The "disruptive candidate" and the Cypriot voter

When Mr. George Vassiliou run for president of Cyprus in 1988, almost everyone, irrespective of his/her political or party affiliation, was pleasantly surprised, because this new candidate was not from among the "usual suspects" and he looked different than the rest.

He was called an "economist" and a "marketer" (as opposed to "politician") and he employed different, i.e. contemporary political campaign methods in promoting his candidature. He spoke directly to people in the street (anyone remembers the media-covered Ledra street stroll?), talked about management and organization, set "first 100 days goals" held an international press conference and spoke foreign languages other than English, and during his AKEL-supported campaign he engaged in what experts refer to as "retail politics." He surrounded himself with young, largely competent and ambitious aids, and his wife was as much an aspiring public figure as he was. He even shook hands differently (anyone remembers kapakoti?). In short he was a "disruptive candidate" and much like anything else disruptive, Mr. Vassiliou's campaign comprised of an innovative and efficient implementation of otherwise "straightforward, off – the – shelf" election "technologies." It suffices to say that the term "disruptive technology" was first used by Dr. Clayton M. Christensen in his bestselling business innovation book The Innovator's Dilemma.

But no matter what he did, he ended up winning by a small margin, not because of the innovative – disruptive nature of his candidacy, but because the alignment of the political parties was such at that particular historical juncture as to allow AKEL to elect his candidate. Subsequently, when the alignment of the parties changed five years later (because Mr. Klerides wanted Mr. Kyprianou' support and in return denounced the set of ideas) Mr. Vassiliou lost, again by a small margin.

What does that say about the Cypriot voter? Do Cypriot voters care to vote for a "disruptive" candidate en masse so as to permanently alter the political party calculus that always takes place? Or will the math always do the trick instead?

Can Mr. Christofias potential/ possible candidature be a disruptive one, albeit much different than that of Mr. Vassiliou, of course?