IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cei/recind/v4y2006i4p14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Echilibrul Nash si alegerile prezidentiale din anul 2000 în România (II)

Author

Listed:
  • DOSPINESCU, Andrei Silviu

    (Centre for Industrial Economics and Services, Romanian Academy, Bucharest)

  • DOSPINESCU, Bogdan Lucian

    (Centre for Industrial Economics and Services, Romanian Academy, Bucharest)

Abstract

In the 2000 Romanian Presidential election the results after the first round placed Ion Iliescu in first position, Corneliu Vadim Tudor in second, Theodor Stolojan in third and Mugur Isarescu in fourth. The first two candidates Ion Iliescu and Corneliu Vadim Tudor were close enough to ensure a tied second round. In these conditions it could be considered a surprise that Ion Iliescu won the election with a comfortable margin. We use the game theory approach to show that the attacks against Vadim and the increase in the number of strategic liberal voters are not efficient in bringing such a comfortable margin. In these conditions, without the appeal of Theodor Stolojan and Mugur Isarescu such a high margin of win in the case of Ion Iliescu would not have been possible even though the political attacks against Vadim were so well orchestrated. This suggests that the actions of the two liberal presidential candidates were impossible to ignore and that they were strategic players in the comfortable win of Ion Iliescu against Corneliu Vadim Tudor.

Suggested Citation

  • DOSPINESCU, Andrei Silviu & DOSPINESCU, Bogdan Lucian, 2006. "Echilibrul Nash si alegerile prezidentiale din anul 2000 în România (II)," Revista de Economie Industriala (Journal of Industrial Eonomics), Centre for Industrial Economics and Services, vol. 4(4), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cei:recind:v:4:y:2006:i:4:p:14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cei:recind:v:4:y:2006:i:4:p:14. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Corina Saman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceiarro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.