Many things have been written about the June 7 election.
Quite a few people put forth various reasons for the situation, such as not electing political experience, acting with overconfidence, ignoring the differences between political theory and practice.
In brief, in June 7 election the theme “The New AK Party” was not supported by the base of the people. The inside of “New” could not be filled with content that was “better than the old.” The best article narrating the dimension of this comparison was Yıldıray Oğur's article on 21.09.2015 titled “The Biggest Trump of the AK Party” Just the opposite of the ideas that Oğur summarized as “the withdrawal of the AK Party's new candidate list, nominating this candidate rather than that candidate will not have an effect on the result” came to pass.
In this process, the AK Party analyzed the reasons and decided to return to its organic structure.
The answer to the question “What changed between June 7 and November 1?” began with changing the Central Decision and Administrative Board (MKYK) in the AK Party Congress.
Changing the team that would manage the election process let the AK Party return to its organic structure; both the strategies and the candidates were determined with a point shot of fine engineering.
No matter what they say, winning these elections with the “old political experience” has been the biggest trump of the AK Party. The people voted for a policy they knew. The AK Party followed its strategy in the first elections. It did not give a premium to media and the general campaigns. It strengthened face-to-face communication.
The experienced names going to the field managed to mollify the voters. Even in the campaign advertisements, the pulse of the local people was felt. The campaign viral films in which Faruk Çelik highlighted the Turk-Kurd-Arab brotherhood were the most impressive works of the election period. These messages were appreciated by the people; the vote increased in Urfa by 18 percent. Of course in this process the negative attitude of the foreign conjuncture against the government caused a positive impact. The exemplary picture of what the Syrian refugees experienced, the fight against terror and the risks to continue have been shown to the people well.
The people did not give credit to the “Istanbul media.” They made their decision based on the one-to-one messages reaching them locally. Besides all the campaigns against the AK Party, the Prime Minister and the President, the support the CHP (The Republican People's Party) and HDP (The People's Democratic Party) gave to the congregation giving credit to these, can be considered among the factors that contributed to the vote increase. Besides these determinations, as the answer to the question, “What does 1 million voters' voting for the HDP for the first time becoming distant to the HDP in only 4 months mean?", I would like to share the notes I took from one of the articles of the former deputy of Batman, M. Emin Ekmen…
The Kurds said “One Minute to Qandil and Continue the Road to the AK Party”
“The first frustration for voters was when the HDP announced that it would not be a coalition partner. The second event which caused to an earthquake effect was when the KCK (The Union of Kurdistan Communities) declared an end to the ceasefire.
The votes given to strengthen the politics and complete the resolution process suddenly triggered a new wave of violence. The mind-gnawing questions were supported with events as the massacre of soldiers and police near their wives, which was difficult to explain. On the other hand with the trench wars they missed the peace of the cities.
The terror organization even could not justify participation in the trench wars declared in the towns of 100,000 people with the participation of only a few hundred, and insisted on this policy. The clashes triggered an internal migration wave. The people who lost their villages in the 1990s had to quit their shantyhouses in the suburbs. The civilians lost their lives between two fires. The attempt for the Revolutionary People War paralyzed the tradesmen and daily life in the entire region. The decrease of 24-hours of city life to 10 was disturbing. The citizens avoiding the clashes did not join the calls to rebellion, saying, “this is not my war, but yours,” and now they have rejected this war at the ballot boxes…
The Kurds only opened the discussion to those who understood Turkification as only integration with the Turkish left. Among the 80 deputies selected in the June 7 elections, since there were almost 40 representatives from the organizations, federations and collectives which had only a potential of 500 people; with their own words even the rooted HEP (The People's Labor party) base could not accept the Kurdish political movement staff to be only 18 people./ They could never understand and accept the “demonization” of a leader who started and continued the resolution process with the Kemalists, the parallel structure following the KCK cases deciphering the Oslo meetings. / The religious base did not like the harsh and extreme statements targeting first Erdoğan and then Barzani. / Having been dragged into the anti-ISIL struggle, vehemently refused statements targeting Islam and its Holy Prophet. / They were disturbed with the anti-AK Party statements targeting its Islamic identity, and HDP's without hesitation joining this chorus.
They knew Kobane and Suruç, they watched the developments in Rojava with great concern and sometimes at least with the excitement and interest they had for the Regional Kurdistan in Iraq but they did not accept turning this into a nightmare for Turkey… Now it is the AK Party's, the government's turn.” M. Emin Ekmen