Prime minister's pick wins easily in Georgia
TBILISI, Georgia — Giorgi Margvelashvili, a onetime mountain guide who forged a reputation in politics as a moderate voice of reason, won the presidential election in Georgia on Sunday with backing from the prime minister's ruling coalition.
By late Sunday, Margvelashvili was leading with about two-thirds of the vote, according to exit polls conducted by the German polling agency GFK, prompting his main opponent to concede.
Margvelashvili, 44, had the backing of powerful Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili and his Georgian Dream ruling coalition. He had been serving as minister of education and science in Ivanishvili's government.
His election could portend a period of relative stability for Georgia, a former Soviet republic whose politics at times have been tumultuous and whose relations with neighboring Russia have been tense at best and have flared into open conflict.
“In the person of Margvelashvili, we got a young, talented and very promising politician who will certainly try to lead a nonconfrontational dialogue with Russia,” said Ramaz Sakvarelidze, an independent political analyst.
Margvelashvili will succeed Mikheil Saakashvili, who came to power in 2004 in the so-called Rose Revolution. Saakashvili and his United National Movement supported David Bakradze, who received barely 20 percent of the vote, according to the exit polls.
The winner thanked his team and his former boss, Ivanishvili.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.