Most anticipated political event 2016 – elections to the State Duma of the seventh convocation did not bring any surprises and fully met the expectations of specialists.
The most anticipated political event of 2016, the elections to the State Duma of the seventh convocation, brought no surprises and fully met the expectations of specialists. United Russia Party in Once again won “by a clear advantage,” and the election results demonstrated the absence of any desire among the common people to change the existing political order. And yet, the election campaign of September 18, 2016 allows us to draw some conclusions. For example, despite the election results, the relatively low overall turnout indicates a loss of interest in elections as an event that determines certain vectors of the country’s development.
State Duma election results: turnout by region
Experts' opinions on the number of Russian citizens who came to the polls vary somewhat. Some experts agree with the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation D. Peskov, who stated that 47.81% throughout the country is an indicator that looks quite decent against the background of similar European campaigns. Others are haunted by the trend showing that ordinary people are less and less willing to spend time expressing their civic position and declaring their political views.
On September 18, 2016, less than half of the registered voters visited the polling stations, but this did not prevent the Central Election Commission from recognizing the elections as valid (corresponding amendments to the legislation were made in advance) and the election results as final. The only thing of interest is the significant difference in turnout rates by region. Despite the fact that representatives of United Russia won in almost every region, greatest number votes for them, as well as almost twice as many voters, were recorded in 13 subjects: the Kabardino-Balkarian and Karachay-Cherkess Republics, Mordovia, the Chechen Republic, the Kemerovo and Tyumen regions, the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Ingushetia, North Ossetia, Tatarstan and the Republic of Tyva. In these regions, the average turnout was 81.4%, while in the remaining 72 it was only 42.9%. What election results were obtained in these two radically different groups can be seen in the following table.
As for Moscow and St. Petersburg, these cities topped the lists of settlements with the lowest turnout: 35.18% and 32.47%, respectively. At the same time, here too, the election results showed serious support for the party in power.
Results of the 2016 State Duma elections: how the votes were distributed
The 2016 elections to the State Duma again showed the strength of the party in power: United Russia not only won, but received a constitutional majority, which will allow it to pass laws containing amendments to articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation - the highest normative legal act of the state. Official data says that United Russia gained 54.19%, which in the number of deputy mandates is equal to 343 ( total number seats in the State Duma - 450). The final election figures are as follows:
- “United Russia” – 54.19%;
- Communist Party of the Russian Federation - 13.34%;
- LDPR – 13.15%;
- “A Just Russia” – 6.22%;
- “Communists of Russia” – 2.27%;
- “Motherland” – 2.3%;
- Russian Party of Pensioners “For Justice” – 2.0%;
- “Apple” – 1.9%;
- “Growth Party” – 1.8%;
- "Parnas" - 1.2%;
- “Greens” – 0.8%;
- “Civic Platform” – 0.3%;
- “Civil force” – 0.2%.
Following United Russia, representatives of five parties and one self-nominated candidate received seats in the State Duma:
- “United Russia” – 343,
- Communist Party of the Russian Federation - 42,
- LDPR – 39,
- “A Just Russia” – 23,
- “Civic Platform” – 1,
- "Motherland" - 1,
- self-nominated candidates – 1.
Elections to the Duma on September 18, 2016: falsification?
Chairman of the Central Election Committee E.A. Pamfilova described the 2016 elections as open and legitimate. At the same time, she made it clear that any facts of falsification will be considered immediately, and appropriate measures will be taken against violators. Official data that came from the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs the day after the elections states that there were two cases of ballot stuffing in the Rostov region. In addition, 8 complaints were registered that were received by the CEC from observers. Experts' opinions regarding the falsification of the 2016 elections are traditionally divided: some believe that seats in the State Duma were distributed in advance, others believe that the will of the common people is truly reflected in the final figures. 
Results of the 2016 Duma elections: what do observers say about the victory of United Russia?
The fact that United Russia will win again in 2016 was already mentioned in preliminary polls that were regularly published by VTsIOM on the eve of the elections. At the same time, satellite parties were also named, which for many years had kept United Russia company in the lower house of parliament: the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia and A Just Russia. Among the opinions of experts and observers, one can hear a variety of explanations for the current situation on the political field of the country: the huge administrative resource of the party in power, the lack of a worthy alternative, the loss of interest in the elections of the majority of the population, etc. Dry numbers indicate that what kind of party has received constitutional the majority, 27.2 million citizens voted in 2016. In the last elections, where United Russia also won an unconditional victory, the number of its supporters was 32.4 million people.
The Center for Scientific Political Thought and Ideology (Sulakshin Center) carried out a mathematical reconstruction of the true, scientifically based voting results.
Mathematics provides a way to prove not only the fact of falsification, but also its scale, nature and organization of the management of the process of falsification, and, in addition, allows us to reconstruct the true voting results; the results both in terms of turnout and the number of votes actually received by parties and candidates, how the traces of mass violations were “covered up.”
I.Analysis methodology
The initial data for the analysis are data officially published on the website of the Russian Central Election Commission for all more than 95,000 polling stations.
The methodology for identifying the truth of elections is based on the following principles.
If the distribution deviates from the Gaussoid, it means that interference in the elections occurred (Fig. 2).
