Politically pragmatic behavior totally devoid of morality always has a boomerang effect. Because everything that is crude and ostentatiously unfair causes victimization, perhaps the most efficient electoral fuel.
Many say that Donald Trump won the elections on the day when a bullet grazed his ear, as a result of the wave of emotion created around the victim of a despicable attack.
Our campaign has had two "bullets" so far, hard to say if decisive, the match is still being played, but in any case, with significant effects on developments and rankings.
The Antonescu Case
The most recent was the attack against Crin Antonescu, accused of having given statements to the Securitate against a fellow teacher in his youth, in Tulcea. The conclusion was drawn following a certificate of non-collaboration with the Securitate received by Mr. Antonescu from the CNSAS, which refers to that statement.
Crin Antonescu quickly held a press conference, explained that he was summoned to the Securitate following a friend's attempted escape from the country, was asked if he knew about his intentions or others with similar intentions. And after two years, the friend managed to escape, entrusting him not only with the secret of the plan but also with the mission to inform his parents after some time.
The statement was confirmed by the friend himself, who categorically denied any collaboration, and CNSAS Vice President Mădălin Hodor specified that the statements of the two fully correspond to the reality in the file, and the verdict is non-collaboration.
We understand that Mr. Antonescu would have requested CNSAS to send him the statement from the file, and on Friday, he will receive it, it is desirable for him to make it public.
If the accusation of informing in this case is quite evidently false, it does not mean that, at some point, like in the case of Băsescu, new information cannot emerge about anyone, including Mr. Antonescu. But at this moment, based on the current data from CNSAS, it was an incorrect attack.
We can discuss, of course, whether it was a poorly thought-out compromise plan, or, on the contrary, it was well thought out as a succulent bait that many fell for, so that Crin Antonescu would then be victimized.
The fact is that, instead of bringing him down, the attack gave Mr. Antonescu the profile of a fighter against the Securitate, implicitly, subtly, against the system of that time, at least. Other friends have appeared, important statements of support like those of Marius Oprea, Cristian Tudor Popescu, or Stelian Tănase, an invaluable moment in the campaign.
And while we talk about a lie regarding Crin Antonescu's past, there is little space to observe the present.
Far more problematic than false past denunciations are present associations with extremely dubious characters, such as Ilfov baron Thuma Hubert, the friend and scandal partner of "horror asylums" with Florentin Pandele, or his campaign manager, Mircea Roșca, indicted by the DNA and escaped prescription, a convinced mystical anti-European.
Who comes out the worst? Those who jumped from the first moment to accuse Antonescu of informing, even though their candidate was the target of a similar despicable attack in the campaign for last year's local elections.
The Lasconi Case
The Lasconi case is another example of a boomerang effect when all moral boundaries are crossed.
Sure, any party has the right to support any candidate. But from the moment the documents are submitted to the BEC and the candidacy with the party's symbol remains definitive on the ballot, the die is cast.
Nothing has changed from the moment when the USR leadership was marching behind Elena Lasconi to the BEC and the moment when the same people, who didn't know how to praise her and who, many of them, owe their current mandates to her, threw her off the train, without money. It was grotesque how USR representatives in TV studios attacked the official USR candidate.
There is nothing comparable to Ludovic Orban's withdrawal last November, as that was voluntary, in the final days of the campaign, as a strategic move, not with an air of internal coup in the first days of the campaign. Orban triggered a coalition effect, the USR coup triggered division.
The blatant immorality and even illegality of the USR leadership's move had the opposite effect than expected, according to most polls. And the party is split in two.
I keep hearing people who, even if they didn't like Elena Lasconi, now look at her with sympathy and some of them do not exclude the possibility of voting for her.
Yes, politics must be pragmatic. It is not made for the faint-hearted or purists. But that doesn't mean that any hypocrisy, any immorality are acceptable, at least because they inevitably cause adverse effects far more significant than those expected.
Because defeating evil with abject means only validates another evil.