Romania’s presidential election, annulled last year following allegations of Russian interference, saw a far-right conspiracy theorist denied the top post. This outcome brought relief to many, while others expressed outrage at the perceived disenfranchisement.
Six months later, another hard-right, Eurosceptic candidate is vying for the presidency. George Simion, a former football hooligan turned nationalist politician, secured a substantial lead in the first round of voting on May 4th. He now faces Nicusor Dan, Bucharest’s liberal mayor, in a contest that could significantly shift Romania’s trajectory away from the European mainstream.
Both candidates cast their ballots, with Simion emphasizing a future “decided only by Romanians, for Romanians, and for Romania.” Dan, conversely, championed “collaboration with our European partners” and rejected isolationism. Polls indicate a tight race.
Teleorman county, a traditionally social-democrat region, surprisingly favored Simion by 57% in the first round. A visit reveals a lack of visible campaigning, yet social media showcases intense political engagement, including a viral video promoting a nationalist agenda (“I choose Romania”).
Felicia Alexandru of Aperio Intelligence attributes Simion’s initial surge to widespread anti-establishment sentiment. Decades of dominance by the same political parties, coupled with enduring frustration over corruption and underperformance, fueled this protest vote, transcending socioeconomic divides.
Petre Filip, owner of the Comalat dairy firm—a beneficiary of substantial EU funding—illustrates this nuanced perspective. While he received €1.5 million in EU support to modernize his business, employing over 50 staff, he nonetheless supports Simion, echoing sentiments of many employees who prioritize a focus on Romanian interests and job creation.
Simion’s rhetoric closely resembles that of US MAGA politicians, emphasizing a “make Romania great again” narrative and prioritizing national interests above international collaboration. While condemning Putin’s actions in Ukraine, he advocates ending military aid to Kyiv and remains ambiguous about Ukrainian grain exports through Romania. He faces bans from Ukraine and Moldova due to territorial claims and has engaged in inflammatory rhetoric against his opponent and other European leaders.
Concerns are palpable among business owners like Filip, who deem Simion’s impulsiveness unfit for the presidency. In Roșiori de Vede, Roxana, a factory owner, highlights anxieties among international clients about potential pro-Russian leanings. She intends to vote for Dan, emphasizing his competence and contrasting his behavior with Simion’s perceived “hooliganism” and misogynistic remarks.
Roxana and her friend Andrea are actively campaigning for Dan, but face challenges countering Simion’s appeal among voters who believe he can disrupt the system. Dan’s campaign emphasizes honesty and pragmatic solutions, contrasting with Simion’s populist appeal.
A Simion victory would likely bring political instability and economic uncertainty, particularly given his alliance with Calin Georgescu, the candidate whose election was previously annulled due to alleged Russian interference. Simion’s pledge to make Georgescu prime minister raises serious concerns about the future direction of Romania’s political landscape and its relationship with the EU.