Our presidential elections are purely power games between parties. That’s exactly what the liberals want — for the president to be elected in the Riigikogu, where they hold the majority. They are doing everything they can to prevent the election from moving to the electoral college, where local governments would also be represented.
The liberals suffered a crushing defeat in the local elections. They have no hope that an electoral college — where members of parliament are joined by representatives of local governments — would elect a president according to liberal preferences. Local governments have made their opposition to the ruling parties very clear.
That is why, after their total failure in the local elections, it is crucial for liberals to get “their guy” elected president directly in parliament. The president in our country may not have much real executive power, but they can veto laws that liberals dislike while refraining from vetoing laws that suit them.
Using the veto is not difficult — practically any law, if examined closely enough, can be said to violate what has recently become the sacred cow of our legal system: someone’s interpretation of the principle of equality. That alone is often enough to refuse to promulgate a law.
If disputes over a veto continue, the next instance is the Supreme Court. As practice has shown, the Supreme Court operates under liberal influence. It is enough to recall, as proof of this claim, that the Supreme Court has not even agreed to hear a single complaint about the fairness of e-elections.
Even if the president’s real power is small, it still exists. And even that small amount is useful to liberals.
The described power mechanism is essential for liberals to neutralize laws they dislike and secure the enforcement of those they favor. Having their own person as president would be an important lever of power for them.
There is another aspect as well: for many people, the president’s words still carry some weight. And even if they don’t, the liberal so-called mainstream media will try to squeeze the “correct” ideology out of yet another bland and roundabout presidential speech and then distribute it to the public. The president may not have much real power, but for part of the population they remain something of an authority — even though in reality they function mainly as an ideological loudspeaker. In other words, the president is our national opinion shaper.
Our previous presidents, however, have largely squandered that role themselves. Hardly anyone believes or trusts them anymore when they occasionally deliver another generic, banal speech written behind the scenes. The president’s voice is not the people’s voice. The reputation of the so-called mainstream media — the primary and “authoritative interpreter” of presidential speeches — is also steadily declining in the eyes of the people.
In conclusion: the people will have no say in the upcoming presidential elections. Our role is to be spectators. And to hope that the president is not elected in parliament but that the election goes to the electoral college — and that the electoral college chooses a person who honestly represents the will of the people, not that of party power.
That is precisely what liberals fear most — that the president might become the voice and representative of the people rather than theirs. That liberal dominance in Estonian politics may come to an inglorious end. That could well happen: the 2027 parliamentary elections promise nothing good for liberals. And if, on top of that, the president turns out to be a representative of the people rather than of the liberal clique, then… then it’s over and done with.
It is fear of the people that makes liberals scramble so desperately before the presidential elections.
-Harri Kingo, Facebook
