Svet

[Čutura]

33 minutes ago, BWA said:

Dakle, u čemu se konkretno sastoji njegova nepodobnost da učestvuje na izborima?

Ali konkretno, sta je tačno prekršio, koje pravilo?

 

22 minutes ago, Engineer said:

Izgleda da su finansije lažirane/neprijavljene. Propisi su propisi.

Spoiler

Romania’s Voided TikTok Election

 

Story by Alexander Zaitchik

This story is co-published with Drop Site News and Truthdig.

On November 24, at the southeastern frontier of the European Union and NATO, Romanian voters delivered an unexpected victory to a rightwing populist named Călin Georgescu in the opening round of the country’s presidential election. Always considered a longshot, Georgescu had been polling in the single digits just weeks before surging to claim first place with 23 percent of the vote. The result shocked Romania’s two dominant parties, who found themselves on the sidelines as Georgescu campaigned for the runoff against another anti-establishment candidate who came in second place, Elena Lasconi of the reformist Save Romania party.

Then, on December 4, four days before the deciding round was to take place, Romania’s Supreme Defense Council (CSAT) released a small clutch of heavily redacted documents from the country’s foreign intelligence service. The documents outlined allegations of a Kremlin-backed social media campaign that supported Georgescu in violation of national election laws. “Data were obtained,” the accompanying government statement read, “revealing an aggressive promotion campaign that exploited the algorithms of some social media platforms to increase the popularity of Călin Georgescu at an accelerated pace.”

Within hours, the U.S. State Department expressed its “concern” over the allegations. Two days later, on December 6, Romania’s Constitutional Court unanimously ruled the November 24 vote invalid. “The entire electoral process for electing the President of Romania is annulled,” the court announced, citing government claims of irregularities on social media. Six weeks passed before a redo date of May 4 was finally announced on January 16.

Thus did Romania become the first member state in the history of the European Union to cancel an election. The government had not called into question the legitimacy of the votes or vote-counting process. At issue is social media activity, primarily on TikTok, that boosted Georgescu’s profile and amplified his Euro-skeptical, far-right campaign in the final days before the tally. The cancellation of an election on these grounds marks a milestone in the development of Internet-age information war—one that underscores the fragility of the west’s collective commitment to democracy.

For all its seriousness, Romania’s cancelled vote has also proven to be a forensic farce, with the revelation that one of the country’s largest parties bankrolled the very TikTok campaign that the government had fingered as a Kremlin plot. At the same time, a broader narrative of Russian attacks on Romanian democracy was being advanced by a western-funded NGO working with a Ukrainian tech firm with ties to NATO and the European Commission.

“The Constitutional Court’s decision has divided us into two camps,” Elena Lasconi, the reformist candidate who placed second in the scratched first round, wrote on Facebook. “Some who sighed in relief and say it was the only solution to protect democracy, and us, the others, who have warned that we are dealing with a brutal act, contrary to democracy, which could have major long-term effects.”

Upgrade to paid

---

The declassified documents released on December 4 described the election as tainted due to bad actors engaged in “a massive promotional activity” in violation of TikTok policy and Romanian law. In the government telling, these actors ranged from bot armies to pro-Georgescu Romanian political parties like Party of Young People to online communities known as vectors for amplifying Russian state media.

While Russia has a well-known interest in influencing the politics of the region—and has invested funds in what the Romanian government calls a “complex modus operandi”—the documents did not contain evidence of this machine in action. Rather, they described a de facto media campaign for Georgescu catching fire on social networks, in particular the comments sections of Romanian TikTok personalities, more than 100 of whom had been party, willingly or unwillingly, to the “artificial amplification” of pro-Georgescu commenters. Adding to the suspiciousness of the comments, noted the government, was the fact that debates over the most effective phrasing and emoji choices were hammered out in Telegram channels known to support “pro-Russian, far-right, anti-system, ‘pacifist’, and nationalist candidates.”

Central to the government’s case were a series of hashtags that began springing up across Romanian TikTok in the weeks before the November 24 vote. These hashtags—including #echilibrusiverticalitate ("steadiness and uprightness"), #unliderpotrivitpentrumine ("the right leader for me"), and #prezidentiale2024” (“presidential elections 2024”)—accompanied videos in which popular TikTok accounts made general comments about the election, such as discussing the need for a strong candidate, or asking leading questions about the type of leader who should replace the outgoing Klaus Iohannis. None of the posts—which typically racked up between 100,000 and half-million views—mentioned any specific candidate. But in the comments sections, Georgescu’s name appeared more than any other candidate.

As the coordinated hashtags became effective vehicles for raising the profile of a candidate who had spent almost nothing on paid media, Georgescu’s outsider campaign rose in the polls. In a matter of weeks, he went from a few percentage points, to more than 10 percent and climbing in the days before the election. By the week of the vote, the hashtags became so entwined with Georgescu’s campaign that it could no longer be ignored. On November 22, a Romanian Twitch streamer named Silviu Faiăr flagged the hashtag campaign’s rapid metamorphosis and noted that many of the influencers could be connected, not to Russia, but to a local pay-to-play influencer agency called FameUp. Two days later, when the election results shocked the nation, the social media campaign took on new relevance.

Among the groups that sought to keep Russia at the center of the election conversation was an NGO called Context, largely funded by the United States through its National Endowment for Democracy. On November 29, the outfit published a report that included a summary of an analysis it conducted using software from a Ukrainian tech firm whose clients include NATO and the European Commission. In other words, five days after the election, a US-funded watchdog was relying on a NATO-funded analysis to purport to expose foreign interference, shortly before the government released its own report.

When the government declassified its “top secret” documents on December 4, they told a story that, in its basics, mirrored the gaming-chair analysis by Faiăr, the Twitch streamer. Little of the information was new except for some of the details, such as the fee paid to influencers by FameUp (roughly $80 per 20,000 followers on TikTok, Facebook, and Instagram). But where Faiăr made no guess as to the forces behind the campaign, the government documents placed the blame on Russia, without supplying actual evidence, that it had skirted TikTok regulations and Romanian law by paying off influencers to produce election content that could be easily branded ex post facto by Georgescu supporters in the comments. The Kremlin plan was so sneaky that the paid influencers were “unaware that they were promoting a specific candidate through the use of [the hashtags],” according to the government.

Two days later, on December 6, the Constitutional Court’s annulment of the election was met with acclaim and approval in the west. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reported Romania had become the latest victim of an “aggressive hybrid war” waged by the Kremlin. Four U.S. senators issued a statement condemning “Vladimir Putin’s manipulation of Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-controlled TikTok to undermine Romania’s democratic process.” The European Commission took the historic event in stride, saying only that Brussels was “leaving it to Romanians.” Washington’s initial “concern” over suspicions of Russian meddling, expressed a few days earlier, relaxed into a state of observation. “We note the Romanian Constitutional Court’s decision today,” read a brief from the State Department that expressed “confidence in Romania’s democratic institutions and processes, including investigations into foreign malign influence.”

In Romania the cancelled vote was more controversial. And the backstory, it turned out, far from settled.

---

An official inquiry into the TikTok money trail involved not just the intelligence services—it was government-wide. Among those tasked with getting to the bottom of Russia’s interference was Romania’s revenue service, or ANAF. In the days following the court’s decision, one of the tax investigators assigned to the case contacted the Romanian investigative news outlet Snoop with information that had not been included in the December 4 cache of declassified documents.

On December 12, Snoop published a report revealing that the TikTok influencer campaign had been paid for, not by the Kremlin, but by Romania’s National Liberal Party (PNL), which has governed the country for much of the last three decades; its most prominent member, Nicolae Ciucă, is president of the senate and stood as a (losing) candidate in the November 24 election. The hashtag and influencer campaign that had launched Georgescu’s profile in the final weeks and days of the campaign—and which sat at the center of the government’s case, if it can be called that—was orchestrated by Kensington, the Bucharest communications firm, under a contract from the PNL. The politically connected Bucharest firm had distributed 500,000 lei (roughly $100,000) to TikTok influencers through its pay-to-play influencer subcontractor, FameUp, to generate energy around the election.

Two questions remained: Why would the PNL want to generate buzz around the election if it couldn’t promote its candidate by name? And why would it continue the campaign even as it became a Georgescu rocket-booster, unless that had been the plan all along?

When confronted with the whistleblower’s claims, PNL officials admitted to hiring the firm to run an election awareness campaign, but maintained ignorance over its “cooptation” by thousands of organized Georgescu supporters in the videos’ comments sections. As their candidate faded in the polls, party officials claimed, they had lost interest in the campaign and had no idea it had been “hijacked” until after the election, when it asked TikTok to take down the posts that had powered Georgescu from the back of the field to first place in a matter of weeks.

Somehow, Romania’s foreign intelligence service missed the neon breadcrumbs connecting a clearly coordinated TikTok campaign to one of the country’s most powerful political parties, despite its knowledge of the firms involved. The documents released on December 4 contained no mention of the PNL; the word Kensington had been redacted.

“Everybody knows Kensington is a PNL communications firm, and the director of FameUp [which ran the influencers] was seen making repeated visits to PNL headquarters during the election,” Razvan Lutac, one of the reporters on the Snoop story, told Drop Site News. “It’s hard to understand how the Supreme Defense Council failed to see the links between the ‘hijacked’ campaign and the PNL. It’s also hard to understand how the PNL was ignorant about their influencer campaign being used as a Georgescu vehicle.”

Few in Romania buy the idea that the PNL was ignorant. Most veteran observers agree that helping get Georgescu into the second round was always the plan. This includes the whistleblowing tax official, who says flatly that “public money provided by taxpayers for the PNL was used to promote another candidate."

“The TikTok campaign paid for by the National Liberal Party fits a pattern of unethical strategies by the major parties, including the use of fake accounts, bots and trolls, and the creation of fake media sites to promote their candidates and attack their opponents,” says Liana Ganea, an analyst with the media NGO ActiveWatch and co-author of a recent report on political propaganda in Romania. “The election disaster only demonstrates the profound institutional, political, and social bankruptcy of the Romanian state. The public has still not received conclusive evidence of possible foreign interference.”

 

 

A man wearing a Romanian flag with a portrait of presidential candidate Calin Georgescu talks to participants in front of the "Monument of the Heroes" in Bucharest on January 24, 2025. Photo by DANIEL MIHAILESCU/AFP via Getty Images.

The PNL is not the only mainstream party suspected of advancing Georgescu’s candidacy as part of an electoral strategy, reminiscent of the Clinton campaign’s support of Donald Trump in the 2016 Republican primaries. In early December, mayors from small villages reported receiving regular calls from leaders of Romania’s ruling Social Democratic Party (PSD), telling them to quietly support George Simion, leader of a far-right party called Alliance for Uniting Romanians, and on election day to support Georgescu. The tactic appears to be part of an established playbook; in 2000, the PSD was caught helping the campaign of far-right candidate Vadim Tudor advance to the second round of the 2000 presidential campaign.

“Giving votes to the candidate who is easiest to beat [has remained] in the imagination,” said the political scientist Cristian Preda in a January 19 interview with a Romanian news outlet. In the recent election, “the PNL wanted a controlled sharing of power. Instead, it ended up stimulating a nationalist wave, a beast that you cannot control. Beyond the lack of honesty, we are slipping into absurdity. You enter politics, you fight for your own camp, not for that of others.”

Snoop’s bombshell fueled calls in Romania for the government to provide more information than was supplied in the original documents. In response, President Klaus Iohannis issued a brief statement saying that no further information would be released. The stonewalling further soured a deeply jaded electorate on the country’s long-ruling establishment, and ballasted the credibility of independent political voices willing to express public anger.

“The annulment of the elections is a very significant matter, and we must be convinced and clear that it was the right decision,” said Nicușor Dan, Bucharest mayor on January 5. “For now, we do not have that clarity.”

---

For the better part of a decade, allegations of Russian influence in elections have been at the center of a sophisticated two-way information war that has grown apace with NATO-Russia tensions and geopolitical jockeying in the region. This competition has been especially fierce along the southeastern frontier of the western military alliance, with Romania emerging as perhaps the most important chess piece. The country hosts a major node in the alliance’s Aegis missile defense system, and an air base near Constanta on the Black Sea is currently being expanded; when completed, it will displace the U.S. Air Force-NATO Ramstein base as the largest U.S. military outpost in Europe.

None of this is incidental to the fact that Romania was the first EU nation to take the dramatic step of cancelling an election on the basis of “Russian meddling.” When releasing the documents that led to the cancelled election, the government foregrounded Russia’s motive in boosting Georgescu’s campaign. “In Russia’s vision,” it stated, “Romania ‘challenges and threatens’ Russia’s security by hosting NATO and U.S. military potential.” Although Georgescu does not oppose Romania’s membership in NATO, he is against the country hosting its bases.

Of course, the U.S. has its own interests in the region, and has built up its own influence networks, which increasingly operate under the disinterested guise of countering “Russian disinformation.” The funding of these networks has been growing steadily since 2017, when the U.S. Congress created a $1.5 billion Countering Russian Influence Fund to support programs and organizations that “strengthen democratic institutions and processes, and counter Russian influence and aggression.” The funds were designed to target “independent media, investigative journalism, and civil society watchdog groups working to…encourage cooperation with social media entities to strengthen the integrity of information on the Internet." The dollar-spigot was loosened following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, allowing more media related grants to flow through the USAID’s Strengthening the Foundations of Freedom Development Framework (formerly known as the Countering Malign Kremlin Influence Development Framework.)

Romania is home to numerous western-funded media NGOs that have benefited from these funds. Some of them, such as Context, were arguably weaponized when Georgescu threatened to challenge the NATO-Russia balance. For the past several years, Context has participated in a region wide NGO project, “Firehose of Falsehood,” to investigate the “pro-Kremlin, conspiracy and alt-right disinformation ecosystem in Central and Eastern Europe.” The participating groups often have similar funding streams and various western institutional connections. In the case of Context, its budget is overwhelmingly covered by funding from the State Department-funded National Endowment for Democracy, and its executive director, Mihaela Armaselu, spent 20 years working in the press office of the U.S. Embassy in Bucharest. (Context is also a member of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, a global reporting network also heavily funded by the U.S. government.)

Five days after November’s first-round vote, on November 29, Context anticipated the imminent government report by releasing its own social media analysis, headlined, “EXCLUSIVE: Operation Georgescu on X, Telegram and Facebook.” It was topped by a credit to a Ukrainian tech firm, Osavul, which identifies Kremlin social media narratives for a client list that includes the British, Canadian, Ukrainian and Estonian governments, the European Commission, and NATO. According to the report, Osavul’s “AI-powered software” had detected “possible coordination between…a series of Russia-linked accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers and with obvious pro-Russian, anti-Western and conspiratorial sympathies that constantly promote Călin Georgescu.” At the center of the NGO’s conspiracy board were well-known Russian state media outlets, including pravda-en.com and pravda-es.com.

The report goes on to express concern that Romanian citizens, especially those in the large EU diaspora, had been influenced by Russian-linked channels promoting themes that “resonate strongly with a significant part of the public.” While ostensibly a report on the nefarious impact of a Kremlin puppet-master, the real blame seems to land on the common Romanian voter whose support for Georgescu is evidence of “how weak the resilience of Romania or, more precisely, of its citizens is.”

Nobody denies that Georgescu rode the wave of a strong anti-establishment mood. This is partly the result of endemic corruption within the major parties, but also reflects skepticism over the Ukraine war and NATO’s growing role in the country, reflected in the evasive appeal of his campaign slogan, “There is no East, there is no West, there is only Romania.” Georgescu’s positions are streaked with QAnon-style conspiracy theories and odious historical echoes with the country’s fascist past—including praise for the World War Two-era Iron Guard—but the main themes of his independent campaign have broad appeal at home, where he benefited from the work of military groups, church networks, and an active diaspora that gave him 80 percent support. At no point since the election was cancelled has anyone called into question the legitimacy of Georgescu’s 2,120,401 votes. Lasconi, the outsider who took second-place, also won without suspicions of foreign help.

“Wherever you look—healthcare, education, transportation, environment, justice—we see big problems in every sector,” says Nicoleta Fotiade, president of the Bucharest-based Mediawise Society. “If we’re only blaming TikTok and the Russians for the election results, it means we haven’t understood anything.”

In May, the government and media will likely have a second opportunity to show how well it understands the dynamics driving Georgescu’s success. On January 22, the other far-right party in the race threw its support behind Georgescu, whom polls now show in first place with 38 percent support—15 percent more than his voided victory. Lasconi, the reformist candidate who took second place in the first November ballot and might have triumphed in the scratched second round, is now polling at just six percent.

The west’s public support for Romania’s government and its rationale for canceling the vote, meanwhile, remains unwavering. It was re-stated at the U.S. embassy in Bucharest during a mid-January press conference held by a senior State Department official named James O’Brien.

"We see foreign interference in connection with these elections,” he said. “If I were Romanian, I would ask who is paying for what, and who will benefit from a certain outcome. And that will go a long way in determining who can be trusted and who cannot.”

Fair and important questions. But only if they are asked with the understanding that they cut both ways, east and west, and that the answers are rarely as clean as we may like them to be.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Čutura

[SNARC]

6 minutes ago, BWA said:

Tačno, samo što onda demokratija nema smisla budući da i jedni i drugi imaju pravo glasa koji isto vrijedi.

Dakle, nužna je alternativa.

 

Kapitalizam je popusio onda kada su Ameri vadili banke iz bule umesto da ih prepuste trzistu..Demokratija ce nuzno da popusi ako se imaocima kapitala ne dopadne kako narod vecinski razmislja..a na pragu smo toga.

 

Idu vesela vremena.

[SNARC]

6 minutes ago, BWA said:

Tačno, samo što onda demokratija nema smisla budući da i jedni i drugi imaju pravo glasa koji isto vrijedi.

Dakle, nužna je alternativa.

 

Kapitalizam je popusio onda kada su Ameri vadili banke iz bule umesto da ih prepuste trzistu..Demokratija ce nuzno da popusi ako se imaocima kapitala ne dopadne kako narod vecinski razmislja..a na pragu smo toga.

 

Idu vesela vremena.

[BWA]

11 minutes ago, Engineer said:

Alternativa je edukacija i emancipacija, bar za početak

Ko će edukovati narodne mase? U Rumuniji imamo zavidan procenat elementarno pismenih. Imamo valjda i neku intelektualnu elitu, ma šta to tačno značilo. Imamo li ikakav relevantan podatak, ko su simpatizeri Đorđevića?

Nepismeni, polupismeni...ili ima i još nekih?

[Ivo Petović]

5 minutes ago, SNARC said:

 

Kapitalizam je popusio onda kada su Ameri vadili banke iz bule umesto da ih prepuste trzistu..Demokratija ce nuzno da popusi ako se imaocima kapitala ne dopadne kako narod vecinski razmislja..a na pragu smo toga.

 

Idu vesela vremena.

 

Amerima se tu, zapravo, ima manje prigovoriti nego Evropljanima. Ameri su pustili dve ogromne (baš ogromne) banke da crknu. Evropljani nisu pustili nijednu.

 

Problem je više u tome što reakcija na 2008.g. nije bila neka radikalna reforma FDR style, nego umiveni Obama. Koncentracija kapitala je osnovni neprijatelj države i demokratije. Mislim da je sad kasno za neku intervenciju, moraće na teži način ili ćemo svi da imamo svoja dva minuta mržnje, o čemu se trudim da ne razmišljam.

[radisa]

3 minutes ago, BWA said:

Ko će edukovati narodne mase? U Rumuniji imamo zavidan procenat elementarno pismenih. Imamo valjda i neku intelektualnu elitu, ma šta to tačno značilo. Imamo li ikakav relevantan podatak, ko su simpatizeri Đorđevića?

Nepismeni, polupismeni...ili ima i još nekih?

Nepismeni, siromašni, potomci gubitnika tranzicije...

 

SNS birači, samo u Rumuniji...

[BWA]

1 minute ago, radisa said:

Nepismeni, siromašni, potomci gubitnika tranzicije...

 

SNS birači, samo u Rumuniji...

Koji imaju pravo glasa, ali ih niko ne edukuje. Mislim, sve ok, ali ko da ih edukuje i emancipuje. Valjda su prethodne rumunske vlasti imale dovoljno vremena i resursa da taj zadatak obave, ili sam ja bio u zabludi kada sam, između ostalog i ovde, čitao kako je Rumunija ekstremno, ne samo ekonomski, napredovala u odnosu na npr.Bugarsku?

[radisa]

3 minutes ago, BWA said:

Koji imaju pravo glasa, ali ih niko ne edukuje. Mislim, sve ok, ali ko da ih edukuje i emancipuje. Valjda su prethodne rumunske vlasti imale dovoljno vremena i resursa da taj zadatak obave, ili sam ja bio u zabludi kada sam, između ostalog i ovde, čitao kako je Rumunija ekstremno, ne samo ekonomski, napredovala u odnosu na npr.Bugarsku?

Jeste napredovala, ekonomski i u gradovima... Ima još dosta ruralnog stanovništva...

 

I ima još jedna stvar, Ukrajinske izbeglice... Lik je dobio bar 15% na tome, pričajući samo o tome kako ih treba vratiti, da kradu poslove, socijalnu pomoć i slične stvari... Ono, klasik AfD, samo imigranti = Ukrajinci...

 

I zamisli, ljudi mu poverovali, kao i u Namčakoj što veruju AfD-u ili u Francoskoj Marini... Kako li je to moguće?

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by radisa

[Budja]

2 hours ago, vememah said:

 

https://kyivindependent.com/romanias-presidential-candidate-calls-ukraine-fictional-state-suggests-annexing-territory/

 

 

Welcom to Latin America.

 

Imala bi sta Rumunija da nauci od Gvatemale, Brazila, Evkadora...

Nezavisno sudstvo koje nepogresivo eliminise ili kandidate ili predsednike ako hoce nesto da menjaju.

 

Tu je Gvatemala doskora bila sampion, neretko Vrhovni Sud, eto tako, eliminise 5-6 kandidata da bi podobni demokratski kandidat pobedio. Kudos Bajdenari sto je priznao Arevala i tome stao na kraj u poslednjem turnusu.

 

Ovde kod nas je Izborni Sud za koji je Vucicev RIK pojam transparentnosti i nezavisnosti, eliminisao zemljaka Topica jer je pretio da ugrozi Nobou u prvom krugu. Zasto? Eto tako, neke pravne nebuloze.

[Budja]

1 hour ago, Anduril said:

Navijaci Rusije zabrinuti za demokratiju. LOL

 

Lepo je sto priznajes da se ovakvim odlukama sahranjuje liberalna demokratija.

[Engineer]

Da citiram sebe sa nemačke teme:

Quote

U najdemokratskijoj državi na svetu je poništen referendum jer informacije koje su date glasačima nisu bile tačne.

 

The information provided to the electorate was "incomplete" and therefore "violated the freedom of the vote", the court ruled.

During the referendum campaign, the Swiss government told voters just 80,000 of married couples were paying more tax than couples living together.

The true figure was almost half a million, the government later said.

 

Možda nema potrebe odmah uskraćivati pravo glasa ili pravo na izbor nekome samo zato što je opozicija, kao što većina ljudi prvo pomisli kada krene priča o obaranju izbora ili kandidata. Ne može niko da utvrdi da kandidat laže i vara kada govori da će njegova politika omogućiti rast ekonomije ili manju stopu kriminala. Ali kad krene da priča da su ljudi u Mikroneziji živeli 200 godina ili da je imao susret sa vanzemaljcima, to nije samo posao za RIK, već možda i za neke zdravstvene institucije.

[Budja]

1 hour ago, Ivo Petović said:

Možda ih više brine to što su mislili da će se liberali i demokrate u svetu samo skloniti pred najezdom novog fašizma  populizma, pa sad shvatiše da možda neće biti tako lako kao što su mislili.

 

Jbg, igra u kojoj se jedni drže pravila i misle na dekorum, a druge boli uvo za sve i svakoga i koriste samo silu, u startu nije ravnopravna. Ja sam uvek za to da se pravila igre izjednače.

 

 

Niti krajnja desnica koristi SAMO silu, niti liberalne snage igraju SAMO posteno. Napisao si obican genericki Anduril-type pamflet.

 

 

[BWA]

5 minutes ago, radisa said:

Jeste napredovala, ekonomski i u gradovima... Ima još dosta ruralnog stanovništva...

 

I ima još jedna stvar, Ukrajinske izbeglice... Lik je dobio bar 15% na tome, pričajući samo o tome kako ih treba vratiti, da kradu poslove, socijalnu pomoć i slične stvari... Ono, klasik AfD, samo imigranti = Ukrajinci...

 

I zamisli, ljudi mu poverovali, kao i u Namčakoj što veruju AfD-u ili u Francoskoj Marini... Kako li je to moguće?

 

 

Ne znamo da li je to 15% ali nije ni bitno.

Mene zanima kako je moguće da nakon decenija demokratije, članstva u EU i NATO, ovakva individua ima većinsku podršku građana Rumunije.

AFD je na cca 20% a ovaj na mnogo više.

 

[radisa]

1 minute ago, Engineer said:

Da citiram sebe sa nemačke teme:

 

Možda nema potrebe odmah uskraćivati pravo glasa ili pravo na izbor nekome samo zato što je opozicija, kao što većina ljudi prvo pomisli kada krene priča o obaranju izbora ili kandidata. Ne može niko da utvrdi da kandidat laže i vara kada govori da će njegova politika omogućiti rast ekonomije ili manju stopu kriminala. Ali kad krene da priča da su ljudi u Mikroneziji živeli 200 godina ili da je imao susret sa vanzemaljcima, to nije samo posao za RIK, već možda i za neke zdravstvene institucije.

ILi kad pRedsednik ne zna zašto USA garantuje bezbednost Japana... I zašto se Kanadska granca, kao i bilo oja druga, ne sme dirati, čak ni pomisliti na to... I tako još puno toga...

 

U trenutku kad je političiarima koji se kandiduju dopušteno da otvoreno lažu, u tom trenutku se demokratija samoubila...

[radisa]

Just now, BWA said:

Ne znamo da li je to 15% ali nije ni bitno.

Mene zanima kako je moguće da nakon decenija demokratije, članstva u EU i NATO, ovakva individua ima većinsku podršku građana Rumunije.

AFD je na cca 20% a ovaj na mnogo više.

 

Nije, na 23% je bio u prvom krugu...