The research sample is representative of the Czech adult (18+) population and was created using quota sampling; the quotas regard the participants’ sex, age, education, region of residence, and the population size of their place of residence. We further strengthen the representativeness of the sample by weighting for deviations from the main quota characteristics, as well as weighting for past voting behaviour in the October 2021 Chamber of Deputies election, the January 2023 second round of the presidential election, and for social/employment status. Data collection using online interviewing (CAWI method) of participants registered with the Czech National Panel is provided by the STEM/MARK agency, which, like STEM and the Czech National Panel, is a member of the SIMAR association of research agencies and follow its industry standards.
The eighth election model of the series was based on the responses of 1,571 participants. The respondents were interviewed in 3 waves between the 7th and 25th of February 2025. During these weeks the spring school holidays took place, always in different parts of the country.
For the best possible results, we check the attention of respondents when filling out the survey, check the logical link between the answers to questions, and we exclude survey answers that were completed suspiciously quickly. The statistical error of the sample is around ±1 percentage point for the smallest parties, and around ±3 percentage points for the larger parties.
The reported preferences and model are part of a unique research series, The Weekly Model, produced by STEM for CNN Prima News. Detailed description of the methodology can be found on our website:
https://www.stem.cz/?metodologie=tydenni-model-pro-cnn-prima-news-2025
SUMMARY
The STEM research institute, in cooperation with CNN Prima NEWS, provides the public with a new weekly election model.
The election model created by the STEM research institute based on data from the second half of February continues to be dominated by the ANO movement, which has maintained its level of support since the beginning of the year. In the current model, it would receive 33.6% of the vote, which would translate into 83 seats. From the currently governing parties, the strongest is the SPOLU coalition. Other parties that would enter the Chamber of Deputies include the STAN movement, SPD, the Pirates, and likely also the STAČILO! movement and Motoristé sobě.
The Motoristé sobě party has significant potential, and the share of committed voters grew gradually over February. With a 5% result, the party would narrowly make it into the Czech lower chamber, earning 9 seats. “The support for the Motoristé sobě is not yet consolidated. Whether it can be stabilized and the party can expand its voter base will be shown by further developments over the course of the campaign,” adds Martin Kratochvíl. He notes that Motoristé sobě show higher levels of support among the youngest age group, people with a secondary education, and men.
The STAČILO! movement, with a projected 5.7% according to the current model, would win 11 seats. While it does not have as much potential as Motoristé sobě, it relies on a bigger and more stable base of supporters. STAČILO!’s supporters are primarily found among older age groups and people without higher education.
In the area of protest votes, the SPD movement continues to dominate. It currently has the support of around 8%, which would correspond to 18 seats. As some smaller parties (Trikolóra, PRO, Přísaha) weaken, part of the protest vote may once again shift toward SPD. The movement has traditionally been strong among people without a high school diploma.
In the second half of February, the SPOLU coalition would receive 16.2%, equating to a possible 38 seats. Compared to the previous period, this represents a notable decline in support, which may have been influenced by Markéta Pekarová Adamová’s announcement that she will not run in the upcoming elections, potentially affecting some of the TOP 09 voters. It will be important to monitor whether this indicates a broader voter uncertainty within SPOLU’s base, or whether support will return to above 18%. SPOLU’s support remains evenly distributed by gender and across age groups.
The STAN movement saw a steady increase in February and would achieve 12.9%, translating to 28 seats. The movement is succeeding in capturing the attention of some less decided voters who had previously leaned toward SPOLU, the Pirates, or were hesitant about participating. STAN’s main voter base is among younger and youngest voters.
The support for Pirates stabilized in February at around 6%, with the most recent model putting them at 6.8%, one of their better results since the beginning of the year. The coming weeks will reveal whether the Pirates can clearly overcome the decrease of support caused by past crises and launch a campaign capable of gaining back lost or new voters—potentially lifting them closer to the support levels of STAN or SPD—or whether they will confirm the current trend and continue hovering just above the five percent threshold.
