At a time erstwhile rising extremism, polarization, and Russian interference endanger the future of European democracy, the historical turnaround in Romania’s presidential elections offers a powerful counter-narrative. The decisive emergence and triumph of a fresh breed of politician, exemplified by the pro-European candidate Nicușor Dan, delivers valuable lessons in combating populist extremism and points toward a possible way forward for Europe.
Over the course of 2 weeks, Nicușor Dan went from trailing behind George Simion, the leader of the extremist -right-wing Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), by 20 points, to winning by a solid margin of 7 points in the runoff. The dramatic shift was partially thanks to unprecedented voter mobilization – an awesome 65 per cent of voters, the highest turnout since 1996.
The election became more than just a national contest. It came to be seen, both in Romania and abroad, as a symbolic conflict between pro-European and pro-Russian forces, emblematic of akin struggles across the continent. Dan’s victory, hailed by European leaders including Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen, is simply a win for European safety and stableness in the face of rising global tensions and a blueprint for defeating populist extremism. The message to Europe is clear: Russian influence can be resisted, and centrist, democratic forces can prevail.
The anti-politician
The appetite for anti-establishment figures is undeniable. However, Nicușor Dan’s candidacy challenged the presumption that only nationalist agitators can credibly argue entrenched parties. Populists frequently dominate in the “outsider” contenders category, but they themselves are frequently not as external to the political establishment, or to the established mode of “doing politics”, as they claim.
Nicușor Dan, even after 5 years as the mayor of Bucharest, is not a professional politician – that category which usually elicits a grimace in citizens of all backgrounds. His run had no political or PR machinery behind it. He is simply a actual independent in that he has shown himself to be a regular, dedicated professional with a occupation to do. He deals in concrete problems and attempts to tackle them rationally and realistically.
Dan rose to prominence as a civilian activist, founding the Save Bucharest Association that fought to save heritage buildings and defend them against the “real property mafia” building illegal housing projects in green spaces. He has won hundreds of lawsuits in court. He inactive lives in a rented flat and commutes on the metro.
In 2016, he founded the Save Romania Union organization (USR) as an anti-corruption and cross-ideology coalition. He duly left erstwhile this became besides trenchantly left-wing and when, with USR’s entry into parliament, the infighting and politicking began. As mayor of Bucharest, he tackled the gritty and unglamorous projects long overlooked by erstwhile talking-head mayors. For example, he started modernizing Bucharest’s crumbling heating system, an initially thankless job, as hundreds were left in the cold while work took place.
But Dan proved his pragmatism and long-term thinking, as well as his courage in making decisions which were unpopular in the minute but essential for long-term growth and the improvement of people’s surviving conditions. This was all done in a political environment that rewards short-termism and pushes politicians to choose the option that gives them the quickest popularity boost, come what may.
Simion claims to be an outsider, but his backing and behaviour are those of an establishment politician. His party, AUR, is by now well entrenched, with the second largest number of representatives in parliament. His approach to the run was recognizably populist. He avoided authoritative debates and interviews with independent media on policy and substance and focussed alternatively on social media – on catchy slogans, empty rhetoric, and “memeable” content.
Anything to cover up the reality that his promises rang hollow, just like erstwhile he promised his supporters inexpensive housing in exchange for their individual information, only to later claim his supporters had misunderstood. No houses were forthcoming, his supporters’ details were to be utilized for run marketing, and Simion admitted that the offer itself was only a promotional stunt.
Dan’s triumph has proved that the popular desire for independent figures does not should be satisfied by far-right isolationists. Authenticity and normality, not extremism, can be the driving force behind political renewal.
Actions, not words
Where Simion relied on sweeping slogans, media spectacles, and propagandistic promises, Nicușor Dan emphasized professionalism and concrete results. His political run was built on a snappy but powerful thought – actions, not words.
The appeal of nationalist populists has long been their alleged rejection of hollow rhetoric in favour of decisive action and theatrical provocation. Strongmen like Victor Orban, Vladimir Putin, and most late Donald Trump have become emblematic for aspiring populists the planet over for their impunity in riding roughshod over the regulation of law and for their frequently incendiary statements.
Dan offered a different image. He stood out not through spectacle but through substance—showcasing his administrative evidence as mayor of Bucharest and subjecting himself to intense scrutiny through exhaustive televised debates.
In contrast, Simion appeared at just 1 debate, avoiding detailed policy discussion. Dan, meanwhile, fielded challenging questions on everything from defence and healthcare to economics and infrastructure. Ironically, the populist candidate became the 1 avoiding the hard conversations, exposing the hollowness behind the strongman façade.
In fact, the typology of this theatrical rhetoric, which makes extravagant promises and puts on a good show, especially on social media, has become widespread across the political spectrum of post-modern democracy. A planet in which the dividing line between democratic politics, amusement and spectacle is increasingly blurred is 1 heading towards mass disillusionment with the political class and 1 ripe for destabilizing disinformation.
