ISTANBUL >> As president Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey approaches the toughest election of his career today, he has marshaled many of the resources of the state to tilt the playing field to his advantage.

Erdogan, who has come to increasingly dominate the country over the past two decades, tapped the Treasury for populist spending programs and has raised the minimum wage three times in the last year and a half. His challenger barely appears on the state broadcaster, while Erdogan’s speeches are aired in full. And this weekend’s vote will be overseen by an election board that, during recent votes, have made questionable calls that benefited the president.

And yet Erdogan still could lose. Recent polls show him trailing the main challenger, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, in a tight race that could go to a runoff later this month. But Erdogan’s grip on the country could also contribute to his undoing if voters drop him because of his strongman ways and persistently high inflation.

“The elections are not fair, but nonetheless, they are free, and that is why there is always the prospect of political change in Turkey,” said Sinan Ulgen, director of the Istanbul-based EDAM research group.

Erdogan has eroded democratic institutions, stocking the judiciary with loyalists and limiting free expression. His main challenger, Kilicdaroglu, has vowed to restore democracy if he wins.

The close race speaks to Turkey’s complicated character. Political scientists say it is neither a full democracy nor a full-blown autocracy, but rather a mix of the two in which the leader has outsize power but where elections can still bring about change.

Turkey has never tipped into full-on autocracy because electoral politics retain a hallowed place in the national identity, one revered by Erdogan himself. He and his governing Justice and Development Party have regularly trounced their opponents at the ballot box over the years with no indications of foul play, granting Erdogan a mandate.

During Erdogan’s tenure, much of Turkish foreign policy has become personally associated with him as he has proved to be a necessary but problematic partner of the West. He condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and sent aid to the Ukrainian government while not only refusing to join Western sanctions on Russia but also expanding trade ties with and drawing closer to President Vladimir Putin of Russia.