Translated material
Q.E.D
Vladimir Putin won with an advantage unprecedented in Russia
The incumbent president won with an overwhelming advantage, unprecedented in the modern history of Russia.However, the absence of any full-fledged rivals for Vladimir Putin should not serve as a basis for discrediting the institution of elections. This freedom, which we received not so long ago, has already been seriously discredited. Moreover, we honestly admit that this did not happen in the last four years. The presidential elections in both 1996 and 2000 could only be called completely democratic with a stretch. At that time, however, no one called for refusal to participate in them under the pretext that this was “not an election, but a farce.” Yesterday's vote was not a farce either. To say this is an insult to the vast majority of Russian voters who voluntarily and quite consciously gave their votes to Vladimir Putin. It is not their fault that the current president did not have worthy competitors.
Another thing is that a decent turnout was often ensured using completely Soviet methods, and the regions were in a very Soviet hurry to report this very turnout.
Does all this indicate that Russian democracy is flawed? - Undoubtedly. Is it possible to say that democratic institutions are completely degrading? - But this is another question. And it sounds like this: “degraded” compared to what? Or did we witness the true triumph of democracy in 1996 and 2000? Or did the threat of communist and then neo-communist revenge seem so real at that time that obvious deviations from democratic canons could be “ignored”?
Let us remember, by the way, the main results of the previous elections:
Turnout four years ago was higher than yesterday - almost 69% compared to the current 61%.
Probably, the administrative resource and cheap pies attracted some voters, but there is no reason to say that without the pies and without the resource, the elections would not have taken place.
Four years ago, about 53% of the votes were cast for Putin. Yesterday - according to preliminary data, about 68-70%. The result, of course, is surprising, but expected. At whose expense did candidate No. 1 profit yesterday? First of all, at the expense of the communists - after all, if in 2000 almost 30% of Russians who took part in the voting voted for Gennady Zyuganov, then half as many voted for the candidate Kharitonov. It is curious that the “democratic” candidate Grigory Yavlinsky received 5.8% four years ago. The figure is quite comparable with yesterday’s result of Irina Khakamada.
Even if you try, trying to take the most “objectivist” position, it is very difficult to answer the question: is it good or bad that a considerable part of voters (primarily from the former communist electorate) changed their orientation and began to vote for other candidates, mainly - for Vladimir Putin.
On the one hand, as far as the market economy and further reforms are concerned, this is certainly good. On the other hand, popular love and approval for the current government causes quite unpleasant associations among those who have not yet forgotten the history of the 20th century.
The President, it must be said, was once again original by deciding to spend the most important day from a political point of view in the company of the Russian boxing team. He, of course, defeated all his opponents, but still not by knockout, and should be grateful to his opponents for not throwing white towels into the ring in advance. But, in the end, this is his personal business, as long as he does not violate the Constitution. And he, in his own words, is not going to. True, many observers drew attention to Vladimir Putin’s remark during a recent meeting with Krasnoyarsk students that he did not at all want to be the leader of the country, “but then he got involved.” There is, however, no reason yet to assert that the president has become so involved as to violate the deadlines allotted to him by the Constitution. After all, Vladimir Putin, no less than other citizens of the Russian Federation, has the right to the presumption of innocence.
Exit-polls data on the presidential elections in the Russian Federation
| Sergey Glazyev | 4.7 |
| Oleg Malyshkin | 2.3 |
| Sergei Mironov | 1.0 |
| Vladimir Putin | 69.0 |
| Irina Khakamada | 4.7 |
| Nikolai Kharitonov | 12.6 |
| Against everyone | 5.5 |
The survey was conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation among 120 thousand respondents in 75 regions (674 settlements, 1200 polling stations)