PARTY PREFERENCES
The party preferences show the distribution of political preferences among the entire population of respondents, i.e. including undecideds and people who are unable or unwilling to name a party preference or openly say they will not vote for any party. STEM asks for political preferences using an open-ended question and records the participants’ answers verbatim. Thus, we list groupings mentioned by the participants alongside undecideds and negative responses.
The preferences for each party are lower than would be expected from the actual election result, which is decided only by the voters who actually turn out.
“If you voted, which party would you vote for next week in an election for the Chamber of Deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic?”
(data for the second half of February 2025;
open question – no selection from a list of parties or coalitions)
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
ATTENTION: PARTY PREFERENCES DO NOT REFLECT THE ELECTION RESULT!
THE TOTAL MAY NOT ADD UP TO 100% DUE TO ROUNDING.
VOTER MOTIVATION
At the latest since the 2013 Czech general elections, we have seen significant changes in the electoral strategy of various voter groups. The number of sworn party voters has declined, the spectrum of political parties and movements has grown, and there are more frequent changes of party preference. The fluctuation between voters and non-voters is intensifying and the proportion of those who decide whether and whom to vote for only shortly before the elections is increasing. The peak of these phenomena so far was the 2021 parliamentary election – six months before the elections, a third of potential voters had been unsure about their participating in the election or who they might vote for.
Thus, uncertainty is becoming increasingly important in estimating political preferences and the fluctuations of electoral sentiment, and it makes sense to look at this phenomenon more closely and analyse its role. We have therefore prepared an overview of the groups of the Czech adult population according to their motivation to vote.
We construct an indicator of motivation to vote based on three questions:
a) willingness to vote in the upcoming election,
b) general interest in political events,
c) the strength of the relationship with the preferred party or movement (if the participant does prefer any).
We thus find that the Czech public can be divided into three groups in terms of voting motivation:
- Less than half (40–50%) of people go to the polls regularly, their participation in the parliamentary elections is very likely and they are mostly clear about whom they want to vote for.
- One third of the population (around 35%) is either unsure about their participation in the elections, hesitates about their participation or is unclear about their choice of party.
- A fifth to a quarter of the population is made out of people who do not vote and their motivation to vote is negligible.
People eligible to vote
grouped by motivation to vote in the second half of February 2025 [%]
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
The sum of the share of Stable voters and Undecided voters (83% in the second half of February) can be considered the theoretical maximum turnout that could be achieved in the Czech Republic currently. The overview of the motivation to vote further serves as a starting point for the construction of the turnout and voting model.
WILLINGNESS TO VOTE FOR INDIVIDUAL PARTIES/MOVEMENTS
In addition to stating direct support for a party or movement in an open-ended question, the research also inquires about willingness to vote for the main Czech political groupings. On a seven-point scale, participants can express the degree of “acceptability” for each of the parties, movements or coalitions.
Willingness to vote for respective political parties and movements
– second half of February 2025
“If the election for the Chamber of Deputies were held today, would you…”
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
The maximum hypothetical amount of support, the so-called potential for a given grouping, is calculated as the sum of the weights of the votes of those who chose one of the top three answers (“Definitely would vote”, ”Rather would vote” vote and “Maybe would vote”) for this grouping and who also belong to the groups of Stable and Undecided voters.
ELECTION MODEL
It is not easy to build an election model because it is difficult to estimate various parameters: which survey participants will actually participate in the election, whether the voters’ turnout motivation will be similar to the previous election or not, how last-minute emotions will be reflected in the election result and so on.
In surveys, members of the public like to present themselves as responsible citizens: when we pose a direct question, we find that up to 70% of voters want to participate in elections, but the actual turnout does not usually reach that level. Thus, the key to model electoral outcomes and voting patterns is to estimate the behaviour of hesitant and undecided citizens.
