I confess that for quite some time now, I feel exactly like the character of the great writer and playwright Ion Luca Caragiale. As I write these lines, my hangover hasn’t passed yet, but out of respect for readers, for those who have asked me questions, for those I discuss with, and for those who follow me on spotmedia.ro, on social networks, or on some TV shows, I consider it my duty to tell them who I vote for.
I would have liked to write a supporting article for one of the candidates, based on their qualities, their preparation, their ability to lead us, and to offer a future for Romania in the most complicated political context since the aftermath of World War II.
For almost three years, we have had a war at our border, and none of the candidates has managed to propose at least three important objectives for our country in relation to what is happening in Ukraine and how they will approach this crisis.
For several decades, since I have been following the political phenomenon in our country, rarely have I seen candidates as clueless as now. We literally have a former Deputy Secretary-General of NATO who wants to become the President of Romania and who publicly supported the idea that Ukraine should give up territories for peace. I'm talking about Mircea Geoană.
He said it with the calmness of a teenager whose brain has been bombarded with pro-Kremlin messages on TikTok, without flinching that changing borders somewhere in Europe, following a military invasion, would call into question the entire international stability and open the way to a possible forceful alteration of all borders, including Romania's, putting the country in front of a major revisionist danger.
Iohannis, a total political failure in terms of an alternative to PSD
The rest of the important candidates have oscillated between villainy and cluelessness, creating real crises of conscience among voters. In my life, I have never heard and seen so many people shrug and say they don't know who to vote for.
This happened mainly because there was not a single candidate on the right side of the political spectrum. It would have been simpler: in the race, there would be PSD, with Marcel Ciolacu; there would be Russia with local conspirators, but also a bit of PSD, which would parade with George Simion; on the right side, with its ups and downs, conservatism mixed with progressivism, as we have been accustomed to, there would have been a single candidate. Three forces, three options - much easier to choose.
But it was not meant to be. There are many explanations, but in my opinion, the main cause is the total failure of Iohannis in his second term to create and shape a credible political alternative to PSD. In reality, the president has been the main driving force behind the revival of the state-party, which was dying in 2020.
And thus, we find ourselves in a situation where the social democrats have a free hand to launch the specific political manipulations through which they have significantly altered the political landscape, sidelining the extremist Diana Șoșoacă, but leaving the extremist George Simion, thus creating the position of a "useful idiot" for Marcel Ciolacu, in the presidential final. A repetition of the 2000 election, Iliescu-Vadim. That's as far as Hrebenciuc and associates could think.
Fragmentation has massively favored PSD
Thus, center-right voters found themselves in the unpleasant situation of being forced to split their votes among at least three candidates - Nicolae Ciucă, Elena Lasconi, and Mircea Geoană, although they represent the most important political force in Romania, over 50% of the votes.
None of the three political leaders had the power, preparation, and ability to dominate the others and somehow convince the electorate that only one of them represents the center-right options.
Each of them has certain qualities, but also a lot of skeletons in the closet, plagiarism, dubious associations, and attitudes of unwarranted superiority.
So personally, I had to choose between Elena Lasconi and Nicolae Ciucă. I would have voted for the latter if I had the slightest hint that he would make it to the second round. This doesn't mean he can't. But at no point during this campaign did I have information, data, or hints that the liberal leader has a chance to advance to the final round.
Instead, I had a lot of statements and assurances from PNL representatives that their mayors would solve the problem.
The salvation is supposed to come from their 1,100 liberal mayors - it was the most used expression throughout the campaign, a kind of guarantee to the public that the party leader cannot miss the final.
Indeed, I am not in a position to dispute this. I have neither arguments nor data, but if it is true, the liberals will manage to push Nicolae Ciucă into the second round even without my vote.
A vote for Elena Lasconi
And because since 1990 I have been voting with a single purpose, that of keeping the most dangerous politicians for Romania's democracy as far away from power as possible, or at least to diminish it, I thought that a vote for Elena Lasconi is more useful for those on the right than for Ciucă.
This doesn't mean that I wasn't horrified by the self-sufficiency of the USR leader, by the fact that she failed to break away from the PRO star airs, which at one point had Romania at her feet.
I didn't understand why she didn't prepare and didn't manage to build an image that would transfer more trust, more professionalism to the voters.
On the other hand, I cannot help but notice her naturalness, sincerity, and ability to take risks.
I don't know if Elena Lasconi will be a good president for Romania if she wins the elections or one who will quickly alienate society.
Generally, I don't have illusions about politicians, all those in power will ultimately disappoint, because they change, and the country changes.
The blame for the result lies not with the voters, but with the candidates
I confess that in 2019 I was wondering what the Ukrainians were thinking when they elected Volodymyr Zelensky as president, a comedy actor, arrogant and superficial at the helm of a country constantly threatened by Russia.
It was as if, in Romania, Florin Călinescu had won the presidential elections and had taken office at the Cotroceni Palace.
Events have shown that after three years of mediocre mandate, that actor emerged bare-chested in front of Russia's military machinery, united the country, inspired it, saved it from invasion, and became a Churchill of our days.
This doesn't mean he won't lose the elections next year or whenever they are held. That's democracy.
On the other hand, who would have expected in 2014 that Iohannis would become such a political catastrophe, with monarchic tendencies and obsessed with himself, the one for whom millions of Romanians took to the streets, marched, supported, and voted to save Romania from sliding towards authoritarianism imposed by PSD?
As I write these lines, I have no idea who will make it to the presidential final. There are four candidates - Simion, Lasconi, Ciucă, and Geoană - within the margin of error of opinion polls, with over 15% of voters declaring they will go to the polls, undecided, and from discussions with sociologists, politicians, and consultants, it seems that voting day will start without a clear favorite for the second place in the final, with some expecting even bigger surprises.
We should expect many invalidated votes, arrangements in polling stations, irregularities, and chaos in counting and submitting the minutes. Nothing has changed. It will be the same as in local and European elections, the difference being that now, PSD and PNL are in direct competition and, to a large extent, it will be a battle between the two formations.
In my opinion, each voter should follow their own reasoning and vote accordingly. It's good to do so, always with reason, not with emotion.
And one more thing must be said, for what will follow after the series of elections, it's never the fault of the voters, but of the politicians who have won and have scorned the votes they received.