Talk:2009 Romanian presidential election

Opinion polls?

I strongly suggest removing all the opinion polls due to their innacuracy, partisanship and extremely large diferences between them. I also have to underline that many notable Romanian press agencies decided not to publish them anymore for the same reasons. --Eurocopter (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• Agreed. Removed opinion polls.

http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-politic-6407228-hotnews-nu-mai-publica-sondaje-opinie-subiect-politic-durata-campaniei-electorale.htm (in english, via google translate http://www.translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hotnews.ro%2Fstiri-politic-6407228-hotnews-nu-mai-publica-sondaje-opinie-subiect-politic-durata-campaniei-electorale.htm&sl=auto&tl=en ) ArnoldPlaton (talk) 18:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I disagree that we should remove them. Opinion polls everywhere are affected by margins of error, framing biases and often very large differences between them. Polling is never an exact science, and it is for this reason that any polling data should be taken with a grain of salt. However, the ones for this election do not appear to be significantly different to polls for a range of other issues in other countries. Indeed, the latest polls appear to be rather consistent, with the margin between them no more than 2-4%. I have re-included the polls, since it is common practice on Wikipedia that large-scale elections such as this contain an opinion polls section. I have also included a message about their possible unreliability. Ronline ✉ 00:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Exit Polls

Partial exit polls (12:00 EET) to be added to article - http://www.catavencu.ro/primele_i_exit_poll_i_uri-11320.html - ArnoldPlaton (talk) 12:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• Nevermind - these exitpoll are ilegal and aparently of dubious origin - ArnoldPlaton (talk) 15:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

These are official results of exit polls [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahetin (talk • contribs) 20:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Map

The map does not indicate overseas voters, which may be significant in number. Elekhh (talk) 19:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that. I think the map would loook even better if the circle indicating overseas votesrs would be placed above the circle for Bucharest, while the circle key could migrate on the left side, paired with the other key items. Elekhh (talk) 19:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Shouldn't Bucharest be broken up into the existing sectors, as results are for each sector of Bucharest? - ArnoldPlaton (talk) 18:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Election rigged by Basescu?

I read earlier this autumn that Basescu sabotaged the formation of a new government that was agreed on by a nearly 70 % parliamentary majority in order to keep Emil Boc from his own party in power until the election in order to influence its outcome. As the two opposition candidates received well over 50 % of the votes in the first round and Basescu only 30 %, it seems extremely unlikely that Basescu would "win" the second round. This reminds me quite a bit about the Zimbabwean presidential election, 2008. Are there any more recent indications that the elections were rigged, in addition to opposition politicians warning of that possibility earlier? I think we should address this in the article. This doesn't seem like a democratic election. Jackjoboto (talk) 08:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

OSCE will publish its findings today [2], but so far there are no indications of massive fraud. In my opinion, the votes from abroad were decisive. Basescu got nearly 80% of those. Pcap ping 10:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The elections were most probably rigged. There were lots of complaints about electoral tourism, multiple votes, and so on. Of course the evidence is being covered up, especially when the PD-L is in power. If the Constitutional Court finds any illegalities, they will most probably cancel the elections, but this is Romania so anything is possible. Qubix 89.44.243.118 (talk) 18:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Your IP address resolves to Romania, so you should know that electoral tourism, multiple votes, and bought votes are an issue at every election in Romania . PSD would have to prove that over 70,000 votes have been affected to change the results. In my opinion, it's unlikely they can do that. The Western press pays attention to these issues now because the race was tight. Pcap ping 19:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Pcap please also note that during the first round 70.000 Romanians from the diaspora expressed their vote, while in the second round 145.000 came to vote (of which 79% of the votes seemed to be for Basescu). So we should be aware that fraud allegations are not limited only to the vote inside Romania. --Eurocopter (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

"Geoana's Social Democrats refused to concede defeat, saying that they would challenge the results in court.

"Starting wtih exit polls, the high number of void ballots, modified voting protocols and massive electoral tourism, all these factors compel us to challenge the results. It is a democratic obligation to the five million Romanians whose vote is about to be defrauded," Liviu Dragnea, Social Democrat secretary general, said on December 7." [3] Jackjoboto (talk) 14:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The OSCE monitoring mission report has described the elections as overall fair:

"The mission noted that the second round of the election reaffirmed the positive aspects that characterized the first round, including the overall compliance with OSCE commitments and other international standards, respect for fundamental political freedoms, the competitive campaign environment and the efficient work of the election administration."

Although allegations of fraud need to be investigated:

"The authorities took steps to remedy some of the shortcomings noted during the first round and investigated allegations of irregularities. But the mission stressed that further efforts are required to address remaining weaknesses to improve the election process and strengthen public confidence. This includes the investigation of reports of fraud received by the authorities during the second round."

