Radev turned out to have no party and his support /for Yotova/ was a bit like the Tsar's in 2001 for Stoyanov - formal, wrote former constitutional judge Georgi Markov on the social network. Regarding the presidential vote yesterday, he stated that the introduction of machine voting was a big blunder of the ruling party. Here is the full text of the publication:
"Dear readers,
Five days ago I posted a post in which I predicted that the turnout in the presidential vote would be very low, and that the difference in favor of Yotova would not be as large as sociologists give, and that Kostadinov would get more than 10%.
I pointed out that there would be many factors for the low turnout, headed by machine voting. Voters are not so stupid that they do not know that it is not practiced in Europe, because back in 2009 the German Constitutional Court abolished it as not ensuring the credibility of the vote. There's no way, despite the censorship, they didn't understand that Musk is ready to show in 5 minutes how to do "ala-bala".
The introduction of machine voting is a big blunder by the ruling party. Of course, there are other reasons for the low turnout - there is no right-wing candidate for whom right-wing voters can vote, the largest party GERB did not nominate a candidate and, what is very important, the presidential powers, which were already not great for the rank of a directly elected head of state, were so curtailed that they turned him into an "onion head", from which not a single problem of ordinary citizens can be solved.
The result of the brutally low turnout is one: bankruptcy of the presidential institution in its current form.
What will be the public legitimacy of a president who won with only 11% of the total number of voters?1?
Not to mention that in principle even fewer voters go to the second round.
In terms of personality, both candidates failed as majoritarian candidates. Results of around 500,000 votes for those going to the runoff show that they are not strong majoritarian charismatic personalities to attract broad masses of voters.
So, at a time when in 1992 the candidates of the UDF and BSP together received over 5 million votes, the independent George Ganchev appeared and with one guitar took nearly a million.
Yotova managed to squeeze everything out of the deceased BSP.
Radev turned out to have no party and his support was a bit like the Tsarist in 2001 for Stoyanov - formal.
The Russophiles went to Kostadinov...
Gyurov squeezes out the Sorosoid community in the capital and large cities to the maximum in universities, NGOs and municipal councils.
He was visibly superior in internet.
It was clear that the initiative committees unsuccessfully replaced the parties, which were already weak, and their structures, as many as remained, were demotivated.
Ultimately, Bulgaria should think about whether we need a majority vote for a president with weak powers.
The veto of the directly elected Polish head of state is overcome, for example, with 3/5.
In Austria, it plays an important role in forming the government...
Or is it better for the parliament to broadcast it, as in Germany, Italy, Hungary...
If the second round of activity is the same or lower, whoever is elected would be better off throwing in the towel. To return and increase presidential powers, such as the right to schedule referendums and hold new elections with the ballot
A curious piece of news to cheer you up!
Yesterday, the "Wall Street Journal" leaked information that the US, Russia and China are nominating Viktor Orban as UN chief. Naturally, since he is on "ti" with Trump, Putin and Xi. But it is not clear whether he will agree," concludes Markov.
Source: tribune.bg