Nicușor Dan does not have the charisma of a cult leader or a late-night tv host, spinning tall tales and making elaborate, unrealistic run promises. Instead, he had the courage to do what fewer politicians can – to admit to not knowing something, to defer to specialists, to make credible alternatively than grandiose promises. It may not be flashy, but it has proved persuasive.
So much so that Simion’s run attempted to caricature Dan with insults ranging from “nerd” to “autistic” in a reliance on vicious individual attacks that unsurprisingly backfired. But Dan’s quiet competence, calm and perseverance prevailed.
The centre must hold
Nicușor Dan’s win is simply a reminder that centrism—too frequently dismissed as ineffective—can be a compelling antidote to polarization. His success shows that the mediate ground can be occupied not by compromise for its own sake, but by a clear, values-driven programme that speaks to the unaligned majority.
Across Europe, centrists have struggled to defy the pull of ideological extremes. In any cases, left-leaning parties have tried to counter far-right populism with a populism of their own—only to alienate undecided voters and deepen rifts. If social divisions are to heal, politicians request to reclaim the mediate ground. Centrism does not should be about a lukewarm mishmash between left and right.
Nicușor Dan took a different path. His platform addressed the real concerns of average citizens – pragmatically, not ideologically. He portrayed himself as a president with administrative and legal experience who can lead on state reform, a president who can bring together a divided country, and who can return values to politics.
His message is different in contemporary politics in that it is un-ideological and arguably unexciting. But it cut through the sound and appealed to voters tired of culture wars and political tribalism, and disoriented by the media onslaught and rampant disinformation.
His comments on winning are revealing of this approach: “Total respect for those who made a different choice today, and for those who made a different choice in the first round. We have a Romania to build together, regardless of political choices.”
This is not to minimize the fact that a galvanizing force behind the evidence turnout was the continuing appeal of a united Europe, the values it embodies, and the rejection of a turn towards Russia. Dan’s victory, however, shows that centrism, erstwhile rooted in competence and vision, can inactive inspire and win.
Russia’s (not so) iron grip
So, Russian disinformation and influence campaigns are not irresistible forces in European politics. Simion’s run leaned heavy on Kremlin-style narratives – informing that Romania’s support for Ukraine would drag it into war, and echoing Moscow’s claim that NATO and the EU were to blame for the conflict.
Simion’s parroting of Russian propaganda is not surprising, especially given that he is banned from both Moldova and Ukraine for making revisionist claims. Yet, a majority of Romanian voters yet rejected this messaging. The evidence turnout and mobilization of civilian society suggests that large swathes of society proceed to be motivated not by fear or resentment, but by a commitment to democratic values and European solidarity. And ironically, Simion lost the diaspora vote in both Moldova and Ukraine by large margins.
Dan, on the another hand, is simply a staunch supporter of Ukraine. “I want to underline that the war in Ukraine is essential for the safety of Romania and Moldova…I appreciate what the Romanian state has done so far, the direction … was correct and must continue”, he stated in an interview with Reuters in April 2025. Romania has provided consistent military support for Ukraine, including donating a Patriot air defence strategy and training Ukrainian air force pilots. The country has besides been crucial in facilitating the export of about 30 million metric tons of Ukrainian grain via the port of Constanta and the Sulina Canal. Dan has committed to continuing this backing. He has besides stated that defence spending should increase from 2.5 to 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2030, a decision which would strengthen Romania’s own position and its ability to aid Ukraine in its self-defence.
A blueprint for Europe
Why does this all substance for Europe? due to the fact that the Romanian elections were more than just a symbolic crossroads. Had Simion won, a key EU and NATO ally on Europe’s east Flank and staunch supporter of Ukraine might have become a disruptive, Russia-friendly outlier. The triumph of a Eurosceptic, pro-Kremlin figure would have further fractured European unity at a time of acute geopolitical instability, erstwhile a united front is simply a political and safety imperative. Ultranationalist populist parties in Europe and beyond would have been emboldened and NATO would have lost a committed and dependable partner in a key strategical area. Instead, Romania remains a reliable partner in the EU and NATO.
Just as important, if not more so, is the fact that Nicușor Dan’s run and triumph offer up a fresh model for engaging in politics. Dan represents an alternate to both the typology of the ultranationalist, firebrand populist and of the hypocritical, opportunistic “professional” politician. His brand of down-to-earth, authentic, average politics with which people can relate and which they can trust – though it may not inflame passions or garner millions of reactions on social media – can pave the way for a renewal in Europe’s political landscape. It has proven effective in defending against extremism, polarization, and Russian interference that seeks to deepen divides and amplify these trends.
Populist firebrands, across the political spectrum, should not be left to act as sole challengers to the system. Europe should look not to extremists and influencer-politicians but to fresh anti-politicians like Nicușor Dan – who are honest, average and credible – to advocate for its values and safety within an increasingly challenging world.
Maria Branea is simply a investigation Coordinator at the European Leadership Network. She previously worked as a programme associate at LSE IDEAS, the London School of Economics’ abroad policy think tank, and the Romanian-based Ratiu Forum.
Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.
