3 ms·

It's possible but spending has to be reported to the electoral authority, which it wasn't.

by cbg0 2y ago

jdasdf 2y ago
If i spend money on all the other candidates and don't declare it, will they get disqualified? Or is this a rule that only gets applied when the wrong person wins=?
- cbg0 2y ago
  You would be in legal trouble for breaking electoral law. Based on what happened today, if there is proof that the electoral process was tainted, the elections can be annulled by the constitutional court.
  - jdasdf 2y ago
    >You would be in legal trouble for breaking electoral law. Based on what happened today, if there is proof that the electoral process was tainted, the elections can be annulled by the constitutional court. So, your stance is that any foreign nation can disqualify any candidate they like by running a few ads for them? Think seriously about what you're saying.
    - cbg0 2y ago
      This is not a "stance", I'm mostly talking about the law, and that's something that judges decide on, not myself. Foreign nations are not allowed to be involved in the electoral process in Romania by law and could lead to the annulment of the electoral process, which is what happened. The process will start again from scratch, nobody was disqualified.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - tensor 2y ago
      Yes. That’s how it is in North America too. “A few ads” probably no, but if it’s enough to be significant then yes.
    - stubish 2y ago
      Since political advertising is and needs to be regulated, it needs to be regulated. What platform allowed the unauthorized ads to be run and who are we putting in jail? Local TV, radio and print gets held accountable, but a stick needs to be taken to foreign owned social media companies to make them acknowledge their social responsibilities.
  - Wytwwww 2y ago
    But why would the result of the new elections be different unless they disqualify that guy? It's not like there is a way to somehow force his voters to forget the illegal ads etc.
- ccozan 2y ago
  look, the law requires this declaration of funding. There is a constitional article in which the elections must be correct. By doing this, there is an unfair situation and the corectness of the elections is no longer guaranteed. Also, there is no natural growth of a candidate from 5% to 22% in two weeks. It was a massive attack on the people minds with very well crafted messages, practically saying what the people want to hear. This is no work of a person, it points out to a state actor with such vast resources.
culi 2y ago
Yeah but the consequences would be for that rich person, wouldn't it? Not the candidate themselves
JacobThreeThree 2y ago
So any third party can spend a bunch of money without the knowledge of the candidate that they purport to support, purposefully not report it, and then that candidate can be disqualified? If that's how the system works, it incentivizes abuse.
- cbg0 2y ago
  No, you would still be on the hook for breaking electoral law by not reporting spending, even as a private individual not part of the election. This wouldn't be relevant for making a few flyers as the law won't come after you for that, but spending hundreds of thousands on tiktok bots will definitely cause a stir.
  - returningfory2 2y ago
    Right, so what about if I don't like a candidate and I intentionally pump 1 million euro into her campaign so she gets disqualified? This is what the parent is asking about.
    - cbg0 2y ago
      I don't have a clear answer on that for you, but nobody was disqualified in this situation as the election was annulled and will restart from scratch. This hypothetical situation though is a bit unlikely, as we're talking about quite a lot of money to pump into someone's campaign and anyone doing this will still be subject to attempting to manipulate the electoral process if they do not abide by the law, which could land them in jail and lead to an annulment of the electoral process.
      - returningfory2 2y ago
        Sure, but right now we're talking about a situation in which quite a lot of money has been pumped into someone's campaign! This situation is proof that people are willing to interfere in the election. The problem is that once you introduce the idea that the election can be "annulled" a bunch of people are going to be motivated to hack the election to get it "annulled" in some way.

It's possible but spending has to be reported to the electoral authority, which it wasn't.

by cbg0 2y ago

It's possible but spending has to be reported to the electoral authority, which it wasn't.

If i spend money on all the other candidates and don't declare it, will they get disqualified? Or is this a rule that only gets applied when the wrong person wins=?

cbg0 2y ago
You would be in legal trouble for breaking electoral law. Based on what happened today, if there is proof that the electoral process was tainted, the elections can be annulled by the constitutional court.
- jdasdf 2y ago
  >You would be in legal trouble for breaking electoral law. Based on what happened today, if there is proof that the electoral process was tainted, the elections can be annulled by the constitutional court. So, your stance is that any foreign nation can disqualify any candidate they like by running a few ads for them? Think seriously about what you're saying.
  - cbg0 2y ago
    This is not a "stance", I'm mostly talking about the law, and that's something that judges decide on, not myself. Foreign nations are not allowed to be involved in the electoral process in Romania by law and could lead to the annulment of the electoral process, which is what happened. The process will start again from scratch, nobody was disqualified.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - tensor 2y ago
    Yes. That’s how it is in North America too. “A few ads” probably no, but if it’s enough to be significant then yes.
  - stubish 2y ago
    Since political advertising is and needs to be regulated, it needs to be regulated. What platform allowed the unauthorized ads to be run and who are we putting in jail? Local TV, radio and print gets held accountable, but a stick needs to be taken to foreign owned social media companies to make them acknowledge their social responsibilities.
- Wytwwww 2y ago
  But why would the result of the new elections be different unless they disqualify that guy? It's not like there is a way to somehow force his voters to forget the illegal ads etc.
ccozan 2y ago
look, the law requires this declaration of funding. There is a constitional article in which the elections must be correct. By doing this, there is an unfair situation and the corectness of the elections is no longer guaranteed. Also, there is no natural growth of a candidate from 5% to 22% in two weeks. It was a massive attack on the people minds with very well crafted messages, practically saying what the people want to hear. This is no work of a person, it points out to a state actor with such vast resources.

culi 2y ago

Yeah but the consequences would be for that rich person, wouldn't it? Not the candidate themselves

JacobThreeThree 2y ago

So any third party can spend a bunch of money without the knowledge of the candidate that they purport to support, purposefully not report it, and then that candidate can be disqualified? If that's how the system works, it incentivizes abuse.

cbg0 2y ago
No, you would still be on the hook for breaking electoral law by not reporting spending, even as a private individual not part of the election. This wouldn't be relevant for making a few flyers as the law won't come after you for that, but spending hundreds of thousands on tiktok bots will definitely cause a stir.
- returningfory2 2y ago
  Right, so what about if I don't like a candidate and I intentionally pump 1 million euro into her campaign so she gets disqualified? This is what the parent is asking about.
  - cbg0 2y ago
    I don't have a clear answer on that for you, but nobody was disqualified in this situation as the election was annulled and will restart from scratch. This hypothetical situation though is a bit unlikely, as we're talking about quite a lot of money to pump into someone's campaign and anyone doing this will still be subject to attempting to manipulate the electoral process if they do not abide by the law, which could land them in jail and lead to an annulment of the electoral process.
    - returningfory2 2y ago
      Sure, but right now we're talking about a situation in which quite a lot of money has been pumped into someone's campaign! This situation is proof that people are willing to interfere in the election. The problem is that once you introduce the idea that the election can be "annulled" a bunch of people are going to be motivated to hack the election to get it "annulled" in some way.