State Duma elections 2016 (party list)
Fig. 2 The deviation from the Gaussoid in favor of the candidates (parties) from power - “United Russia” is shaded in black. The ratio of the black area under the curve and the white area under the Gaussian gives the falsification coefficient
Citizens' preferences for different parties or candidates in “fair” elections do not depend on turnout. If a Gaussian “honest” cloud of votes is visible, but with increasing turnouts, an increase in votes in favor of the candidate and party in power and a drop in votes for the opposition, then this is clearly falsification, which is clearly seen in the example of the 2016 elections in the Penza region (Fig. 3).
Fig.3 The honest “cloud” of the opposition is higher than the “cloud” of the United Russia party. The rest was thrown in and attributed to the benefit of the United Russia party and to the loss of the opposition
If in many polling stations in the region the result of the party in power is the same to within hundredths of a percent, then this means that the command was given to “get” just such a result. This is especially clearly visible in the Saratov region for the United Russia party in 100 polling stations - the result is 62.15%.
If the falsification coefficients for the regions of Russia coincide with statistical accuracy both for the falsification of results for the party list and for majoritarian districts, then this proves centralized x the nature of falsification management.
II. The scale of fraud in the 2016 State Duma elections
The official results of the September 18, 2016 elections to the State Duma, published by the Russian Central Election Commission, are as follows.
The turnout according to the Russian Central Election Commission was 47.88%.
Based on the mathematical reconstruction methodology outlined above, we will analyze the voting results in the elections of the State Duma of the Russian Federation on September 18, 2016 and identify their real results.
As can be seen from the above data, the Gaussian “cloud” for both voting on party lists and in majoritarian constituencies indicates that the “fair” turnout of real voting is 35%, but not 47.88% recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission.
Thus, based on the scientific methodology of mathematical reconstruction of the analysis of voting results in the elections of the State Duma of the Russian Federation on September 18, 2016 first conclusion is this: in the organic Gaussian vote cloud, the average turnout was 35% for both types of voting. Increase in official turnout to 47.88%, recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission, is unreliable and is the result of falsifications, which is clearly visible on the right wing of the Gaussian distribution, which goes beyond the boundaries of the pure Gaussian curve.
Second . From Fig. 4 - the results of voting by party lists and Fig. 5 - the results of voting by majoritarian districts, it is clear that in an organic Gaussian cloud, that is, in a truly fair election, the United Russia party received fewer votes than the opposition.
Third . On the right wing of the voting results for party lists and majoritarian districts (see Figures 4 and 5), clear unambiguous signs of falsification are visible - “spikes” in turnout multiples of 5% and 10%. A particularly outstanding “spike” - 95% turnout is recorded for the United Russia party.
Fourth . The left wing of the organic Gaussoid is clearly visible at small turnouts, and this makes it possible to reproduce the right wing symmetrically. From here it becomes possible to calculate the true number of “honest” votes cast in the elections, and the number of votes attributed or falsified.
Let's evaluate the election results for the United Russia party by simply comparing the areas under the bell curves and the falsified long right wing. The assessment results are shown in Table 1.
Assessing the true outcome for the United Russia party
The coincidence of falsification coefficients for party lists and majoritarian elections for the United Russia party is not accidental. This indicates that the falsification campaign was under unified control and with a single goal. The same tasks were set - “bars” for the result.
Instead of 343 seats in the State Duma, according to the official total, the real total for the United Russia party is 134 seats.
The falsified 209 mandates transferred to the United Russia party are actually in a state of “seizure of power and appropriation of power,” which is prohibited by the Constitution Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Russia.
In Fig. Figure 6 clearly shows how much the United Russia party lost to the opposition in both types of voting in a more or less adequate area of turnout.
Rice. 6. In reality, United Russia lost to the opposition
As can be seen from the figures shown. 6 data, in the area of unfalsified results, the United Russia party lost to the opposition by about a third of parliamentary seats. A complete falsified bacchanalia for the United Russia party to the detriment of the opposition parties is observed in the right wing of the chart.
The next pattern that helps to reveal falsification is the law of independence of the electorate’s preference for a particular candidate from turnout (Fig. 7).
Rice. 7. It is theoretically clear that voter preferences should not depend on turnout
If the distribution has a positive angle deviation from the horizontal (from left to right up) - then this indicates falsification in the form of attribution of votes. If there is a deviation from the horizontal to the minus (from left to right down) - then this is falsification on the contrary in the form of theft of votes.
This methodological approach allows us to identify the amount of falsification in voting for parties and their candidates in all subjects of the Federation.
A quantitative measure of the degree of falsification is determined by the slope of the distribution curve - the falsification coefficient. If it is positive, then this is falsification in favor of the corresponding party or candidate, votes are attributed to him. If it is negative, then, on the contrary, it is falsification at a loss; in this case, votes are stolen.
In Fig. 8 (Voronezh region) shows a typical and almost standard form of curves, which is reproduced in almost all subjects of the Federation. Each point on these diagrams is the number of votes for a particular party or candidate at a particular precinct. In all subjects of the Federation, with rare exceptions, the winner (the United Russia party) has a deviation of “+”, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, both the main oppositionist, and the rest of the opposition parties have a deviation of “-”. Dense organic clouds with a small scatter are observed (Fig. 8), i.e., a low level of dispersion. And the second, elongated cloud, which has a very high level of dispersion. It will soon be seen that one of the “clouds” corresponds to true results, and the second - falsified ones.
