The presidential elections of 30th October position themselves on a way already expected by us: the one that is pushing on the first plan the pro-Russian candidates. The crowd from the right wing threatens to cannibalize the campaigns and the votes and to allow, last of all, full manifestation of pro-Russian voters, anyway more well-schooled at the voting.

The presidential elections of 30th October position themselves on a way already expected by us: the one that is pushing on the first plan the pro-Russian candidates. The crowd from the right wing threatens to cannibalize the campaigns and the votes and to allow, last of all, full manifestation of pro-Russian voters, anyway more well-schooled at the voting. 

Why there is a substantial advantage for the pro-Russian nominees? Firstly, it is because there are only two of them: Igor Dodon, the President of PSRM, and Dmitri Ciubasenco, the man of Renato Usatai. The withdrawal of Vladimir Voronin from the race leads to maintain the votes between those two, and the boycott urge has reduced the effect on keeping the left wing voters, because all the electoral campaign is urging to vote, but a single boycott voice does not mean anything than the abdication of communists from the electoral race, disqualified for a party.  More than that: states the fact that this party does not have a presidential nominee (or the President Voronin does not want to promote the successor pupil on this occasion, but to maintain the control over the party).

So, as long as on the left wing are two nominees, on right wing – about 5 main ones (in comparison to PDM and its counselors, I have, a very clear, evaluation that the governing party in Moldova, assumed pro-European, is perceived as right wing party. In addition, it cannot be otherwise, because the pro-European path and the reforms do not qualify in Moldova a left wing party, even if its candidate, Marian Lupu, has a confusing identity approach that can still hold him in a doctrinaire confusion).  When you share comparable votes (the last public opinion poll shows an equal report between pro-European and pro-Russian voters, with a small advantage for the pro-European side, for the first time in 2014), it is obvious that in general, each one of the pro-Russian have a better quotation than the pro-Europeans. As well as for the parties, those two from the left wing, PSRM and PN, have higher positions in the pools, their chance to enter in the second round is highly probable. 

There is another motivation, which exists a high probability that both pro-Russian nominees will ascend in the second round: gathering voters. Every public opinion poll is made on a sample that is comparable with the demographic situation from the last known opinion poll, in other words on a division of the age structure rather equal to that of the entire population. However, the capacity to gather people alters these results. For example, if voters that have more than 60 years represents 22% of the population, but are present at voting only 55% of voters from the polls, then the result will show this difference outreach. In this case, a better mobilization of this this age – most likely – leads to promotion mostly pro-Russian candidates in the second round of elections. Where the election rules are changing substantially. 

Secondly, as a probability, getting in the second tour of elections claims the votes that have been collected. From this point on, the fight between government – pro-European opposition is one that involves resources and media power, although the opposition is dominant and threatening to send a candidate in the second round. As the power is divided into two, maybe three – Lupu and Ghimpu, and eventually Leanca – preeminence stays with the candidate form the right wing. And here is the most interesting part of these elections: the unity that is behind the back of only one of the right wing nominees, most likely Maia Sandu, leads to getting in the second round of elections and to the probability of winning the elections. A weaker voice that is running against the power increase your chances of winning in the second round, but create difficulties to enter the second round.

Therefore, the decision on withdrawal of Andrei Nastase and support of Maia Sandu, for real, by PDA with the help of PLDM (with organizational resource from the field), could bring a pro-European to the second round of elections. Obviously, a better option would be a single nominee from outside of the political spectrum, with better chances than Maia Sandu’s for now.  

Will Andrei Nastase respect the agreement, that in the second round of elections, the weakest candidate to drop off? Is there the capacity of unity and working together; or the second tour of the presidential elections is already a pro-Russian business, with major costs at Bucharest for those responsible for Romania's foreign policy, the president and government (PNL)?

The analysis is still preliminary, until September 9th, when we will already have the list of the candidates, and even more, with what support. But the stakes are set. I don’t think that Marian Lupu will accede in the second round of elections, maybe only except if in the right wing will be a chaos and a sudden disappearance of “Partidul Nostru” Party candidate. Otherwise, on October 30th, we will have two pro-Russians in the second round of elections, and on November 13th, Dodon as President of Moldova. With all the costs, that such a free choice would bring to Moldova.

Of course we have a long way to go; however, the preeminence of the themes of the campaign will count as well. Depends on who will make the agenda and the modifications on the field. Therefore, if the main topics are geopolitical debates between East and West, the chances of a pro-European nominee, with a well led campaign, matters. There is more, a pro-European candidate in the second round of elections will be the winner of these elections. If we have to deal with the pre-eminence of an anti-Plahotniuc fight and of a captive state, the pro-European opposition would be main gainer. If the debate would be first of all about unionism or the identity debate, the winners would be the unionists and they will face each other on these bases. And so on. In other words, we still have to wait until more serious and more effective characteristics of the electoral perspectives. Let us wait also for the first polls after the final start of the nominees.

Naturally, if on the field appear political events or direct crises, things will change proportionally. An eventual action of the Russian army on the right side of the Nistru river, with separatist banner, would functionally affect the situation as - God forbid – any destructive crises of health or security, which could, as well, fundamentally ruin the chances of the candidates of different parties. We won’t talk anymore about eventual disclosed frauds or arrests. As possible positive surprises of some unexpected nominees, this lures a lot of public support through the created emotion and the originality of their launch. To be seen.