The question of how diasporas vote is important per se and also raises the issue of how best to stimulate the political participation of nonresident citizens in national and presidential elections as well as referenda. Few European countries offer special parliamentary seats to the diaspora, and Romania is one of them. Diaspora votes are counted in a special district (Law No. 35, 2008), which elects two senators and four deputies to the Romanian Parliament. The election of representatives in a designated constituency for overseas voters is a strong incentive for participation because voting preferences are not scattered across multiple districts. Furthermore, voting abroad has become increasingly simplified through the adoption of postal voting (Law No. 208, 2015) and voting over three days (HG 630, 2019). In this context, the question is: What type of party manages to attract diaspora votes?

First, I argue that whereas old parties have the organizational capacity and resources, and could benefit from the votes of nonresident citizens, it is actually new parties that succeed the most in attracting those votes. It is not resources that a party needs the most to engage with the diaspora but rather an effective online communication strategy, which is less costly than traditional voter-mobilization strategies. It is not the structural articulation of the party that matters the most for electoral campaigning and coordination across districts. The ad hoc, informal, online engagement with the diaspora can have an electoral impact considering that the target group is scattered across countries abroad. It is not the age of parties and their experience that impacts greatly on electoral success across the diaspora but rather the main party message.

The Social Democratic Party (PSD) is the most institutionalized post-communist party in Romania. It has high membership and relatively strong electoral support across the country. The party’s reputation suffered, however, from corruption scandals. Many of its officials have been prosecuted and convicted on corruption charges. The party acknowledges the diaspora the most in its statute, but the level of online engagement with it is low (Borz Reference Borz2020). PSD candidates received the lowest number of votes across the diaspora in the 2019 European elections. The Liberal Party (PNL), another institutionalized party, managed to reform its statute. For example, the PNL added provisions according to which collaborators with the former communist secret service or party members under prosecution for corruption can no longer run for office. The PNL’s online activity, however, is more intense than that of the PSD. The electoral success of the PNL across the diaspora was visible during presidential elections when, in the run-off, its candidate opposed the PSD candidate. Union Save Romania Party (USR), established only in 2016, does not have local branches across the country but was more successful at connecting with the diaspora (Central Electoral Bureau 2019). Online communication via dedicated web pages, Twitter accounts, and Facebook pages was efficiently used but also showed high activity (e.g. followers and messages). The results were visible, especially in the last presidential and European elections when the party received a significant percentage of its total votes from the diaspora.

Second, I argue that the link between parties and the diaspora is stronger when certain political issues become salient across the diaspora and when party–voter congruence on those issues is high. In new democracies, institutional and economic developments are topical issues; however, more relevant in recent decades is the fight against corruption as a way toward improving good governance.

In Romania, along with improving the economy, living standards, health care, and welfare conditions, corruption eradication became a salient issue at home and abroad especially after 2012, when new anticorruption institutions (e.g., the National Agency against Corruption) were established. The Romanian civil society and media mobilized successfully against corruption in various forms and the diaspora followed with strong anticorruption protests organized in Bucharest in 2018 and 2019. Not all parties could respond to anticorruption voter preferences. The PSD, the post-communist successor party, could not attract diaspora votes because it had corrupt officials among its ranks. The PNL reformed its candidate-selection rules and many of its members were forced to resign from official positions due to corruption charges. The USR, however, has as one of its main goals the fight against corruption. Its strong anticorruption program coupled with effective online communication strategies with party members abroad were the keys to success across the diaspora.

Overall, in contrast to traditional accounts that link institutionalization, organization, electoral strategies, and nationwide electoral success, for the diaspora it is the online organization combined with issue salience and issue congruence that ensures most party success. It is not the old parties that benefit most from this recipe for success but rather new parties that manage to get their message across the diaspora—that is, not the new splinter parties but instead the newly established parties with a specific anticorruption program.