There are roughly 91 hours for me (or for any Croatian citizen) to decide who to vote for in the first round of Croatian presidential election. Unfortunately, due to obsolete and useless electoral laws, there is less time me or anyone else to explain this decision. So, I would try to be as possible and in the process give some sort of explanation to those readers fortunate enough not to be exposed to this year's boring presidential campaign.
I decided to do it by giving personal pros and cons to in reverse order in general preference.
#1 Josip Jurčević, historian and indepedent candidate (generally classified as hard nationalist right)
Pro:something of an expert in his field
Con:hard right views that would continue eternal Ustasha vs. Partisan struggle and poison relations with Croatian neighbour; his official complaint against Nova TV's method of handling presidential debates led to the debate cancellation (and helped Milan Bandić)
Chances: Snowball in hell
#2 Boris Mikšić, businessman and indepedent candidate, best known for defying all polls and almost getting into 2nd round during 2005 elections
Pro: presumably good command of English language, his election would be middle finger to Croatian political establishment
Con: incoherent populist views that don't move much from right; electoral base limited to Zagreb; spent force who had his chance in 2005 and blew it; vote for him is a waste
Chances: Snowball in hell
#3 Slavko Vukšić, businessman and leader and small regionalist party in Slavonia, former member of Sabor, inedpedent candidate
Pro: claims to be successful businessman and entertaining with his absence of "proper" etiquette
Con: complete lack of any coherent policy; vote for him would be complete waste
Chances: Snowball in hell
#4 Miroslav Tuđman, university professor, son of late president, former intelligence chief and leader of neo-Tudjmanist political party
Pro: accuses his father's former party - HDZ - of betrayal, thus exposing the hypocrisy of current political establishment; one of the rarely consisent and principled politicians in Croatia
Con: "unreformed" hardline views that would create too much mess both in Croatian internal politics, as well in relations with neighbours
Chances: might defy polls and win double digits; anything above that (including 2nd round) is in fantasy domain
#5 Dragan Primorac, former minister of education
Pro: very smooth campaign that tries to portray him as "cool", modern and hip; leftists among campaign staff, which would signal non-ideological presidency; one of better minister in Sanader's cabinet
Con: too much of political opportunism in the past, including last-minute entry into HDZ
Chances: almost none, looked big in the beginning, than got destroyed in one TV debate
#6 Andrija Hebrang, former minister of health and defence, former Tudjman's personal doctor, official HDZ candidate
Pro: recently discovered sense of humour, liberal views in some social issues (abortion)
Con: hardline nationalist views in almost anything else, reputation of meanness, witch hunts against liberal and left-meaning media in the past
Chances: could make something of surprise, but 2nd round doesn't seem very likely
#7 Vesna Pusić, leader of HNS
Pro: one of the more consistent liberals among Croatian politician; one of few who dares to tell express some unpopular views about Croatian role in Bosnian War; good international experience and credentials that could make her great diplomatic asset
Con: snobbish attitude that make her poster girl for phrase "Ivory Tower intellectual"; disdain towards anyone less educated than her; Euro-dogmatic who tends to view Brussels in the same way petty Soviet aparatchicks viewed Kremlin; if elected, she would be more hated than Tudjman or Mesić; finally, part of Croatian political establishment
Chances: Snowball in hell
#8 Milan Bandić, mayor of Zagreb
Pro: workaholic; undisputedly successful populist, Man of the People who tries (and succeeds) in bridging various ideological gaps - supporting both Thompson's and Lepa Brena's concerts in Zagreb; in 1990s single-handedly turned Zagreb into SDP stronghold; very good choice for president in case of war and other situations that require national unity
Con: lack of education; not speaking single foreign language; many of his associates belong to Croatian hard right; arrogance towards media and opponents; plenty of corruption charges; poor handling of Zagreb finances during economic crisis; demonised by media and likely to be the most despised president if elected
Chances: very good, depending on whether he could beat Nadan Vidošević and enter 2nd round; then he is likely to make minced meat out of Josipović
#9 Ivo Josipović, SDP candidate
Pro: quiet, unobtrusive technocrat who seems to know what he is doing; least likely to create hatred or bad feeling if elected; his election as SDP candidate would be the quickest way to established some kind of balance towards Jadranka Kosor's HDZ cabinet
Con: apparent lack of character and spine; too many favour owed to the Party and Zoran Milanović; in most political issues follows the establishment line; involvement in some minor controversies regarding copyright laws
Chances: actually very good; the only candidate who could expect 2nd round and leads most polls when faced against Bandić and Vidošević
#10 Vesna Škare-Ožbolt, former Tudjman's presidential advisor and wartime negotiator, former Sanader's minister of justice, leader of Democratic Centre party
Pro: her negotiatiating experience could benefit Croatian diplomacy; as a blogger she is one of the "coolest" candidates and truly formidable opposition leader
Con: her record of justice minister leaves much to be desired; vote for her is complete waste
Chances: Snowball in hell
#11 Damir Kajin, member of Sabor and IDS candidate
Pro: most radical critic of HDZ government and Croatian political establishmnent; unashamedly leftist and uncormpromisingly hostile towards Croatian nationalist right
Con: messy family life and finances; likes to drink; hostile mentality; if elected, likely to create even more controversies and bad feeling than Tudjman; vote for him might be a spoiler
Chances: snowball in hell
#12 Nadan Vidošević, chairman of Croatian Chamber of Commerce, businessman, former minister of economy
Pro: ran probably the best campaign of them all; successfully presented himself as "cool", very modern and "hip"; superb command of economic issues; good international experience; took support from both sides of political spectrum; his entry in 2nd round would knock Bandić out; last, but not least, he grew up in the same neighbourhood as the author of this post
Con: all too convenient political opportunism; serious corruption charges related to infamous 1990s privatisation
Chances: depending on polls, he either leads or trails Bandić in the race for 2nd place; currently trailing Josipović in hypothetical 2nd round match-up; yet, writing him off would be folly
Based on my preferences, I decided to cast my vote for Vidošević. This is partly because he ran really good campaign and this should be rewarded, and partly for tactical reasons. With Josipović secure in 1st place, the real issue of 1st round is his immediate opponent. Vidošević is at this moment preferable option to Bandić, so I decided to play it safe. Vote for anyone else - including Josipović - is at this time vote for Bandić,
This is yet another case of the contradictions in voting. The bad may be the indirect ally of the good. For instance, consider the French election where Chirac was re-elected. He won the second round with 80% because his opponent was Le Pen, who had edged out all the left candidates in the first round. A Chirac supporter might have voted for Le Pen in the first round just to create that situation.
Contrariwise, the good may be the enemy of the better. Suppose there is a "party primary", where a 90% conservative and a 70% conservative compete to meet a 90% liberal, in a district that leans conservative. The 70% conservative would when the general election easily; but the 90%er would win too, and be a more reliable conservative representative. Hard conservatives would therefore go all-out against Mr. 70%
Posted by: Rich Rostrom | Monday, December 28, 2009 at 07:41