39
As for the “existing realities” in particular county councils, PRM frequently sat in the driver’s seat for
coalition formation, and Vadim Tudor did not elaborate on what aspects of these “realities” forced him to choose
PSD over the ADA-PNL-PD, beyond accusing the Alliance of hesitation, rejection, and even betrayal in certain
counties (such as the defection of PNL council members in Gorj to support PSD in spite of a previous PNL-PRM
agreement, and who were promptly expelled from PNL).
Among his offered proofs of fraud, Vadim Tudor claimed that no less than two million votes had been
added overnight to ballot boxes, that there was a “massive annulment” of votes for PRM though he failed to cite
specifics other than a single sector in the capital of Bucharest, and that the difference between annulled ballots for
the county councils versus the local councils was “suspiciously large,” claiming that 850,000 ballots had been
annulled for the county councils but only 640,000 ballots faced the same fate for local councils. România Mare, 25
June 2004.
27
See Evenimentul zilei, 2 August 2004, and Adev rul, 3 August 2004, both reporting different poll results from a
poll by the IMAS polling organization, although Adev rul does not specify the exact date in July of their version of
the IMAS poll and thus may be reporting a different poll.
28
See IMAS-BOP, January 2001 – March 2004, in the table excluding undecideds and those who would not vote in
any hypothetical elections.
29
See the IMAS poll results in Evenimentul zilei, 2 August 2004.
30
In the 2000 elections, Romania used a graduated threshold for coalitions, starting from the base of 5 percent
applied to all parties running alone, but adding an extra percentage point for each party in a coalition.
31
Grigore Pop-Eleche , “Romania’s Politics of Dejection,” Journal of Democracy 12:3 (July 2001) 158.
32
See the IMAS poll results as published in Adev rul, 3 August 2004.
33
Ibid. An even more recent poll in mid-August by CURS gives N stase a bit of an edge over Stolojan, 43 to 35
percent, and accords Vadim Tudor 15 percent. See “Sondajul CURS – 24 August 2004,” published on-line at
www.aleg-ro.org.
34
See, e.g., William Brustein, The Logic of Evil: The Social Origins of the Nazi Party, 1925-1933 (New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1996); Francisco Veiga, Istoria G rzii de Fier, 1919-1941: Mistica ultrana ionalismului, 2
nd
ed., trans. by Marian tef nescu (Bucharest: Humanitas, 1995); Nonna Mayer and Pascal Perrineau, “Why Do They
Vote for Le Pen?” European Journal of Political Research 22 (1992) 123-141; Hans-Georg Betz, “The New
Politics of Resentment: Radical Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe,” Comparative Politics 25:4 (July
1993) 421-23; and cf. the “rival hypotheses” presented in Herbert Kitschelt in collaboration with Anthony J.
McGann, The Radical Right in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan
Press, 1995, 2
nd
paperback edition 2000) 26-28.
35
See the BOP-OSF, May 2004 and October 2003.
36
See the section by Manuela St nculescu, entitled “Vor românii o economie de pia ?” (“Do Romanians want a
market economy?”), in BOP-OSF, October 2003.
37
See the section by M lina Voicu, “De ce exist saraci în România?” (“Why are there poor people in Romania”), in
ibid.
38
Of voters 60 years and older, 55 percent favored Iliescu to 16 percent for Vadim in the first round of the
presidential elections of 2000. Likewise, 48 percent of rural voters favored Iliescu while 26 percent favored Vadim.
It should be kept in mind that Iliescu’s first round score, all told, was 36 percent to Vadim’s 27.9 percent. Vadim
scored successes (in terms of overrepresentation relative to his average national score) among voters 18-44 years
old, with 33 percent, and in small and medium sized cities with 31 percent in each type of locality, though Iliescu
had the edge in small cities with 34 percent. The data can be found in IMAS, Exit Poll: Alegeri generale – turul I:
Raport final (personal copy) in reference to the 2000 elections, of course.
39
See the section by Dumitru Sandu, “Democra ia ‘tr it ’ prin institu ii i resurse,” (“Democracy ‘Lived’ through
Institutions and Resources”), in BOP-OSF, October 2003.
40
I base this claim on the compounded scores presented by Dumitru Sandu, “Democra ia ‘tr it ’ prin institu ii i
resurse,” (“Democracy ‘Lived’ through Institutions and Resources”), in ibid.
41
See the BOP-OSF, October 2003.
42
See the section by Dumitru Sandu, “Democra ia ‘tr it ’ prin institu ii i resurse,” (“Democracy ‘Lived’ through
Institutions and Resources”), in ibid.
43
The opposition Alliance for Justice and Truth, which is to say PD and PNL, are not without their supporters
among these disfavored social segments, but these two parties are much more likely to be supported by the urban
middle class, intellectuals, and the well-to-do, as the opposition typically has been throughout Romania’s
postcommunist experience.
Convention