Alexandru SOLCAN // About elections at the past present and future present
The fact that the presidential election would be lost by the European side was obvious even before it was announced. To predict it, you were not supposed to be a prophet. It was enough to follow the recent political events, the results of sociological surveys, the social-economic context, the general atmosphere in the society. It's not possible to provoke - under the cover of European integration - a big financial crisis, without being punished by the electorate: after the negative transfer of image, the pro-European vector has been damaged.
Firstly, it was a party whose leader was seen as the biggest, the most important and, in fact, the only one: a kind of chief over the whole country. That is why had declared - as one of his political priorities - the election of the President by the entire population. Sounds good. Dare to oppose when it comes to people - the exponent of national sovereignty. The suit of the public enemy would be assured for you. The idea of a president elected by the people was taken then to a platform whose leaders have named themselves - fighters for justice and truth. Try now to fight back! You risk to be sentenced to life. And yet there were some realists, who stated bluntly - referring to the teachings of history - that where the poverty, corruption and lies are prevailing, usually, the populists are chosen. In our country (the local contribution, so to speak), the favorite of the surveys in eve of the elections remained against the grain of custom, the candidate of the left, that is the pro-Russian...
For the end of the drama remained two competitors: Igor Dodon, and Maia Sandu. The socialist opt for a closer relationship with Russia and the revision of the Association Agreement with the European Union. Why must be reviewed the document that, according to the experts, is very good and even favors us, the Socialist leader avoided to tell us. Judging by the results of the first round (which by the way, were not contested), it appears that people believed him. In the second round, Igor Dodon has diluted the anti-European and anti-Romanian message, trying to convince us, slightly more insistently that by staying simultaneously in two boats is not only possible, but, apparently, even beneficial for the organism! By examining the preliminary results of the second round, this time as well we find that most voters have given credence to the allegations launched by candidate PSRM. As mentioned, a large part of Moldovans in the autumn of 2016, would be vote for Igor Dodon, regardless of what the socialist leader would have said. And the politician said exactly what they wanted to hear. As for those who have not yet understood this feature of politics in the XXI century - the marketing - we can only envy them. If it's just naive, of course!
The second candidate, Maia Sandu was really unique. She tried - in a kind of historical premiere - to unite the anti-oligarchic message with the oligarchs that stood somewhere behind her. To combine the halo of holiness, which her advocates endeavored to create for her, with the sins of her staying in government; and the pretense of a charismatic political leader, with, alas, the disappointing developments of the direct election debates. The PAS leader's performance, but also of her staff will remain, as an always instructive chapter in the annals of electoral absurd, particularly through the applied tactics.
Surprisingly for many, in the presidential runoff was recorded an exemplary mobilization of the diaspora, who has given us to understand that we are not alone and that, in fact, all is not lost.
Now we were watching the court (which examines the appeals submitted by the staff of Maia Sandu) and the Constitutional Court. Although, regardless of the verdict, a part of the society will challenge it, we can safely say. This, probably, is the only right that we managed to assimilate since the 90's onward. Even if we had only the contesting spirit, it would still be worth it to wander, more than a quarter of a century, through the scruffy of the democracy. And the fact that people stupidly have failed to assert even this right, it inspires us confidence and optimism.
Who, however, had to win and who to lose, effectively, in this election? If the answer is in front of us. But let us not hurry. The politics is an issue much more complicated than some imagine. If, in the everyday life, when one loses the other, most often wins in politics, on the contrary, the victory can turn into failure and from defeat may be taken advantages. The politics also recognizes situations when all are losers, but also cases when everybody wins. It depends on how you think and how it works. Advantaged are those who look on. Ergo: let's not reduce failures thr cause of at fraud the invocation of until satiety, but we must try, each after power to change things. The action is preferable to moan (for which neither those who still practice it, no longer have ears).
As mentioned, the presidential result was, from the outset, almost known. PD, the leading party in the current ruling coalition, trying probably, to anticipate events, decided to implement a scheme which took many by surprise. In the first stage, the Democrats withdrew their candidate from the race, then decided to relieve the duties of the president, still quite modest. This time (it can be said as surely) the government will have by its side everyone who is dissatisfied with the eventual victory of Igor Dodon. Even those who, until recently, were demanding the head of Plahotniuc. As it may be painful for some, it must be recognized that the PD is currently the only political force that can actually thwart the plans of the socialists perched at the presidency.
The presidential elections passed. Soon we will find out the decision of the Constitutional Court on the validation of the election. But we will never know, as it turns out, how many votes would be taken Marian Lupu, how many citizens living abroad were not able to vote and, the essentials, to what movie Igor Dodon wanted to invite Maia Sandu?...
Too bad, though, that the PAS leader refused multiple and insistent invitations of the Socialist leader. It could be the only feasible thing in all the electoral chatter. The Cherry on the top of the cake of a campaign that has left us with a bitter taste.