opciones ampliamente impopulares. Para Fujimori, solo el 32% señaló que podría apoyarla; para Castillo, el panorama era marginalmente mejor —36% expresó apertura y 15% dijo que efectivamente podría votarle— pero el patrón era el mismo: candidatos que luchan por construir coaliciones de votantes dispuestos.
Lo más revelador no era el rechazo en sí, sino que el 77% de la población ya había tomado una decisión. Esta no era una carrera que se definiría en el último momento ni por indecisos que cambian de bando. La mayoría de los peruanos sabía hacia dónde inclinarse, aunque muchos se inclinaban hacia alguien que no les convencía del todo.
En la recta final, ambas campañas enfrentaban el mismo desafío desde ángulos opuestos: no se trataba de persuadir, sino de movilizar. El margen de victoria dependería de la intensidad del apoyo entre quienes ya habían elegido bando, y del pequeño pero potencialmente decisivo grupo que aún no terminaba de decidirse.
Five days before Peru's runoff election, a Datum poll conducted for El Comercio captured a country deeply divided and largely made up its mind. The survey, which interviewed 1,201 people between May 25 and 27, found that nearly half of all Peruvians—48 percent—said they would never cast a ballot for Keiko Fujimori, the right-wing candidate under investigation for money laundering. Yet her rival, Pedro Castillo of the leftist Peru Libre party, faced nearly as much resistance: 43 percent of respondents said they would not vote for the Cajamarca teacher under any circumstances.
The numbers revealed a electorate caught between two deeply unpopular choices. For Fujimori, 32 percent said they might vote for her, while 5 percent remained genuinely undecided about which direction to go. The picture for Castillo was slightly more favorable in raw terms—36 percent said they might support him, and 15 percent indicated they could actually vote for him—but the overall pattern was the same: a candidate struggling to build a coalition of willing voters.
What stood out most sharply was not the rejection of either candidate, but the fact that 77 percent of the population had already made a decision about how they would vote on June 6. The runoff was not a race being decided by last-minute persuasion or undecided voters swinging the outcome. The vast majority of Peruvians knew which way they were leaning, even if many of them were leaning toward someone they did not particularly want.
This posed a peculiar challenge for both campaigns in the final week. Fujimori's path to victory required converting some of the 43 percent who said they would never vote for her, or at least mobilizing her conditional supporters more effectively than Castillo could mobilize his. Castillo faced the inverse problem: he needed to either shift some of the 48 percent who rejected Fujimori into his column, or ensure that his own base turned out more reliably than hers.
The poll suggested that the election would be decided not by changing minds, but by which candidate could better activate the voters who had already chosen their side—or who had chosen against the other side. In a race where nearly half the country had explicitly ruled out each finalist, the margin would likely come down to turnout, intensity of support among those willing to vote for either candidate, and the small but potentially decisive group still genuinely uncertain about their choice.
Citas Notables
32% of respondents said they might vote for Fujimori despite her money laundering investigations— Datum poll findings
36% said they might support Castillo, with 15% indicating they could actually vote for him— Datum poll findings
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that 77 percent already knew how they'd vote? Doesn't that happen in most elections?
Not like this. Usually that number means people have settled on a candidate they actually want. Here it means they've decided who they're against. That's a different kind of certainty.
So Fujimori's 32 percent who might vote for her—are those people actually supporting her, or just afraid of Castillo?
The poll doesn't tell us that. But in a runoff where 48 percent has ruled you out entirely, you're probably winning votes from people choosing the lesser evil, not from people excited about your vision.
Castillo has 36 percent who might support him and 15 percent who say they could. That's 51 percent total. Doesn't that give him an advantage?
On paper, yes. But "might" and "could" are fragile. Those voters are conditional. If turnout is low, or if his base is less motivated than hers, those soft numbers collapse.
What about the 5 percent undecided on Fujimori and the 15 percent undecided on Castillo? Aren't those the real swing votes?
They are, but they're small. The real battle is over the 32 and 36 percent—the people willing to vote for each candidate but not enthusiastic about it. Whoever can make their conditional voters feel like they have to show up wins.
Is there any way to read this poll as good news for either candidate?
For Castillo, yes—he's not as explicitly rejected. For Fujimori, the only reading is that a third of the country is still willing to vote for her despite everything. In a race this polarized, that's something.