The discussion about the withdrawal of one of the non-PSD candidates is in itself nonsense, but which, in subtext, confirms, at least in the case of PNL, exactly what the liberals want to deny.
Withdrawal is no longer legally possible after the ballots have been printed. There are already stamped ballots sent following the vote by correspondence. Even if one of the candidates, God forbid!, passes away, they will remain on the ballot. And in a commune, at one point, it actually happened that a deceased candidate won during the campaign.
What could theoretically happen is for one of the candidates to announce to their supporters that they no longer wish to be voted for and, eventually, to urge them towards another candidate. This would mean the end of that politician's individual career. So the motivation for such a gesture must be of extreme gravity, leaving no room for discussion.
But even if this announcement were to occur, it is by no means certain that all, not even the majority, of their voters would follow the direction indicated by the one who is withdrawing.
And then why all the fuss?
On the one hand, simply invoking the withdrawal of a candidate pushes them into a defensive zone. Instead of being offensive, they are forced into a defensive position to deny. Furthermore, invoking withdrawal implies a reason, which can only be serious since it requires such a gesture. This uncertainty erodes the image of a candidate and complicates their dynamics.
But invoking, especially insistently, the withdrawal of competitors by a candidate puts them in a defensive position, exposing their vulnerability.
There are discussions about two types of withdrawals.
1. Withdrawal of candidates from the so-called right-wing in favor of one of them. If Elena Lasconi proposed and abandoned the idea some time ago, now the liberals almost hysterically demand the withdrawal of all in favor of Nicolae Ciucă invoking the specter of Simion.
We are not in the local election paradigm, meaning the elections in one round, where the concentration of votes is vital because there is no second round, where it could revolve around the best placed candidate.
In the paradigm of two-round elections, each candidate gathers their own pool of votes and the best placed one reaches the final where they absorb a good part of the pools of those who dropped out of the race.
Yes, it is the first time when two large blocks, PSD and anti-PSD, are not automatically qualified for the final. We practically have the PSD candidate already qualified and about 4 candidates competing, with close scores, for the other spot in the final: Simion, Ciucă, Lasconi, and Geoană.
If Mr. Ciucă is sure of the second place, as the liberals claim and some opinion polls suggest, why would someone need to withdraw in his favor? And why would everyone need to withdraw? How poorly is Mr. Ciucă really faring in the polls if all the candidates from the "right-wing" need to withdraw in his favor?
The insistence with which the liberals demand the withdrawal of the other candidates shows that Mr. Ciucă is by no means close to the second place in the polls and needs a lot of percentage points to get there, despite the advantage of a large but somewhat undisciplined party that does not believe in him.
2. Withdrawal of George Simion following the "Russian agent" scandal. It is extremely unlikely for him to do so, regardless of what revelations may come to light. His supporters either do not believe or do not care about any links with Russia, and since the chances of him reaching the final are high, it will have a major impact on AUR's score in the parliamentary elections.
And no one has an interest in removing him from the race. Ciucă needs his scarecrow to reach the final, and Ciolacu will need him in the final. But let's say they wake up at the last minute and sacrifice their own electoral interests to avoid massively boosting AUR in the future parliament and risking losing control in the second round.
As I was saying, after the episode of Șoșoacă's removal, it will be very easy for Simion to massively victimize himself, which will further mobilize his electorate.