Why is Nicușor Dan losing the support of the reformist electorate. “Rather, those who projected unrealistic expectations were wrong”
One year after winning the presidential elections, Nicușor Dan is going through the most complicated period of his mandate. Failure to fulfill promises made at the beginning of his term, government instability and accusations of closeness to the PSD led to his decline in the polls and fueled the discontent of the reformist electorate.
Nicușor Dan, President of Romania Photo: Mediafax
While some of President Nicușor Dan's supporters criticize him for the slowness of his decisions – such as the appointment of a head of the SRI or the publication of information related to the cancellation of the 2024 elections – and the lack of a clear political direction, analysts
While some analysts describe him as a moderate president, others believe that Nicușor Dan got too close to PSD and made compromises that disappointed part of the reformist electorate. The stake of the coming years will be the president's ability to regain public trust, think analyst Radu Magdin and political scientist Cristian Preda.
Between “moderate president” and “he believed more in PSD than in any other party”
Political analyst Radu Magdin believes that part of the criticism of Nicușor Dan comes from the difference between his real profile and the expectations projected on him in the campaign.
“First of all, the president has never been a polarizing one, even if he came on a wave of polarization, that is, saving the nation from an anti-system candidate. But taking into account his personal structure, the president has always been a moderate. The expectations about polarization and embracing a certain camp were from those who supported him, and not necessarily the promise of the president. I think those who projected expectations that were rather wrong unrealistic”, is of the opinion political analyst Radu Magdin.
Political scientist Cristian Preda, however, has a different interpretation and claims that the closeness to PSD exceeded the role of institutional mediator.
“He believed more in PSD than in any other party. Under the pretext of holding together an (apparent) anti-AUR majority, the president guaranteed the duplicitous behavior of the party led by Grindeanu. Whenever the PSD stopped the government's action or overturned the agreements made with the other three parties in the coalition, N. Dan was quick to explain that the government was working and that the denigration of the partners practiced by the PSD, including through simple motions against USR ministers, has no value”. says the expert, in an editorial published on the Comunitatea liberală 1848 platform.
The relationship with the PSD and the parties that supported him in the presidential elections
In the context of the renegotiation of the governing majority, the relationship between Nicușor Dan, PSD and the parties that supported him in the presidential elections – PNL and USR – is being redefined.
Radu Magdin says that PNL and USR had legitimate expectations regarding a clearer support from the president for the dismissed Government and for Ilie Bolojan. At the same time, he believes that the dialogue with the PSD remains inevitable in order to maintain a stable parliamentary majority:
“From this perspective of additional support from the president towards Ilie Bolojan, I think it is an aspect that could be improved. I don't think USR has a reason, because it received very good positions, and then it negotiated very well in the previous coalition. I think their instinct of solidarity with Ilie Bolojan is a correct one, because they are now playing a different card than in 2021, USR's place has now been taken by PSD, which sends an alarm signal about instability in coalition.”
Cristian Preda claims, however, that the president's decision-making slowness allowed the PSD to consolidate its influence in the governmental and administrative apparatus:
“The slowness with which the head of state takes decisions has given the Pesedists plenty of time to pull strings and undermine any change. It is, for example, eloquent how Grindeanu managed to keep almost all of the Pesedist state secretaries appointed by Ciucă and Ciolacu and to delay or block the appointments to a few public positions that belonged to the Userists or the Udemers“.
However, the president's reservations towards Ilie Bolojan could also be related to some decisions taken by the Government, claims Radu Magdin, with reference to the VAT increase, a measure that contradicted one of Nicușor Dan's main electoral promises from 2025.
Nicusor Dan and MApN dismantle the false information regarding the mobilization of reservists in Bucharest
“The president cannot give up talks with the PSD, because at the moment it is the main anchor on which you can build a parliamentary stability. This does not necessarily mean that he is the best friend with the PSD, there is a nuance here, but this does not mean that he should not have civilized relations with the PSD. Regarding the relationship with Ilie Bolojan, I always look at the body language of political actors and this relationship has been strained from the beginning, including the violation of Ilie Bolojan of Nicușor Dan's election promise related to the non-increase of VAT. He is a determined man, but he is a man who does not seem to have the art of negotiation.”says Magdin.
Nicușor Dan Photo: Mediafax
Direction in foreign policy: pro-European or pro-Western?
Another sensitive point is the way in which Nicușor Dan defined his speech regarding internal and external policy. The use of the term “pro-Western” instead of “pro-European” generated reactions.
“He should have been more clear and said > and positioned Romania that way. But since we were stuck between sovereignty and the EU, I think it was a failure to say pro-Western. Personally, I would have preferred to hear the USA in parallel with pro-Western and I think no one was upset.”
Cristian Preda sees the change in vocabulary as a sign of a still unclear ideological repositioning:
“Elected as an independent, Nicușor Dan was courted by two of the great European families – the EPP and the liberal -, even though both noted his excessive indulgence towards the Romanian socialists. N. Dan's ideological profile is, in my opinion, a combination of Christian democracy and conservatism. He would fit more easily into the popular family, because he cannot join the conservatives, since he was received there, in 2024, George Simion. Lost in the political spectrum at the European level, the president of Romania saw fit to abandon the very term that encompasses them all. He no longer talks about European politics and European nations, but about the Western world and Western values.”
Nicușor Dan's reaction to the draft law on the transparency of NGO funding: “These are disproportionate measures”
What's next for Nicușor Dan
The decrease in public confidence, also reflected in recent polls, where he has 31% in the intention to vote, being placed behind Călin Georgescu, forces the president to accelerate the political pace and define more clearly his priorities for the next years of his mandate.
Radu Magdin believes that Nicușor Dan still has time to recover politically, but this depends on his ability to become more present and active in the public space.
“I think the president is already paying a price, you can see that in the polls, in the popularity and trust in the president after a year. I think he needs to go faster, he didn't rush in the first year, he was wise to put certain pieces in place. He needs to complete the nominations in Parliament, and he needs the PSD here and for SRI/SIE. And he also needs to have a cadence of events, initiatives, actions from September, so that it can be seen, on the one hand, that he is an important political actor, and on the other hand to regain the trust of the Romanians”, concludes Radu Magdin.
Cristian Preda remains more skeptical and believes that the lack of a clear direction may become the main vulnerability of Nicușor Dan's mandate as president:
“At this moment, the car in which the president got in does not clearly indicate either the right or the left, but is “broken down”. Lost in a crossroad, Nicușor Dan risks losing his carnet. Which can be taken precisely by the pesedists to whom he tolerated all the hackles and the aurists who are convinced that they are the only ones who can define the West, so that the White House and the Kremlin no longer seem so special”.
