Half of Ukrainians would not vote again for a politician who failed to keep promises

51% of Ukraine’s residents consider the fulfillment of campaign promises unconditionally important and would categorically refuse to vote again for a politician who failed to keep them.

These are the findings of a sociological survey conducted on behalf of “Slovo i Dilo” from May 22 to 29, 2026.

The survey was conducted using an online questionnaire on the specialized “Lemur” platform (CAWI — Computer Assisted Web Interviewing). It involved 1,200 respondents aged 18 and over from across Ukraine, excluding temporarily occupied territories. The statistical margin of error at a probability of 0.95 does not exceed 2.89% for indicators close to 50%.

A further 16% of respondents indicated that their assessment of promise fulfillment depends on objective circumstances that may have prevented the politician from keeping them — such as war or crises. For 13%, this is an important but not the primary criterion for their choice. 8% of respondents each either pay no attention to promises at all, viewing them as ordinary campaign PR, or found it difficult to answer. The smallest share — 4% — considers the fulfillment of prior promises a secondary factor: what matters more to them is the politician’s current actions, their present position, and their new platform.

Gender differences in responses were also recorded. Men are somewhat more likely than women to categorically refuse to re-elect a politician who fails to keep promises — 54% versus 49%. Men also more frequently cite promise fulfillment as an important but not primary criterion — 16% versus 11%. Among women, twice as many found it difficult to answer: 10% versus 5%.

By age group, respondents aged 30–44 show the greatest uncompromising stance: 55% of them named failure to keep promises as the main reason to withhold support. Among young people aged 18–29, this figure is the lowest — 45%, though young respondents significantly more often describe promises as an important but not primary factor: 20% versus 9% in the 30–44 age group. Respondents aged 45–54 are noticeably more likely than younger people to take objective circumstances into account — 21% versus 12%. The highest share of those who found it difficult to answer was also recorded among young people: 12% versus 4% in the 45–54 age group.

The regional picture shows the greatest categorical stance in southern Ukraine: 60% of residents of that region would under no circumstances vote again for a politician who failed to keep promises. The lowest level of categorical rejection is in the north of the country: only 42% hold this position. At the same time, northerners show a greater willingness to take objective circumstances into account — 20% versus 13% in the center. Residents of the west were more likely than others to find it difficult to answer: 12%, which is twice the figures for the east and south — 6% each.

A previous “Slovo i Dilo” survey showed that Ukrainian society is also divided on the question of freedom to criticize the authorities during wartime. 45% of respondents believe that criticism should remain fully permitted as a tool for holding the authorities accountable, while other respondents either oppose this or support only partial restrictions.