We follow a three-step process while calculating the STEM election model.
First, we identify the main groups within the public based on their motivation to vote, as described above. We do not take into account the answers of survey participants identified as Non-voters, and for the remaining two groups (Stable voters and Undecided) we estimate their probability of participation in a hypothetical parliamentary election.
We calculate the likelihood of participation in the election based on the participants’ answers to questions related to their long-term, past, and expected voting behaviour:
a) long-term tendency to vote,
b) participation in past parliamentary elections,
c) declared participation in a hypothetical general election the following week.
This probability ranges from 0 to 1, depending on how strong the participant’s voting motivation is. The weight of each participant’s vote in the model then corresponds to the probability of them turning up to the polls.
The turnout probability values are used to recalculate the data for the Stable voters group. This yields a new data set, which we refer to as Loyal voters. We treat these as the bottom threshold for the hypothetical support for the respective electoral groupings (parties and movements). In other words, these are the supporters that an electoral grouping is very unlikely to lose in the medium term, and whose support would likely only be shaken by some major scandal. Loyal voters form the basis of the STEM electoral model, as they represent about two-thirds of the votes in the model. With a modelled turnout of 60%, they make up about 41 percentage points. Undecided voters contribute the remaining third of the votes in the model (in the second half of February 2025, this is about 19 percentage points). These votes are weighed not only based on the participant’s probability of turnout but also based on the probability of them voting for the parties they are seriously considering.
Figure of the process of selecting participants for the model
STEM Election Model
– simulated election outcome under a modelled turnout of 60%
Second half of February 2025 (results in %)
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
Election model, loyal voters, maximal hypothetical vote share
second half of February 2025 (results in %)
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
SEAT PROJECTION BASED ON THE STEM ELECTION MODEL
We can estimate the number of seats for each political grouping if we apply the legal rules for converting vote shares (as given by the STEM model) into seats in the Chamber of Deputies and estimate voter behaviour patterns in the respective electoral constituencies and the national turnout level.
The seat redistribution system in the Czech Republic traditionally favours parties with the highest share of the vote. This so-called “winner’s bonus” tends to be larger the greater the gap between the leading party and the others. An advantage is also held by parties with evenly distributed support across regions, or by those that perform strongly in the four most populous regions—Moravian-Silesian, South Moravian, Central Bohemian, and Prague—where nearly half (94) of all seats are allocated.
Although the changes compared to previous weeks are not dramatic, they show that it is not only shifts in party preferences, but also the number of parties surpassing the five-percent threshold that plays a key role in the results. Moreover, even changes within the margin of statistical error can significantly affect the final distribution of seats. The results of the model should therefore be seen not only as a reflection of the uncertainty of mathematical calculations but also as evidence that, in the Czech electoral system, every vote can count.
According to the current STEM model, the ANO movement continues to dominate with a significant lead over the SPOLU coalition. However, compared to the previous week, it has five fewer seats. This is primarily due to the redistribution of nine seats in favor of Motorists for Themselves, who narrowly reached the 5% threshold in the model. Despite this, ANO maintains strong support across all regions, which still grants it a considerable bonus in the seat allocation system.
The SPOLU coalition recorded a loss of 8 seats, which can partly be attributed to the effect of seat gains for Motorists, but mainly to lower support in the current model. This development may have been influenced by Markéta Pekarová Adamová’s decision not to run in the upcoming elections.
The SPD movement continues to hold steady support, with around 18–19 seats, indicating a relatively stable voter base evenly distributed across the country.
By contrast, the situation for parties hovering just above the five-percent threshold remains highly volatile. Even small changes in support and slight shifts in the relative position of three smaller groupings can result in relatively large swings in the number of seats.
Seat projection in case the STEM election model matched the actual results
– for the second half of February 2025 (200 seats in total)
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
TRENDS IN THE STEM ELECTION MODEL
STEM election model results since the last (2021) general election [%]
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
Note: For parties that were ran as members of electoral coalitions in 2021, we calculated the individual parties’ vote share based on a STEM study undertaken shortly after the 2021 election.
