The Democratic Party’s decision to withdraw from the government coalition after the parliamentary elections allowed Igor Dodon to form a government that, in case Maia Sandu is elected President, would be fully faithful to him. On the other hand, any political move has a reverse side. Now that the PDM withdrew from the government coalition, Igor Dodon remained alone on the political arena, confirming his isolation at internal level too, political analyst Anatol Țăranu stated in IPN’s public debate “To Whom and to What voters of candidates who didn’t reach runoff migrate?”.
According to Anatol Țăranu, the question is why the Democrats took such a decision? Some say the PDM gets ready to occupy the most advantageous position in the future negotiations on the parliamentary majority. This position resides in the necessity of taking a particular side as the PDM would have been unable to do this if it had remained alongside Igor Dodon. It thus decided to withdraw and could join Maia Sandu when time comes. The Shor Party, even if this reached an agreement with Igor Dodon, is rather vulnerable from juridical viewpoint and could disappear easily if the entire legal power is used against its leader.
The analyst noted the supporters of Renato Usatyi could be divided into three categories in the presidential runoff. A part of them could vote against Igor Dodon or for Maia Sandu, another part with Igor Dodon, while the rest could refuse to vote. The given electors could vote according to two criteria, one of which is the political preferences. A part of the voters of Renato Usatyi are pro-Moscow and they will be put in a very difficult situation as the one for whom they voted in the first round said it clearly that they should vote against Dodon. These could remain pro-Moscow or could vote for Maia Sandu and a division could be seen here. The third group will be the persons who will not go to vote.
The second criterion is Renato Usatyi’s anti-system voters who consider that corruption is the main evil in Moldova and these voters will most probably support Maia Sandu.
Anatol Țăranu said the Shor phenomenon in Moldovan politics is very interesting and has its electoral basis in Orhei. These voters respond to populist messages. The question is, if Igor Dodon manages to attract these voters on his side. But the message transmitted by Ilan Shor and his team will also matter. If Igor Dodon and Ilan Shor reached an agreement, as it is rumored, the Shor Party will try to channel the electoral effort of this segment to Dodon and the 6% of the poll won by Violeta Ivanov would represent a weight as the scores of the two candidates in the first round are close.
The personal relations between Maia Sandu and Andrei Năstase, which are very difficult even if a good tone is maintained, show where the votes of the latter will go to. The voters of the PLDM were somehow affected by Maia Sandu’s attacks on the current leader of the party Vlad Filat and this will affect the final vote of these electors. However, almost none of these will go to Igor Dodon, but those dissatisfied with Maia Sandu will not go to the polls.
A lot depends on the unionist voters whom Octavian Țîcu and Dorin Chirtoacă tried to represent, but failed to. All the credible polls show the unionist voters represent 30%, but this score is not reflected in the political representation. This electoral segment is an electoral poll for Maia Sandu, not for Igor Dodon. If all the unionist voters are ‘activated’, Maia Sandu will win the elections easily. If they had been already ‘activated’ in the first round of voting, things will not be so certain.
The debate “To Whom and to What voters of candidates who didn’t reach runoff migrate?” was the seventh installment of the electoral cycle “We and the President: who elects who, who represents who” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.
