Colombian vice-presidential candidate Juan Daniel Oviedo has acknowledged that a portion of his political base of supporters feels disappointed after his decision to join right-wing presidential hopeful Paloma Valencia, but insists the sense of betrayal is not widespread.
In an interview with ColombiaOne, Oviedo said internal campaign measurements suggest that only “one out of every five voters” who supported him in the internal consultations now feel upset or deceived by his political move — an admission that highlights the risk of backlash as he attempts to reposition himself in one of Colombia’s most polarized electoral environments.
“We already did measurements, and we have a clear picture that this feeling of betrayal is not the majority perspective,” Oviedo said. “Only one out of every five people who voted for me were bothered by the decision, but they are also paying attention to what happens in the next 30 days.”
Related: Colombian Elections: Valencia and Oviedo Publicly Disagree Over Uribe.
National recognition for former DANE director
Oviedo, who gained national recognition as the former director of Colombia’s National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE), received approximately 1,255,000 votes in the internal consultations, becoming one of the most visible figures in the early stage of the 2026 race.
His decision to align with Paloma Valencia, a prominent conservative politician, has fueled debate among voters who previously saw him as a centrist or independent technocrat. During the interview, Oviedo directly addressed the criticism that he “sold out” or abandoned the political identity that initially attracted many of his supporters.
“There’s this idea that because Paloma won, then I sold myself, I knelt down, I betrayed my people,” he said. “But that’s not really what is happening.”
While he defended the alliance, Oviedo’s own numbers reveal a significant warning sign: 20% dissatisfaction among his consultation voters could translate into hundreds of thousands of disillusioned supporters — an important bloc in a country where electoral outcomes are often decided by slim margins and shifting coalitions.
Oviedo framed his decision as a response to Colombia’s current political moment, saying he is prioritizing what he believes the country needs rather than personal ambitions.
“For me, it has been very exciting because it is also about understanding the dynamics of politics,” Oviedo said. “It has been exciting to feel that I’m making decisions aligned with the country’s moment, and not necessarily with my personal political interests.”
He also referenced what he described as a common political expectation: That after winning more than 1 million votes, he should have stepped back, consolidated his image, and prepared for a future campaign such as the Bogota mayoral race.
“The big question in the air is: This guy got 1,255,000 votes, he should save them, wait, rest a little bit, and then go ask for the vote for mayor of Bogota,” Oviedo said.
Instead, he said he believes Colombia is facing an urgent crossroads that requires immediate action, warning that the country is at risk of being trapped between what he described as two political “telenovelas” (soap operas) or simplistic narratives competing for power.
“If we don’t act, sadly we will end up between two soap operas,” he said, describing one narrative as built on class resentment — “let’s make the rich cry” — and the other as a politics of blind faith — “pray and vote for someone who will perform a miracle.”
Moving away from emotional extremes
Oviedo argued that Colombia must move away from emotional extremes and focus on what he called the nation’s real and urgent problems. He said the country faces “five time bombs” that must be defused to stabilize Colombia, though he did not list them in detail during the interview.
His remarks come as candidates across the political spectrum attempt to build broader coalitions ahead of the decisive campaign season. For Oviedo, the challenge is particularly complex: His appeal has been rooted in data-driven governance and institutional credibility, qualities that attracted moderate voters but may now be tested by his decision to join a more ideologically defined ticket.
Still, Oviedo suggested the reaction among his voters is not final and could change depending on how the campaign develops in the coming weeks. He said the dissatisfied voters remain attentive and could reconsider their position before the end of May. “They’re watching what happens in the next 30 days, to define themselves on May 31,” he said.
That timeline suggests the Valencia-Oviedo campaign is working to contain reputational damage and persuade skeptical supporters that the alliance is strategic rather than opportunistic.
The coming month may be critical. If Oviedo succeeds in winning back skeptical voters, he could provide Valencia with a broader appeal beyond the traditional right. But if the sense of disappointment spreads beyond the reported 20%, it could weaken his value as a coalition partner and reinforce the narrative that his political identity is unstable.
For now, Oviedo is betting that most of his supporters will accept his explanation: That Colombia’s political moment requires uncomfortable decisions — and that the risk of staying neutral is greater than the risk of choosing sides.