It was certainly not "like Zimbabwe". Ofcourse an election this close will be contested but there was never any doubt it would be very close, because PNL is a right-wing neoliberal party and PSD a left-wing social-democratic party largely perceived as the heir to the communist party's legacy so a lot of people that voted for Crin Antonescu in the first round didn't vote at all in the second or voted Basescu --Helixdq (talk) 12:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

why isn't media misinformation also covered

the article talks about possible fraud by the winning side, but it doesn't say anything about the illegalities commited by the media during the election day, where unsourced polls were published illegally before the closing of the voting procedure, and thus may have also lead to biased results? 19:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT. It does not appear an issue important enough to be mentioned in the Western/English media, so bear in mind WP:WEIGHT. Pcap ping 19:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

thediplomat.ro -- unreliable source

I think that English-language Romanian-based source is unreliable. Besides the obvious editorial bias in titles, it appears to simply invent or twist statements made by OSCE. It attributes some findings to the OSCE 2nd round report, which are simply not in it or in the official press release or simply contradict those. For instance thediplomat.ro article claims that OSCE found Pro TV to be unbiased, but the OSCE says "The coverage of Pro TV, Antena 1 and Realitatea TV, by contrast, was more biased against the incumbent". Thediplomat.ro article also says that Evenimentul Zilei and Romania libera were unbiased according to OSCE, while claiming that OSCE found Jurnalul National, Cotidianul and Gandul "all gave overwhelmingly negative coverage to Basescu". Partially true and partially false; this is what the report says "Among the newspapers monitored by the OSCE/ODIHR LEOM, Evenimentul Zilei, Gândul and România Liberă were more balanced, while Jurnalul Naţional and Cotidianul were biased against the incumbent". I think the color of the lens of thediplomat.ro is too orange; I'm removing it as a source of this wiki article. Pcap ping 05:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Opposition demands that the Constitutional Court annuls the vote

Romanian Opposition Contests Basescu’s Election Win Jackjoboto (talk) 07:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Geoana demands repeat of presidential elections

"Romanian social democrat leader Mircea Geoana said today (Tuesday) that he is the real winner of the presidential elections and called on the Constitutional Court to rule on the fairness of the polls.

The Romanian Social Democratic Party today submitted their request to annul and repeat the presidential election run-off to the Constitutional Court, saying the election was rigged."

Jackjoboto (talk) 16:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Latest AP news, should someone care to update this article. I'd wait till the court comes with a decision though. Pcap ping 19:25, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Romanian presidential election, 2009. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091125140807/http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/876787/53-52-DINTRE-ROMANI-AU-VOTAT-LA-ALEGERI-REFERENDUMUL-VALID to http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/876787/53-52-DINTRE-ROMANI-AU-VOTAT-LA-ALEGERI-REFERENDUMUL-VALID
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090517022926/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33446/basescu_leads_voting_intention_in_romania to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33446/basescu_leads_voting_intention_in_romania
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33801/basescu_is_most_popular_candidate_in_romania
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090801035434/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33888/romanians_could_grant_basescu_a_new_term to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/33888/romanians_could_grant_basescu_a_new_term
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100112234054/http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/873136/CURS-Basescu-si-Geoana-umar-la-umar to http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/873136/CURS-Basescu-si-Geoana-umar-la-umar
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091102012812/http://www.cotidianul.ro/antonescu_l_a_depasit_pe_geoana_cu_o_vasla_in_urmarirea_lui_basescu-102102.html to http://www.cotidianul.ro/antonescu_l_a_depasit_pe_geoana_cu_o_vasla_in_urmarirea_lui_basescu-102102.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111009135304/http://www.gazetadebistrita.ro/citeste/1665-sondaj-csop-basescu-invingator-si-in-turul-ii?n=1 to http://www.gazetadebistrita.ro/citeste/1665-sondaj-csop-basescu-invingator-si-in-turul-ii?n=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091027113300/http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/34358/basescu_faces_tough_battle_in_romania to http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/34358/basescu_faces_tough_battle_in_romania
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100112234054/http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/873136/CURS-Basescu-si-Geoana-umar-la-umar to http://prezidentiale.evz.ro/emain/articolul/873136/CURS-Basescu-si-Geoana-umar-la-umar
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091122084237/http://www.insomar.ro/documente/alte_cercetari/2009_11_Sondaj_INSOMAR_6-9_nov.pdf to http://www.insomar.ro/documente/alte_cercetari/2009_11_Sondaj_INSOMAR_6-9_nov.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:59, 10 October 2017 (UTC)