Why don't romanian politicians go after the gypsies?

Legitimately honest question here.

I've been in Romania for the last five months as an Erasmus student and the gypsy behaviour I've seen on the streets and on the news is absolutely animalesc to say the least. Stuff no other country in the world as to deal with (not even neighbouring Republic of Moldova for that matter).

Latest one I've seen, on r/ActualPublicFreakouts was out of this world.

Why don't romanian politicians tackle the gypsy problem?

I mean, I guess I know that it is a difficult problem and that the approach is one of integration (good luck!) and of changing them little by little and one at a time.
I am not asking about why that - the traditional western approach to the integration of marginalized (in this case self-marginalized) communities is not working.

What I am asking if why certain parties - namely right wing - or newly appeared figures on the right - read Georgescu the russian agent - have not banked on branding themselves anti-gypsy and promised to give the gypsy problem a less western, less tolerant approach, from a slow integration to a forceful, rule of law oriented one.

I am not necessarily arguing for it even. I am just extremely curious as to why some parties and figures that want to come from out of the system and that gain incredible popularity from the things they say still refuse to mention gypsies - a topic that would probably win them a bunch of vores, seeing every romanian abhores them.

I would really appreciate if somebody could help me understand what it is that makes them so untouchable, even with the growing of far right parties and personalities. For the other parties, I guess that them branding themselves as moderates and wanting to respect EU boundaries stops them from having a harder take and policy on the gypsy problem.