Fig.8. A typical picture of fraud in favor of the United Russia party and the taking of votes from other parties. Deviation angles from the horizontal – falsification coefficient
This example for the Voronezh region shows a typical picture. The right “tails” of the distributions for United Russia, being falsified, are always directed to the right and upward. For the opposition, the direction is always the opposite “right-down”.
The Report contains data on falsification in favor of the United Russia party and the taking away of votes from other parties in all subjects of the Russian Federation.
The distribution of the falsification coefficient across the subjects of the Federation (comparative data) for voting on the party list and in majoritarian districts is shown in Fig. 9.
Fig.9. Fraud rate for the United Russia party for all subjects of the federation for majoritarian elections and for the party list
From the nature of the curves it is clear that the falsifications were synchronized both on the United Russia party list and on its candidates in majoritarian districts. The correlation coefficient of the curves is very high - it was 0.86!
We especially emphasize that the average coefficient of falsifications in favor of candidates and parties in power in 2016 was 1.9 times higher than in 2011.
III. Mechanism of election fraud
The voting results during the 2016 elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation were falsified in several ways: the stuffing of false ballots; drawing up false protocols; fraud with the absentee mechanism; fraud with fake voters (the so-called carousel); fraud committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy or by an organized group, combined with bribery, coercion, the use of violence or the threat of its use; threats to teachers and other poor souls in precinct election commissions with dismissal in the event of a low result in the elections of the government's favorites.
The facts of falsification are evidenced by numerous video evidence, personal testimony of eyewitnesses, photos and videos of ballot stuffing at many polling stations by members and even chairmen of election commissions.
In fair elections, citizens' preferences do not depend on turnout: that is, the ratio of the number of votes for one party to the number of votes for another, votes for one candidate to votes for another does not depend on turnout. In the direct exit pool conducted by VTsIOM, which cannot be suspected of being in opposition to the authorities and the Russian Central Election Commission, there is no dependence on turnout at the exit from polling stations!
The figures above show that up to a turnout of 47%, the United Russia party is seriously losing to the opposition. But starting with a turnout of 47%, the opposite is true. And the higher the turnout, the more the United Russia party begins to “win” against the opposition. Moreover, the curves practically coincide for voting on the party list and in majoritarian districts. It is important that in the turnout range of 25-40%, which corresponds to the organic cloud of “honest” voting, the attitude really does not depend on turnout. This means that the data here can be relatively trusted. In this range, the United Russia party lost to the opposition by 1.42 times. The average turnout in this range is 32.5%.
For this turnout, the number of voters who voted in the elections is 35,690 thousand people. The true ratio of votes for the United Russia party and the entire aggregate opposition revealed above (1.42 times) allows us to obtain the true absolute number of votes for the United Russia party and the corresponding result (percentage). It turns out that the United Russia party actually received 14,750 thousand votes. Officially, the Russian Central Election Commission announced 28,525 thousand votes for the United Russia party. And this corresponds to 54.28%. And the true result is 27.9%.
Results of reconstruction of the true election results
As a result, we come to the conclusion that the United Russia party was supported by just over 13% of all registered voters and less than 10% of the country’s population. The counterfeiters illegally increased its result by more than 1.5 times! More than 200 people came to the State Duma of the Russian Federation to “work” on the basis of illegally assigned powers of power! In other words, there was an illegal seizure of power!
Meanwhile, in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Article 3.Part 4. it is stated that “no one has the right to appropriate power in the Russian Federation. Seizure of power or appropriation of power is prosecuted under federal law - the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
In particular, Article 278 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - Forcible seizure of power or forcible retention of power - states that “actions aimed at the forcible seizure of power or forcible retention of power in violation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ... are punishable by imprisonment for a term of twelve to twenty years.. ."
Federal election fraud state power State Duma of the Russian Federation is also part of a criminal offense. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 142. Falsification of election documents, referendum documents.
"1. Falsification of election documents ... if this act is committed by a member of the election commission ... is punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles or in the amount wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to two years, or forced labor for a term of up to four years, or imprisonment for the same period….
2. Forgery of voter signatures, ... or certification of knowingly forged signatures (signature sheets), committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy or by an organized group, or combined with bribery, coercion, the use of violence or the threat of its use, ... is punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand...or forced labor for a term of up to three years, or imprisonment for the same term...
3. Illegal production of... ballots..., absentee certificates is punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand rubles... or imprisonment for a term of 2 to 5 years.”
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 142.1. Falsification of voting results. “The inclusion of uncounted ballots among the ballots used in voting, or the deliberate submission of incorrect information about voters, or the deliberately incorrect compilation of voter lists, ... or falsification of voter signatures, ... or the replacement of valid ballots with voter marks, leading to the inability to determine the will of voters, ... or deliberately incorrect counting of votes, ... or signing by members of the election commission ... of a protocol on voting results before counting votes or establishing voting results, or deliberately incorrect (not corresponding to the actual voting results) drawing up a protocol on voting results, or illegal entry into the protocol on voting results changes after its completion, or deliberately incorrect determination of voting results, determination of election results... - is punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand rubles... or forced labor for a term of up to four years, or imprisonment for the same term.”
Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 141. Obstruction of the exercise of electoral rights or the work of election commissions.
« 1. Obstructing a citizen’s free exercise of his electoral rights, violating the secrecy of voting, ... obstructing the work of election commissions, ... the activities of a member of an election commission, ... is punishable by a fine of up to eighty thousand rubles ... or ... correctional labor for up to one year.
2. The same acts:
a) connected with bribery, deception, coercion, use of violence or the threat of its use;
b) committed by a person using his official position;
c) committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy or by an organized group - is punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand... or imprisonment for a term of up to five years.
3. Interference, through the use of official or official position, in the exercise by an election commission ... of its powers, ... with the aim of influencing its decisions, namely a demand or instruction official on issues of registration of candidates, lists of candidates, counting votes...is punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand...or imprisonment for a term of up to four years.”
IY. conclusions
1.The official turnout of 48%, recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission, is unreliable and does not exceed 35% for both party list voting and majoritarian constituencies, or The turnout recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission was falsified and inflated by 1.45 times.
2. During the voting, the United Russia party actually received not 54% of the party list, as recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission, but 27.9% of the number of voters, or 13.2% of the number of registered voters and less than 10% of the country’s population . Counterfeiters illegally increased its result by more than 1.5 times.
3. Instead of 343 seats in the State Duma of the Russian Federation, according to the official total, the real total for the United Russia party is 134 seats.
The falsified 209 mandates transferred to the United Russia party are actually in a state of “seizure of power and appropriation of power,” which is prohibited by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Russia.
General conclusion : a scientifically based analysis of the election process on September 18, 2016 indicates that the elections to the State Duma were held with gross violations, massive falsifications and are subject to cancellation, and State Duma 2016 isillegal.
The saddest thing about this problem is that only certain individuals are actively fighting against gross violations, falsification, scandalous elections, such as T. Yurasova in Mytishchi, S. Posokhov in Krasnogorsk, R. Zinatullin in Tatarstan and a number of others, but not the opposition parties LDPR, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, A Just Russia, which were “robbed” during the election process and the only media outlet – Novaya Gazeta.
Meanwhile, it is the factions of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Liberal Democratic Party, A Just Russia in the State Duma of the Russian Federation that could bring to the meeting of the State Duma of the Russian Federation the issue of gross violations and massive fraud in the elections of September 18, 2016 with the aim of making a political decision - self-dissolution illegal State Duma of the Russian Federation and an appeal to the President of the Russian Federation as the guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation to call new elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation.
Massive violations and falsification during the 2016 State Duma elections affect a significant number of citizens and have acquired special socio-political significance. In this regard, within the framework of its powers, the Central Election Commission of Russia has the right to appeal to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the protection of the electoral rights of the majority of citizens, as well as to the Prosecutor General’s Office and investigative committee Russia to take prosecutorial response measures and initiate criminal proceedings regarding the commission of crimes provided for in Articles 141, 142, 142.1, 278 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, and to identify those responsible for violating current legislation.
With sincere respect (Yu. Voronin)
Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor,
Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic -
Chairman of the State Planning Committee of the TASSR (1988-1990);
First Deputy Chairman of the Supreme
Council of the Russian Federation (1991-1993); State Duma deputy
(second convocation); auditor of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation.
Experts predict that after the presidential elections in 2018, reform of the political system will begin
Photo: Vladimir Afanasyev / “Parliamentary newspaper”
Leveling the competitiveness of parties will become one of the main directions of reform of the political system in Russia. And one of her vectors will be the consolidation of parties. This was stated by participants in the meeting of the Expert Club of the Parliamentary Newspaper, which took place on October 12.
"Multi-subject" instead of manual control
The moderator of the Expert Club of the Parliamentary Newspaper, a political scientist, said that the reform of the political system is overdue, since the existing mechanism for forming the Russian parliament has successfully completed its task of cutting off legislative branch populist groups. And, according to him, the drop in turnout at the elections, which was noted by political scientists on the single voting day on September 10, is “reasonable voter behavior.” The expert believes that the substantive difference of the future reform is that the regime of personal power under one, albeit excellent, leader will be replaced by “multi-subjectivity.”
“The mechanism for making collegial decisions will be stronger than manual control,” Markov said about one of the reform options.
Mikhail Emelyanov. Photo: Igor Samokhvalov / Parliamentary Newspaper
Also, according to him, a very real scenario is when political parties in Russia will become a platform for the integration of power and big business. For example, he explained, if in some city there is businessman No. 1, then there is also businessman No. 2, who will always be in conflict with the first. Each of them needs its own political support, its own party - such a system works in dozens of countries around the world. In Russia, for now, business places more emphasis on supporting governors or mayors than deputies. The political scientist believes that the situation should change in favor of the parties.
The voter does not go to the polls because he is sure that all parties in Russia are the same, and voting is needed “for show,” said the first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on State Building and Legislation, a deputy from the A Just Russia faction. The parliamentarian is convinced that reform of the political system in Russia is impossible without proposals from the parties themselves. According to him, individual people in the systemic opposition have been talking about this for a long time and there are more and more such people.
Ivan Abramov. Photo: Igor Samokhvalov / Parliamentary Newspaper
“No one will break the parties over their knees - such a reform will not restore the trust of voters. I think the authorities will mark the path to reform so that the parties can move forward along it themselves,” the legislator noted.
And now, according to Mikhail Yemelyanov, it is necessary to create a coordination council for opposition parliamentary parties - this will make it easier to promote initiatives. Moreover, for example, the introduction of a progressive tax scale in Russia is supported by all three opposition Duma factions. Therefore, the deputy believes that the unification of A Just Russia, the Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, “is not such a fantastic idea.”
Towards bipartisanship
Reform of the political system will begin immediately after the presidential elections in Russia in March 2018, experts are convinced. And we will hear proposals on how to implement changes already during the election statements of presidential candidates - the first deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on Regional Policy and Problems of the North is sure of this. Far East, deputy from the LDPR faction.
“The demand for a strong opposition has already been formed in society. And the candidate who formulates it will have a great chance of winning,” he believes.
Konstantin Babkin. Photo: Igor Samokhvalov / Parliamentary Newspaper
And the parliamentarian sees the essence of the reform in the consolidation of political parties. At the same time, the parliamentarian noted: if the current electoral legislation worked one hundred percent, then the question of the majority party would always be open.
Experts agree that the emergence of a “second major party” along with United Russia will make it possible to get away from the situation where the interests of a huge number of Russians are not expressed in any way during the elections. A political strategist Andrey Kolyadin noted: the authorities will not give a signal for reform if there is no specific project for changing the political system. As they say, no project - no solutions.
Andrey Kolyadin. Photo: Igor Samokhvalov / Parliamentary Newspaper
Meanwhile, not everyone is sure that the reform of the political system will begin in 2018. But in 2021, the State Duma will be formed according to a different principle - few people have doubts about this. In particular, this opinion was expressed to the Parliamentary Newspaper by the head of the Party of Causes. Konstantin Babkin.
“Elections will become more competitive, there will be more competition. In any case, our party feels the desire to suppress our political activity, and it really hopes for this,” he noted.
Moscow, 09/18/2016
Russian President V. Putin and Russian Prime Minister, Chairman of the United Russia party D. Medvedev at the headquarters of the party that won the elections on the night after the vote
Press service of the Russian government/TASS
Constitutional majority
"United Russia" will receive 343 mandates (76.22% of seats) in the State Duma of the seventh convocation, in accordance with the preliminary election results, TASS reports with reference to the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation receives 42 mandates (9.34% of seats), the Liberal Democratic Party - 39 mandates (8.67% of seats), A Just Russia - 23 mandates (5.11% of seats). Representatives of Rodina and the Civic Platform, as well as self-nominated Vladislav Reznik, elected in single-mandate constituencies, each receive one mandate. In most residential districts, United Russia or representatives of other parliamentary parties won.
After the four parliamentary parties of the new Duma, in fifth place according to the election results, TASS previously reported, are the Communists of Russia with 2.40% of the votes. Further votes between the parties were distributed as follows: Yabloko - 1.77%, Russian Party of Pensioners for Justice - 1.75%, Rodina - 1.42%, Growth Party - 1.11%, Greens - 0, 72%, "Parnas" - 0.68%, "Patriots of Russia" - 0.57%, "Civic Platform" - 0.22% of the votes, "Civil Force" - 0.13% of the votes.
By the end of the count, United Russia had greatly strengthened its position compared to midnight. Then, according to Exit-poll data provided by VTsIOM, United Russia gained 44.5%, the LDPR was in second place (15.3%), the Communist Party of the Russian Federation lagged behind (14.9%), A Just Russia had more than later (8. 1%). The turnout was about 40%, but then increased significantly: after processing 91.8% of the protocols, the turnout was 47.9%. Zyuganov’s words, said shortly after the vote count began, that “two thirds of the country did not come,” were not confirmed.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev arrived at the United Russia election headquarters at night.
“The result for United Russia is good,” said the Russian President. “We can say with confidence that the party achieved a good result - it won,” Putin said.
According to estimates by the head of VTsIOM Valery Fedorov, United Russia, taking into account single-mandate constituencies, can receive 300 mandates. "United Russia will have about 300 mandates, maybe even more. This is a constitutional majority. Some want 66%, some 75%, everyone has their own criteria for problems. I think that everything above 44% (according to party lists - ed.), this is definitely a very big success for United Russia. Let's see whether our forecasts are confirmed or not,” Fedorov said on Life.
The forecast of more than 300 mandates is fully confirmed. Data on single-mandate constituencies at 9.30 am Moscow time were still incomplete, but already quite eloquent. United Russia continued to lead in 203 of the 206 single-mandate constituencies in which it nominated candidates, TASS reported.
The party, obviously, again has a constitutional majority, which United Russia did not have in the previous Duma. Let us remember that she was elected only from party lists (according to the 2004 legislation). “Candidates from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and A Just Russia win in seven districts each, five are retained by the LDPR. Leaders of Rodina Alexey Zhuravlev and Civic Platform Rifat Shaikhutdinov win in their districts.
A number of violations were recorded during the elections. The incident in the Rostov region was considered the most significant.
The Ministry of Internal Affairs confirms the facts of ballot stuffing at polling stations in the Rostov region, TASS reports.
As stated by First Deputy Head of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs Alexander Gorovoy, facts of ballot stuffing at polling stations No. 1958 and No. 1749 have been documented.
Victory of strong statehood
But, according to political scientist Dmitry Orlov, administrative mobilization is becoming a thing of the past. United Russia was helped by the primary mobilization - the primary elections in the spring, and the thesis “together with the president.” A very significant factor in favor of United Russia was Putin’s meeting with its activists shortly before the elections and his statement that he created this party.
Although the company is described as boring, according to the political scientist, this is not the case thanks to the meaningful struggle in single-mandate constituencies, where many new faces with specific programs were nominated.
The LDPR responded to the social request better than the Right Russia, also drawing back the votes of the nationalists. Traditionally, in times of crisis and uncertainty, this party improves its results, noted Dmitry Orlov.
It is interesting to look at some of the estimates that analysts made for Expert Online shortly before the elections. Tatyana Mineeva, vice-president of Business Russia and a member of the federal political council of the Party of Growth, noted the “strong position of the LDPR”: “The majority of the population does not believe in reforms, and the liberal democrats do not propose them,” she stated. "Fair Russia", noted public figure, falls because it was never able to present a coherent political program.
The forecast of the expert of the Public Duma center Alexei Onishchenko was that the votes in the elections will mostly remain with United Russia, since their voters are those people who are united by the idea of a stable and strong state. “They are not for virtual democratic slogans, but for state guarantees. It is no coincidence that 8.5 million people voted for United Russia in the primary elections. This is a high figure,” he noted.
Advisor to the Chairman of the Presidium of the Association of Young Entrepreneurs of Russia Denis Rassomakhin expressed the opinion that real things happening in the country are associated with the party in power against the backdrop of growing trust in state institutions, primarily in connection with the annexation of Crimea and the anti-sanctions policy.
Indeed, it can be stated that the victory of United Russia, while maintaining the presence of noticeable socio-economic problems, ideologically represents the dominance of the idea of a strong, robust, guaranteeing state. The party “does not succeed in everything,” as Putin noted, but it is strongly associated with this idea. The specter of the weakening and half-life of the state does not “warm” the Russian people at all, although for some of the intellectual elites it is alluring.
Gigabytes will arrive from orbit
SpaceX's manned program successes should not be misleading. the main objective Elon Musk - satellite Internet. His Starlink project is designed to change the entire communications system on Earth and build a new economy. But the economic effect of this is not obvious now. That is why the EU and Russia began implementing more modest competing programs
The country was laid out in a new way
In addition to the eight federal districts, Russia will now have twelve macro-regions. Agglomerations are recognized as the most progressive form of settlement. And each subject of the federation is assigned a promising specialization. The "expert" tried to find grains common sense in the recently approved Spatial Development Strategy
The current elections have become unique in their own way. Many political scientists agreed that the 2016 campaign became a kind of “stress test” of the entire political system in Russia.
And now we can say that the test was successfully passed. It's about It’s not even about who won and who got more votes. More than ever before, attention was paid to the electoral political processes themselves.
However, first, a little about the numbers.
“Four parties are entering the State Duma: United Russia (44.5%), LDPR (15.3%), Communist Party of the Russian Federation (14.9%), A Just Russia (8.1%),” said the general director VTsIOM Valery Fedorov on the air of the TV channel "Russia 1".
Also, according to polling data at the polling stations, "Communists of Russia" are gaining 2.6% of the votes, "Rodina" - 2.3% of the votes, the Russian Party of Pensioners "For Justice" - 2%, "Party of Growth" - 1.8% , "Parnas" - 1.2%, "Greens" - 0.8%, "Civic Platform" - 0.3%, "Civil Power" - 0.2%.
Also, according to the Public Opinion Foundation, United Russia will have 48.7 percent of the votes, the LDPR will have 14.2 percent, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation will have 16.3 percent, and A Just Russia will have 7.6 percent.
Please note that final data will be available after all ballots have been counted in all regions of the country.
Based on the results of processing 10% of the final protocols, in the State Duma elections “United Russia” gains 45.95% of the votes, LDPR - 17.4%, Communist Party of the Russian Federation - 16.76%, SR - 6.36%, the Central Election Commission reported.
The non-parliamentary parties Rodina, Civic Platform and Party of Growth are entering the State Duma in single-mandate constituencies at the time of counting 8.00% of the protocols, receiving one seat each, according to data from the Russian Central Election Commission.
"People showed a civic position. The turnout is not the largest it was in the previous campaign, but it is high... We know that life is not easy for people, there are many problems, but the result is what it is. It is safe to say that United Russia “gained a majority,” said the Russian President.
“Preliminary results, according to which United Russia members are gaining an absolute majority in the new State Duma, indicate the political maturity of Russian civil society,” Putin noted.
He added that “although it is difficult and difficult for the people, people voted for United Russia. Without controversial issues the party’s work is not complete, but besides it, no one solves the country’s main problems better. “United Russia” precisely fulfills the function for which the party was created,” explained the head of state.
“The result is good, our party will have an absolute majority, but what kind of majority this is will be determined as a result of the vote count,” said Prime Minister and head of the majority party Dmitry Medvedev.
In turn, the secretary of the General Council of United Russia, Sergei Neverov, said that people supported the course towards independence and independence of the country, towards stability. “It is this support that was reflected in the result announced by sociologists and the Central Election Commission,” he said.
The LDPR recognizes the results of the State Duma elections and assesses the elections positively, said party leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky. “We naturally recognize the elections and evaluate them positively,” he said. Zhirinovsky also noted that “certain violations took place,” but they are not significant.
The A Just Russia party also stated that it recognizes the results of the State Duma elections. “In general, I believe that the elections to the State Duma of the 7th convocation took place. The A Just Russia party has no reason to doubt the results,” said party leader Sergei Mironov .
Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov said on the Rossiya-24 TV channel that party supporters intend to hold a series of actions following the results of the recent State Duma elections. “We will not give up our votes. Actions in support of fair and decent elections everywhere are planned for September 19-20,” Gennady Zyuganov grumbles. However, it is precisely with these formulations that he constantly grumbles - which does not prevent the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and Zyuganov personally from sitting in parliament after each election, receiving significant parliamentary salaries.
"United Russia" received a majority in 79 of 89 single-mandate constituencies, the LDPR - in four, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - only in two. The candidates "A Just Russia", "Motherland", "Civil Platform" and the Growth Party had one mandate each," the CEC reported , citing data from the state automated system “Elections”.
For example, Sergei Markov noted the high turnout in the Far East: “there are two reasons for the higher turnout. There are many new small parties, which is why their voters go to the polls. And citizens are more supportive of the government after the West’s attack on Putin, after the disaster in Ukraine and after Crimea.”
“The election results were as expected. The pattern of the campaign was such that the campaign was carried out by single-mandate candidates. Those who had a sufficient number of strong single-mandate candidates to close a certain number of constituencies had a chance, and those who did not, could show as many videos as they wanted and the company in Internet news: voters don’t like electoral schizophrenia, when you have to vote for a person from one party and another for a brand,” said political scientist Alexey Chadayev.
“Small non-parliamentary parties had chances, of course, but no one simply understood this picture election campaign, which suggests that, firstly, single-mandate candidates are locomotives, and secondly, the local agenda dominates the federal one. Not about how to arrange Russia, the planet, Ukraine, Syria, but about how to arrange a yard, an entrance, a neighboring school, and so on,” Chadayev said.
“Our glamorous party, crammed into all sorts of old new parties, was not ready for this, as the result showed,” the expert concluded.
"In turn, in general, there has been an update of the system and players. Love for the country and patriotism are today for the voter important aspects. The LDPR improved its results; confirmed its status as the parliamentary party "A Just Russia"; The Rodina party and small parties showed decent results, distributing votes among themselves, so to speak, of the protest vote. Representatives of these parties will appear in parliament as winners in single-mandate constituencies,” explained political scientist Alexey Martynov.
Vice-President of the Center for Strategic Communications Dmitry Abzalov also commented on the level of turnout and the progress of election procedures: “the turnout is still quite typical, which is due to several factors. On the one hand, there are single-mandate voters, which increases interest in the election campaign, on the other hand, we don’t have any internal strain in the political campaign, such internal protest activity, so the interest there is not so high.”
Alexander Pozhalov, Research Director of the Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Problems (ISEPP) Foundation, also spoke about the high turnout. According to him, “in the first hours of voting, local time, in many regions of Siberia and the Far East, voter activity was higher than in 2011.”
In general, the slogan under which the current campaign took place is legitimacy, honesty, transparency. Even now, judging by how many fewer violations there were during voting, we can say that the Russian electoral system has qualitatively evolved. No matter how pretentious it may sound, democracy won these elections to the State Duma.
This is especially important since the country now needs maximum legitimate power. Moreover, the power that was consciously chosen by the people. By the way, this is precisely why the role of single-member deputies has increased so much within the current campaign. And large percentages of votes were received by those who directly met with voters. What Vyacheslav Volodin spoke about at a meeting with political scientists - about the courtyard as a unit of political space - has been fully realized.
In addition to the global agenda, voters also have specific, local problems that they want to solve with the help of the government they elect. Meetings with voters also became a “stress test.” But not for the entire political system, but directly for the candidates. Who has successfully “tested” will be shown by the voting results.
Another interesting fact. Even the Crimean Tatars show “an unprecedented turnout in the State Duma elections, demonstrating complete solidarity with the Russian people.” Deputy Prime Minister of the regional government Ruslan Balbek told Life about this. “The national factor has been actively used for 2.5 years external forces as a destabilizing agent. The Crimean Tatars took this as a challenge to themselves personally and are showing unprecedented activity in the elections today. The turnout among them will be high, in 25 years of such turnout at elections among Crimean Tatars never happened,” he explained.
"The elections are being held openly and legitimately. Judging by the reports of the Central Election Commission, no serious violations have been recorded. For all parties participating in the elections, equal conditions for competition,” the press service of the movement quotes the co-chairman of the ONF Central Headquarters, Alexander Brechalov.
In general, a number of politicians and experts have already noted high level open and direct competition between parties and candidates. In general, this year’s campaign itself was as public as possible. And the winner is the one who has proven himself to be a competent specialist.
According to Sergei Neverov, “United Russia” considers the holding of legitimate elections to the State Duma, and not the number of votes received on voting day, to be a priority.” And this vision of political processes is relevant not only for United Russia, but also for any political party that wants to win this season.
There is no goal to win at any cost; moreover, you won’t win “at any cost” now. Violations are monitored as thoroughly as possible.
Non-electoral technologies are detected quickly and are followed by a harsh response. The reaction, again, is as public as possible, which damages the reputation of the violating parties and candidates among voters going to vote.
Thus, the co-leader of the movement to protect the rights of voters “Voice” Grigory Melkonyants has already told the media that although all problems have not been completely eradicated, however, “there is an improvement in the overall climate.”
“The climate in the elections has become a little better than it was in 11. “Of course, the position of the Central Election Commission, which the Central Election Commission broadcast to the regions, was heard by someone, but there are isolated cases,” he concluded.
According to the General Director of the Center for Political Information, Alexey Mukhin, “The Central Election Commission is in very close contact with law enforcement agencies and the prosecutor’s office, and on this score we can be calm.” At the same time, the political scientist especially noted: “Knowing Ella Aleksandrovna Pamfilova a little, I believe that this will happen. The Central Election Commission controls the situation quite closely, including in the regions. As far as I know, he is doing significant work to prevent violations. Many candidates are very active, many have already made statements that they have recorded certain violations. This, of course, can also be sorted out very quickly. Literally in live. I think that this operational situation that we are now observing allows us to say that in general these elections can be considered not only valid, but their results will be legitimate.”
Wherein important point is that no global, systematic violations were discovered. Both Russian and foreign experts and observers speak about this. For example, member of the Public Chamber Lyubov Dukhanina noted in an interview that “candidates for deputies from all parties have done real job with voters, they proposed their programs. And today people really have the opportunity to make a choice. But the most important thing: the entire election campaign was truly open. And there was quite a lot of information this year. Now the most important thing is for the elections to be fair and legitimate.”
Dukhanina’s words are also confirmed by famous television journalist Evgeniy Revenko, who voted in Voronezh. According to him, “people in Voronezh actively went to the polls. No significant violations have been recorded anywhere that could affect the will of citizens. And United Russia, more than anyone else, is interested in fair, clean, transparent elections, so that no one has any doubts about the legitimacy of this vote.”
Deputy Chairman of the State Duma, head of the United Russia faction Vladimir Vasiliev also noted the increased openness and competitiveness of the current campaign. He said that "today's elections are being held in an open and competitive atmosphere." “14 parties are fighting for the mandates of State Duma deputies - twice as many as in the last elections in 2011. Equal conditions were created for all participants so that they could present their programs, and people could evaluate them and compare with each other,” Vasiliev said, emphasizing that “now much will depend on the choice of each of us, on our civic position and indifference."
"Our party set the goal of legitimacy. A lot has been done for this - we have carried out preliminary voting, we were able to invite many representatives of civil society into our ranks, who brought with them the respect of the people. We have also reduced the number of candidate governors, so we are convinced that these results and elections are competitive and legitimate,” he said.
“We set the task of updating the Party and meeting the expectations of society. This surprises some, but we intend to seriously change the situation. Addressing people and asking the best of them to come to us and take a place in parliament is a huge responsibility. But we must respond for this," the politician explained.
United Russia monitored new laws during the pre-election period. We are the only ones who took laws on forests, land, trade and began monitoring together with people. This is already producing results: the share of locally produced goods in chains has increased. Qualitative changes are taking place in the interests of people,” he concluded.
At the same time, citizens make a choice, and they make it very actively. According to the head of the St. Petersburg Politics Foundation, Mikhail Vinogradov, “voter turnout in the elections to the State Duma of the seventh convocation refuted the pessimistic forecasts of some analysts who predicted extremely low activity among Russians.”
Agrees with him CEO Center for Political Information Alexey Mukhin, who stated that “as electoral activity approaches in central Russia, in the western regions, especially in the south, turnout will increase. And it will reach more than 50 percent.”
At the same time, not only United Russia, but also other political parties have done work to increase legitimacy and competitiveness. For example, the Socialist Republic and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation actively developed the social agenda. In general, during the current campaign, social issues have been a popular topic for many political movements.
As for the victory of United Russia, you need to understand that this is also a huge responsibility of the party to the entire country. However, United Russia candidates did a great job, from the primaries to the final voting day. As part of these procedures, truly competent people and professionals were included in the United Russia lists. Who were elected to these lists by the people in a preliminary vote.
At the same time, United Russia did not field its candidates in 19 single-mandate constituencies. And this was done deliberately, within the framework of open political competition. Because in these districts there are already strong, professional opposition candidates.
In general, the level of competition has increased this election season. There are 14 parties on the ballot instead of the seven allowed to participate in the elections last year. That is, a variety of social strata can receive political representation in the State Duma Russian society, and what is important is that the political spectrum of parties covers all social strata.
According to experts, the new State Duma will be a space for constant political dialogue. United Russia is ready to talk with the constructive opposition and, moreover, to listen to the opinion of this opposition. Such dialogue is determined by the very logic of the current electoral processes and the choice of citizens. Those who were ready to speak competently and constructively both with the electorate and with competitors in the political struggle entered the Duma.
In general, positioning itself as “the party of Putin and Medvedev” played a separate and important role in United Russia’s victory. The ratings of the top officials of the state also increased the level of people's trust in United Russia.
We can say that the current campaign has been somewhat calmer than previous ones in terms of crises, scandals and violations. And this indicates the development and “maturation” of the political system in Russia as a whole.