Average Chisinau Resident in front of electoral lists. Analysis by Info-Prim Neo, Part VI

“The average Chisinau resident” is pushed by the circumstances to speed up the examination of the lists of candidates for municipal councillors fielded by political blocs and parties for the June 3 elections, including for the reason that there is so much to clear up in order to make a conscious decision and so little time left until Election Day. It is known that the average voter represents a rather numerous category of electors that manifest a certain interest in elections, possess a certain volume of relevant information, but do not have time and possibility of making additional checks and looking for explanations. After all, the lists of candidates are the only source of accessible information in a more or less concentrated form. [BE P-P-P keeps insisting] The Electoral Bloc “Patria-Pодина-Pавноправие” (BE PPP) is formed by a party and a socio-political movement and which inherited their names. This is actually the single alliance running in these elections and the “average voter” remarks instantly this fact, after he expected in vain that other parties would merge too. BE PPP was represented during the past 8 years in the Chisinau Municipal Council (CMC) by one of its components. Actually, each time by a single person, who also heads the 2007 electoral list. This person, who likes to call himself a “deputy” instead of “councillor”, has had an energetic and combative activity, leaving the impression that he knows what he wants. However, the “average voter”, who had numerous occasions to see his behaviour, was often confused when trying to understand what the councillor-deputy really wants. He calls himself a defender of the Russian-speaking population, and his political opponents blamed him of using political leverages for satisfying financial needs, including through illicit methods. Yet, nothing was proved, even thought the authorities used important resources. Candidate no.2 in the list has represented other parties and blocs. As in other cases, it rests with the voter to decide whether he likes such “political migrations”. After taking a brief look at the list, “the average Chisinau resident” concludes that BE PPP is hoping this time too for a single seat, two at best, in the CMC. He doesn’t know any of the names listed below the first two. There are several exceptions, no. 24 and 55, but they have the same names as the first two candidates. No.3 is a “manager”, but the following are “driver”, “pensioner”, etc. Judging by the names of the candidates alone, the list tends towards a fairly balanced ethnical proportion. Of the first 30 candidates, 9 are aged under 37. [PPR: Negation of the Negation] The Republican People’s Party (PPR) has so far acted as an intransigent opponent of the ruling party, or at least had this reputation. It entered the Chisinau mayor’s race with a serious advantage – a political victory in the Gagauzia governor’s race. But this advantage could be useless, also because of the party’s behaviour and the quality of the electoral list. The first obstacle is linked to the fact that PPR claims to be the one and only serious rival of the ruling party, but such a reputation is ascribed by the biggest majority of opposition parties, which, under the given circumstances, are often forced to complete their lists with random or even incompatible people. In the “average voter’s” opinion, this is the case of the messages voiced by the candidates no.1 and 2 in the PPR’s list. Candidate no.1 is running for mayor, and the party tends to persuade the electors that the party’s main advantage is the rich experience in managing the affairs of the capital city. A video spot calls this candidate “Lujkov in a skirt” (Iuri Lujkov is the Mayor of Moscow). Candidate no.2 is grounding his electoral message on harsh criticism against the previous administrations, this way dealing a blow to his own party’s candidate, who has held different high-ranking posts within the city authorities. Consequently, he affects his own party too. Candidate no.2 is also associated with one of the tools used to close down the municipal media by the ruling coalition, which the party is now “intransigently” opposing. Other names known by the general public and by the “average voter”, respectively, are not contained by the PPR’s list. Maybe a few in the middle of the list, but their placement renders them irrelevant. It is an unexpected impression for our voter, who in the meantime managed to find out that 20 out of 54 candidates on behalf of PPR are “managers”, chiefly from the private sector. [PE: A party of electoral courage?] The European Party (PE) attracts our voter’s attention through the fact that almost a half of those 26 candidates work in state-run institutions, in contrast to the biggest part of the other electoral competitors. A part of them even hold high-ranking posts in certain bodies that are tightly controlled by the ruling party. No.2, 4, 8, 9, 20, and 21 work in ministries or subordinated bodies. No.10, 12, and 25 are also civil servants. Although the institutions they work at are public rather than governmental bodies, they are still representing great importance for the ruling party, therefore these candidates had a lot of courage accepting the proposal of a political party from the opposition. PE was not represented in CMC previously, the party being young in what concerns its founding. PE is also a young party in terms of age, with at least a half of its members being aged under 37. [PDS: one more party of directors?] The Social Democracy Party (PDS) was founded recently following a split from another political party. Shortly after that, PDS made itself noticed through its dynamism and political mobility. Given the limited possibilities for manoeuvres in the segment of the political spectrum the party chose, it borrowed some ideas from other parties, such as the image of the sole and genuine opposition party, and the support provided to patentees. The PDS’s electoral list is headed by the party’s leader. Another two candidates were municipal councillors, but on behalf of the party that they left together with their present leader. Their performance was middling, which the “average Chisinau voter” may term equally good or poor. As in other cases, the “average voter” is confused about the abundance of “directors” in the list, with a significant potential of managing human and financial resources. Their number is 30 out of 56 candidates. From this point of view, the situation is only comparable to that of the ruling party, but the resemblance is partial, because in the first case the resources are chiefly public, while in the latter case the resources are private. 18 candidates represent the capital’s suburban localities. 9 out of top-30 are young people. To be continued… [Should he wish to review his previous impressions about the electoral lists, the “average Chisinau resident” can see for oneself that the previous parts of the analysis can be easily accessed in the archives of www.info-prim.md, by using the following links: http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2007/05/21&ay=8273 http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2007/05/22&ay=8302 http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2007/05/23&ay=8321 http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2007/05/24&ay=8346 şi http://www.info-prim.md/?a=10&nD=2007/05/26&ay=8382]