The political culture in the Republic of Moldova is favorable to candidate Igor Dodon because it is a parochial and contemplative political culture. “The people in rural areas expect someone to solve their problems and Igor Dodon thus appears with 900 lei in gift, with the mayors who accepted publicly to support Igor Dodon and such things keep us in this trap for a long period of time. We want yet the people to be active, to learn to exactly understand their rights and to be able to defend them. This is the normal development path for a society,” the standing expert of IPN’s project Igor Boțan stated in the public debate “Strong and weak points of the two finalists” that was staged by IPN News Agency.
According to the expert, the people in the runoff will vote “Europe” or “Eurasia”, while those who are poor and depend on assistance will vote those who were generous in promises. “Currently, the chances of the two candidates are 50 to 50 because the impact of the administrative factor, the behavior of the voters of Renato Usatyi, the impact of the scandals of the last few days, the behavior of the unionists cannot be anticipated,” he stated.
Igor Boțan noted the absence of electoral debates is disadvantageous and he considers Maia Sandu made a big mistake by not taking the possibility of confronting the opponent face to face. In the debates of 2016, Igor Dodon behaved like a lout and in a sexist way, but there was a different Maia Sandu at the debates with Parliament Speaker Adrian Candu, on the national TV channel, where the moderator was pro-Candu and Maia Sandu defeated Adrian Candu with self-control and coherence in speech.
Maia Sandu detests Dodon as a liar, but she would have been armed at the debates as Igor Dodon in advance published the ten accusations against her and excellent replies against Dodon could have been found based on these. If she had prepared well, she could have won the confrontation with Igor Dodon face to face.
In another development, Igor Boțan said he does not consider the statements made by Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, about the Republic of Moldova one week before the elections are accidental. He couldn’t have imagined that mayors and district heads, exploiting their public posts, would have thrown public support to a particular candidate. “How should we, the citizens, react in a divided society where we know that the danger of the dissatisfaction being expressed is very possible?” he asked.
The debate “Strong and weak points of the two finalists” was the tenth installment of the series “We and the President: who elects who, who represents who” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation.