Two Winners, Many Losers: Reflections After the Romanian Elections
Unburdened by care or justice, ideologically entitled, structurally supported—the far right has gained momentum. But it's not just happening now. This resurgence has been building since at least 2015, with figures like Orban, Bannon, Netanyahu. Money has poured into right-wing causes. That makes the work not voluntary—and that means no burnout.
But what happened here?
Two winners: Nicușor Dan and George Simion. Two anti-system candidates born out of the civic society movements. One going for populist nationalist rhetoric—“make Romania great again.” The other, also populist, focused on anticorruption. Both conservatives. One flexing ambiguity about the “strategic partnership” while being a full-blown Trump supporter; the other more European. What European, one may ask, as Europe itself plunges into the far right.
Economic reforms were left out of all campaigns. They all promised to change “the system” without touching the economic structure. Their proposals don’t differ that much if one looks closely. Just new people in politics. Just vibes and aesthetics. One for the nerds, one for the ordinary people. Neither for anybody, actually.
Born out of disenchantment with capitalist electoral liberalism, their parties represent just a different upper-middle-class clique wanting to take over. For USR, it’s the corporate, NGO, so-called intellectual elites. For AUR, it's the Romanian capitalists once dispersed inside PSD.
The biggest loser of this election is by far PSD.
The big old party lost its groove. One might say the intense anti-communist and anti-PSD campaign has finally won. But the party must also own its mistakes.
Historically—for better and for worse—PSD has taken some measures to improve living standards: opposing rabid privatization in the 90s, retracting PD-L’s austerity cuts. Ciolacu came to power after Dragnea fell out of favor and went to jail for a petty crime. But the way Dragnea built influence inside the party was probably not all that legal either—allegedly.
Ciolacu was supposed to be the new face. The real social democrat. He seemed a bit progressive, promised to tax the rich, tried to align with traditional social democratic messages. But this lasted just a few months. Once in power, he lost interest. Nothing changed. His campaign strategy became one word: stability.
Yes, Romania has seen macroeconomic growth—but at the individual level, resentment grew. Brain drain. Low wages. Bad social services. And a general distrust and lack of solidarity. This is the perfect breeding ground for populist messaging. USR came first. Then AUR.
Last year, PSD was so full of itself that when it lost the presidential elections, it was left crumbling. They tried new things—like a TikTok campaign to appeal to younger voters. It failed miserably. They adopted anti-women messages to appeal to populists. They tried nationalism. Nothing worked. The party lost its base.
So when they endorsed Crin Antonescu, people probably voted for Victor Ponta—the former PSD leader who, though now pushing conservative values, isn’t loyal to any ideological idea. And some of the votes likely went to AUR. Because AUR is cosplaying “the people’s party” while the suits are no longer liked.
In general, I think we all lost.
No positive economic or social change will happen under either one of them. And it wouldn’t have happened under any of the candidates.
Which brings me to my final remark: where do we go from here? And what will come next?
Usually, far-right candidates lose appeal once in power. George Simion is a weak person. He’s made compromises during his presidency. But he’s shown flexibility—a willingness to shift from an angry hooligan to a well-read Christian, married, with a child. A chameleon. I’m curious how long this trick will work.
Besides PSD losing, I think there’s something to be said about Nicușor Dan’s campaign. Also envisioned by his supporters as the “good guy,” he showed his true colors to those who had ears to hear.
He refused to sign for a hospital because it required demolishing a house—one with some architectural value. He dismissed other candidates. He was obsessed with being right about petty, unimportant things. He showed a clear lack of vision—ironically, since he accused others of the same.
He wants to rely on technocrats—not the most democratic way to govern the economy or healthcare. Especially since that’s already how things run. One wonders whether this is just a poorly executed show, or if we’re all unaware that the medical system was designed by the World Bank, IMF, and EU accession requirements. And the economy, the taxes, the “strategy”—all shaped by neoliberal think tanks and parties.
In a ridiculous way, as usual, the far right sees the real problems.
But offers phantasmagorical solutions.
And still, their energy wins.