Special for codigopostalrd.net followers
The Chilean general elections, to be held on Sunday, November 16, 2025, mark a crucial moment for the country’s democracy, economy, and social fabric.
Voters will elect a new president to replace the current president, Gabriel Boric (whose popularity hovers around 21-30%), the 155 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, and 23 of the 50 seats in the Senate.
These are the first presidential elections since 2012 with mandatory voting (with a fine of approximately 33,000 Chilean pesos for not participating), which could increase turnout from 47% in the first round of 2021 to over 80% among the 15.8 million eligible voters.
A second round is likely on December 14 if no candidate surpasses 50% in the first round, and the winner will take office on March 11, 2026.
The elections are being held in a context of deep polarization, fueled by the social unrest of 2019-2020 (“Social Explosion”), two failed constitutional referendums, and Boric’s progressive agenda, which has stalled in terms of reforms while grappling with economic stagnation (projected GDP growth of 2-2.5% in 2025), unemployment of 8.5-8.9%, high inflation (4-5%), and growing inequality.
Among voters’ top concerns are public safety (crime has increased between 20% and 30% since 2021, and 30% of Chileans were victims last year), uncontrolled immigration (linked to organized crime), the housing shortage, and unemployment.
The recent rise of the right in neighboring Argentina (Javier Milei’s victories in the midterm elections) and Bolivia has intensified the regional trend toward conservatism.
Main Candidates and Poll Outlook
Eight candidates are registered, but the race is dominated by a fragmented right wing challenging the left. Recent polls (as of late October 2025) show a very close first round, without a clear majority.
Bookmakers like Polymarket give José Antonio Kast between a 64% and 69% chance of winning, reflecting bettors’ optimism about the consolidation of the right wing.
Polls suggest a fragmented first round (for example, Jara 25%, Kast 23%, and the rest divided among others), which would necessitate a runoff between Jara and Kast, where Kast would lead by 10-15 points.
Internal struggles on the right (Kast vs. Kaiser vs. Matthei) could initially limit support for conservatives to 35-40%, but the consolidation of power would favor them in a two-way election. Mandatory voting could intensify anti-government sentiment among young and low-income voters who previously abstained.
The election result could redefine Chile’s trajectory, with stark contrasts between a shift to the right (likely with Kast) and the continuity of the left (Jara).
A right-wing victory would signal a regional “conservative wave,” similar to Milei’s Argentina and the recent changes in Bolivia, which could stabilize markets but exacerbate social divisions.
The parliamentary results are crucial: the right wing could win a majority in the Chamber of Deputies (155 seats at stake) and an advantage in the Senate (13 center-right seats versus 10 center-left seats), allowing for the implementation of reforms without the political gridlock of the Boric era.
A victory for the right wing (Kast/Kaiser/Matthei): market-friendly deregulation, the expansion of pension privatization (the Philippine Armed Forces control 70% of GDP), tax cuts, and mining incentives could boost growth to 3-4% by 2027, attracting foreign direct investment (Chile’s copper and lithium are key to the EU’s green transition).
An appreciation of the Chilean peso is expected (CLP/USD up 5-10%), along with a revaluation of stocks (IPS index +15%) and a compression of credit spreads. Risks: Increased inequality if social spending is cut (for example, Boric’s programs aimed for 16.7% of GDP in transfers).
Expanding social welfare, labor protections, and public investment could sustain the reduction of inequality, but carries the risk of fiscal deficits (currently at 2.5% of GDP), spikes in inflation (up to 6%), and capital flight (withdrawal of the Philippine Armed Forces, exodus of investors). Growth could stagnate between 1% and 2%, with 20% of young people wanting to emigrate, indicating a brain drain.
Overall: Markets are already pricing in the likelihood of a right-wing victory (peso +3% after the Argentine results), but legislative uncertainty could delay the impacts.
Hardline immigration policies (deportations, border walls) and anti-crime measures (military patrols, mega-prisons) could reduce homicides (24% fear rate), but carry the risk of human rights violations, reminiscent of fears surrounding repression during the Pinochet era. Polarization is deepening: Kast/Kaiser’s anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric could alienate urban youth and minorities.
Focusing on prevention and social programs could address root causes (the link between poverty and crime), but could prolong insecurity if police funding is insufficient. Immigration reforms emphasize integration, but chaos persists at the border.
60% anti-party sentiment carries the risk of greater instability if reforms fail; inequalities in housing and education (e.g., 40% of attacks on homes) could trigger protests.
At the national level, the right-wing majority ends the fragmentation (the congressional gridlock of 2021), allowing for the enactment of security laws, but hinders progressive advances (for example, abortion and pensions). The defeat of the left weakens the communists and strengthens the center-right.
At the regional/global level: Kast aligns himself with Trump and Milei (pro-US intervention in Venezuela), straining relations with neighboring left-leaning countries (Bolivia and Venezuela).
Jara’s victory strengthens the remnants of the “pink tide.” The EU-Chile trade agreement (2025) thrives in an environment of stability, but polarization could hamper the supply of critical minerals (lithium for electric vehicles).
These elections could end Boric’s “progressive experiment,” ushering in a rightward shift that prioritizes security and markets over equity, reflecting the conservative surge projected for Latin America by 2025.
Kast’s likely advantage (through consolidation in the second round) offers short-term stability, but in the long run carries the risk of increased polarization, similar to that of the 1970s that gave rise to Pinochet.
An unexpected victory for Jara would defy all predictions, but would perpetuate stagnation and alienate moderates. Ultimately, mandatory voting amplifies disillusionment (60% reject political parties), demanding a post-election consensus on inequality and crime to avert a crisis.
Chile’s Election: A Pragmatic Reset or Entrenched Extremes? The winner will inherit a resilient but fractured nation; Success will depend on overcoming the 2019 split.
