Iulian CHIFU // The single candidate and the theory of the useful vote
After general sustained efforts, about five months later than it would have been really helpful to have an assured victory, the pro-European opposition of the right wing managed, finally, to nominate a single candidate. It is true that on the road have gone four parties, in March-April, with PPEM included in the group; it is true that the best option would have been the alliance with civil society and even a candidate that is outside of the parties. But we do not judge anymore today in these terms: we take the present reality and we look at developments and chances of success.
It is Obviously that it's a very late nomination. And the delay is causing difficulties in public communication of this major change - the existence of the single candidate - until the last hamlet. Or this is the big bet of the group of three parties: to inform the public of the fact that there is a single candidate. And he must reach as many places as he can along with his supporters, in Moldova, at least in the big cities and in the surrounding villages, certainly in Gagauzia and Taraclia. And, meanwhile, to have a component of media force on which to make a communication of full actions and opinions of the program and the prospects of the new candidate.
Igor Dodon is further anticipated with the first chance. It is natural. He's an old candidate, he has as supporter the largest party and resources which we learn, from the revelations of former comrades and heads of the campaign, that they come from foreign donors in the East, whose interests they defend. And he began to overturn his position, to avoid frightening the voters, especially since the substantial majority are pro-European. However, Dodon must be stopped - and perhaps this is the effort and message for the second round. Now the new single candidate must be promoted, decently, but with strength and visibility as a reformist and a knower of the system from the inside, so weighted by facts. Not revolutionary, not challenging the system, not anti-state and anti-system (and I'm not referring at all to the Plahotniuc system, the "trading company" stat, the lubrication of the gears with unintended money who have perverted everything and will create difficulties in the future; this system must be removed, of course).
The story of early elections, imposed by Andrei Nastase remains as a loser stone, because early elections are not feasible in the context of Moldova and of the existing stable majority. More: it is the duty of the President to decide early elections but constitutionally, the inability to pass through Parliament two successive governments. Perhaps this would be the most decent exit for Maia Sandu: to argue that, as soon as the Government will fall, after what two new attempts will prove to be unsuccessful in the Parliament, will immediately convene early elections.
So we have single candidate. How do we proceed? How relevant is this?
All the opinion polls, more accurate or more approximate, with or without sociologists, all of them recorded the perspective of polarization of the votes on the two candidates, Igor Dodon - the left pro-Russian wing, pro-Eurasian union, pro-federalism Dniester, destructive for the state and anti-Romanian substance, a Moldovan backward-looking attitude (maybe he should ask his children who have learned at a Romanian school how and why), and Maia Sandu - the pro-European opposition reformist candidate, moralist, lady (and not in the last row!), a human of principle and a connoisseur of the system from the inside, former minister and critic, once again, from within the Government of which she was part of.
According to the theory of useful vote, profiling in the foreground of the two candidates, separated today by 6, 8, ok, 10 percents, but far ahead of the following platoon, rises to polarization and elimination from the race of fringe candidates. Why would anyone vote in the first round with a sure loser, with 1, 3 or 5, or even 10 percents, when those two will enter and will fight in the second round? Of rebelliousness, of protest, of friendship or respect to a candidate or party they belong. However, it's a blatant futility.
The first defeated by the need of useful vote will be Iurie Leanca. After he took the blessing from Mrs. Merkel, just as he would have been taken, he received a slap on the PPE line - where Viorel Cibotaru and Maia Sandu were received by Joseph Daul, the same who welcomed Nastase's withdrawn (which either we are not shy to appreciate for the gesture and hopefully he will continue to genuinely support the single candidate as serious as he can be, from all of his resources) and demanded Iurie Leanca's withdrawal from the race. I think at this point, going forward in the campaign is politically suicidal for Leanca, who is already marked by penalties within his party for migrating somewhere in the middle, between power and opposition, for treason and collaborationism. If he stays in the race, Leanca is sentenced to a tiny score, and the electorate will naturally migrate to the single candidate of the right wing, even through the compatibility with former PLDM basin, found today behind Maia Sandu.
The next natural target for the current situation will be in the order, Marian Lupu and, to a lesser extent (because it is below of his own party and under the margin of error, as tendency to vote) Mihai Ghimpu. I understand the obligation of their candidacy, but beyond the administrative and media resources, institutional and party (in the case of PDM), the chance of losing important percent in the theory of useful vote is obvious. Marian Lupu has lost the aplomb and sense of growth towards the party percentages and will disappear after the first survey in which he will be exceeded by Maia Sandu with more than 10 percent.
In fact, and the presented survey to separate out the right wing candidates has revealed unequivocally and without appeal, the loss of some tenths in the context of the entry into struggle of single candidate Maia Sandu. But it is clear that the purpose of these two weeks is not, in any case, the battle with Marian Lupu and Mihai Ghimpu, not even close to that (such a process would potency them), but the self-promotion and subsequently combating Dodon in the second round. The votes will move naturally in the measure of a clear pro-European orientation and the lack of explicit vindictive impulses will define the unique positioning of the right wing candidate. Challenging of the methods, of the system, not for direction or started reforms - it would be the right approach; and maybe it would not hurt even in the second round, at least a meeting and a discussion with Prime Minister Filip on topics related to the situation of reforms. It would also allow the signal of a already position placing, a responsible take-over of an existing situation, not without criticism and alternatives solutions, but for sure with the support of pro-Western orientation.