Colombia decides president in a context of boom: its economy flies

In addition to Cepeda, the left-wing candidate, there are two right-wing candidates with possibilities of reaching the second round. Abelardo de la Espriella ranks second in electoral forecasts. He is the bet of the far-right, and his proposal imitates movements like Nayib Bukele’s in El Salvador or Javier Milei’s in Argentina, emphasizing issues such as public order and social control.

Behind Abelardo, polls place Paloma Valencia, from former president Álvaro Uribe Vélez’s party. Valencia is the candidate of the traditional conservative right, and she has the challenge of managing to unite the opposition to Petro’s executive in a divided political space. She is paired with Juan Daniel Oviedo, who aspires to the vice presidency and presents himself as a centrist profile, and is the representative of the most moderate current of the traditional right. However, Oviedo’s visibility in the candidacy may work against Valencia.

“Abelardo presents himself as the true right-wing candidate and insists that he does not align with what has been called the center,” states Juan Camilo Lozano, a professor at the Faculty of Political and Social Sciences at the National University of Colombia. In a global climate of polarization and reactionary rise, Abelardo can easily capture voters from the traditional right. The latest polls corroborate this: the far-right candidate would achieve 30% of the votes, while Valencia would remain around 15%.

This scenario represents an important change in the right-wing bloc. Until now, the Colombian right had been “co-opted” by the figure of Álvaro Uribe, Lozano details. Abelardo, however, distances himself from the former president’s figure. “He does not offend him and does not confront him, but he does not consider him a benchmark. He talks about security, one of Uribe’s banners, but his discourse distances itself from that of the former president,” he adds. Even if Valencia achieves good results, the division within the right is already a fact.

Favorable context for Cepeda

The wind is blowing in favor of Cepeda thanks, in part, to the macroeconomic context in which Petro leaves Colombia: “Despite the fear of some actors at the start of the legislature that inflation and the exchange rate would skyrocket during Petro’s mandate, indicators have remained mostly stable,” explains Juan Carlos Arenas, researcher at the Institute of Political Studies of the University of Antioquia.

The Economist ranked Colombia as the fourth country in the world with the best economic performance in 2025 in December. Also at the end of 2025, Colombia registered the lowest unemployment rate in 25 years, and the executive has approved the highest minimum wage increase in decades.

Despite the good macro data, more than half of Colombians work without a contract. One of the main challenges the new president will inherit will be to continue rectifying this reality, but also issues such as corruption, the increase in violence in some regions, and the crisis that the health system is going through, which has become one of the main themes of the electoral campaign. The reality is that the country’s hospitals are highly strained and medicines are often lacking. The interpretation of the reasons varies: generally speaking, Petro’s supporters accuse private intermediaries of corruption, while detractors point to underfunding of the health system by the State.

Relations with the USA

On an international level, Colombians are deciding this Sunday whether to maintain their challenge to the United States or to yield to its interests and the White House’s desire to influence the continent. In the last year and a half, Petro has been one of Latin America’s main battering rams against Donald Trump. His stance against American imperialism cost him the withdrawal of his US visa at the end of September, and in October, the American president accused the Colombian without proof of being “a drug trafficking leader.” Trump’s words then recalled the verbal attacks he also leveled at Nicolás Maduro, and after the capture of the Venezuelan president, Trump himself warned that Colombia would be “the next target” of the United States.

Against all odds, however, tensions between the two countries eased when Trump received Petro at the White House in February

, in a meeting that initially unsettled journalists and analysts when a climate of understanding and détente was observed between the two leaders, with Petro even smiling in the official photos. Later, one of the reasons for the understanding was explained: the Colombian president offered support to the American in his plans for Venezuela’s economic future, hinting at the participation of the Colombian state oil company Ecopetrol in the economic reactivation of the neighboring country.

In relation to the United States, Petro’s successor maintains the anti-imperialist stance of the outgoing president, but with nuances. “Cepeda is less oriented towards political spectacle,” points out Arenas. “Petro usually sends messages that he knows and calculates will have an impact on public opinion, while Cepeda will surely focus on addressing the relationship with the US from a more institutional and less media-driven perspective, but without renouncing the principles, which he fully shares with Petro,” details the expert.

On the right, affinity with Trump is shared by both candidates. Both want to cooperate with Washington and its interests, but they differ on a key issue. “Paloma Valencia has made it clear that she will hand over Gustavo Petro to the United States if they request his extradition, but she will not seek for this to happen,” details Lozano. “The essential difference with Abelardo de la Espriella is that he has openly said that he will promote extradition and actively seek United States intervention in Colombia to decapitate and weaken the left,” he concludes.