**Measured as KSČM until November 2024.
***Until October 2024, the result of the SPOLU coalition was measured as the sum of the coalition’s three constituent parties.
ELECTION MODEL RESULTS BY SELECTED INDICATORS
We can examine voter behaviour in the election model grouped by generic socio-demographics. It is good to keep in mind that when splitting the election model into demographics, the statistical error also increases, and thus these sub-models should be interpreted with caution.
Election model split by sociodemographic categories
Second half of February 2025 [%]
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
OVERLAPS BETWEEN THE POTENTIAL VOTER BASES OF THE SELECTED PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS
The model shows the current support for the parties, which is made out of, to varying degrees, by loyal and undecided voters. To better understand what is happening in politics, it is useful to assess the relative proximity of the parties, i.e. where each party can potentially gain additional support from.
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
Note: The number under the party name given in the column represents the party’s electoral potential. The numbers in the cells are the shares of participants who belong to the potential of both the party given in the row and the party given in the column.
UNCERTAINTY WHEN DECIDING ON PARTICIPATION AND CHOICE IN THE UPCOMING PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS
In the seventh model, i.e. for the third week of February, in addition to questions about party preference, we also asked when people usually decide whether they will participate in parliamentary elections, and if they do participate, when do they decide which party to vote for. One third of people decide on their participation only shortly before the election — either on election day or during the final week leading up to it. This suggests that election campaigns have the greatest influence during this final phase.
Supporters of SPOLU, STAN, or the Pirates tend to decide about their participation well in advance, with more than half of them voting in every election, indicating a more stable voting behaviour.
Supporters of the ANO movement, SPD, and voters of non-parliamentary parties are slightly more likely to hesitate until the last moment, although even among them, a third report participating in all elections. The non-voter segment is, by its nature, mostly made up of people who either do not vote at all or decide at the very last minute.
Men tend to participate in elections more often than women, which corresponds to their generally higher interest in politics. Seniors (60+) are among the most disciplined voters — almost half (46%) participate in every election. This may be influenced by their generally higher interest in political affairs. Education also plays an important role: 52% of university-educated people vote regularly in all elections. People with only basic education or vocational training, on the other hand, tend to decide about their participation on election day (Friday and Saturday), which points to a lower level of electoral certainty and planning.
„When do you usually decide whether you will or will not go to vote in the parliamentary election?“
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
Across supporters of various parties, more than one-third decide who to vote for only in the week before the elections or even on the day of the elections. Another fifth decides at the end of the campaign, a month before the elections. These voters can significantly influence the final results in the last days of the campaign.
Seniors are among the most decided voters and form a stable voting base. As many as 54% of voters aged 60+ know their choice well in advance—either they consistently vote for the same party or decide months ahead. People aged 45–59 are the most divided group. A third of them decide right before the elections, while another third have made up their mind months before. This means that this age group contains both firm voter bases and undecided voters who can be addressed by the final campaign push.
Men tend to decide a little later than women. As many as 34% of men choose their preferred party a week before the elections or on the election day, which is more than among women (27%).
„And when do you usually decide, which party, movement or coalition will you vote for in the parliamentary elections?“
Those respondents who stated that they do not vote, and those who have never voted in the parliamentary elections, did not answer this question. N=1312
Source: STEM for CNN Prima News, model 2025: 08, February 2025, N=1571, CAWI
MAIN FINDINGS
- STEM is publishing a weekly election model constructed using a methodology that takes into account the increased level of uncertainty and people’s hesitancy to vote.
- Around one-fifth of the public are non-voters, while two-fifths to one-half usually vote and are usually clear about whom they will support. The remaining third are unsure about coming to the polls or unclear about their choice of party. It is this group and the estimation of their voting behaviour that is crucial for voting patterns and the electoral outcome.
- The model captures the current sentiments among voters and the possible distribution of power that would result from a hypothetical election to the Chamber of Deputies if it were held in the second half of February. The parties and movements are slowly starting up their election campaigns and specify their intentions. Some have already announced joint election efforts, and further mergers or alliances may still occur.
- The model shows the current support of the parties, which is made out of, to varying degrees by, loyal and undecided voters.
- Take note: the election model does not predict how the actual election will turn out but rather captures the current sentiments and estimates how the election might turn out if it were held now. The election year has always been a dynamic one, and there have been large changes in party preferences in the run-up to all recent general elections.
- The Czech political scene continues to be dominated by the ANO movement, which is the only electoral grouping to stably achieve results above 30% in the election models, including the current one. It remains unchallenged as the leading voice of the opposition, with a broad base of loyal voters. The ANO movement finds strong support among citizens without a high school diploma and among people over the age of 60. Women are more likely to vote for it than men. However, it does not perform poorly in any specific sociodemographic group.
- The SPOLU coalition reached a combined support of just under 16% in February. This represents the largest decline in support in STEM’s models since the beginning of the year, likely linked to the announced decision of Markéta Pekarová Adamová not to run for the Chamber of Deputies again for health reasons. SPOLU’s support remains evenly distributed by gender and across age groups.
- The STAN movement, as the remaining member of the governing coalition, is instead managing to grow, likely attracting some former SPOLU voters. In the STEM model, it currently holds just under 13% support, which would be a historic success for the movement. STAN’s main voter base is among younger and youngest voters.
- Government parties and the Pirates perform well among people with a university or secondary education, but their position is weaker among those without a high school diploma.
- The governing coalition parties and the Pirates are, in total, performing worse than they did in the last parliamentary elections. Also in February, there is no systematic voter shift from the original five-party coalition to other groupings; rather, there are internal shifts in support among these parties.
- The SPD movement continues to compete for the position of the main representative of protest votes. In the current STEM model, it has 8% support and holds fourth place. With the weakening of some smaller parties (Trikolóra, PRO, Přísaha), a portion of protest votes may shift back to SPD. The movement traditionally has strong support among people without a high school diploma.
- The Pirates have been fluctuating between 5 and 7 % in January and February, and their result remains unstable. They have partially consolidated their support compared to autumn 2024, but the effects of previous crises persist. The Pirates are now also slightly gaining at the expense of the SPOLU coalition.
- The STAČILO! movement hovered just around the five-percent threshold in January’s STEM models and would likely make it into the Chamber again now. STAČILO! supporters are mainly found among older age groups and people without higher education.
- Motoristé sobě would reach the 5% threshold in the latest February STEM model. The party has high potential, and awareness and willingness to vote for them are gradually increasing. However, they still lack a strong core of convinced supporters. The party shows higher support among the youngest age group and among men.
- SOCDEM and Přísaha are oscillating between 2 and 3%. Both parties would likely fail to enter the Chamber based on the current STEM models. SOCDEM has long struggled to regain its former supporters or attract new ones. Meanwhile, Přísaha has failed to build on its solid result in last year’s European Parliament elections. Both parties are currently negotiating possible forms of participation and collaboration in the upcoming autumn elections. SOCDEM will not collaborate with the STAČILO! movement, and Přísaha will not continue its coalition with Motoristé.
- The Svobodní party has also approached the 3% threshold in the current model. They represent a possible alternative for some supporters of both the governing parties and the opposition.
- For government or Pirate Party supporters, the Green Party has long been a second or third choice, which results in only low actual support and a weak voter base. It remains unclear whether it could surpass its 2021 result in a real election
- The potential margin of error is +/- 1 percentage point for smaller parties and +/- 3.0 percentage points for the largest ones. The results reflect public sentiment during the time of data collection, which took place in the second half of February 2025.
