Two -humpy Russia

On September 18, 2016, elections of deputies of the State Duma of the seventh convocation were held. These were the first federal elections that took place on a single voting day in September, and the first after 2003, passing through a mixed system: 225 deputies in a proportional system with a 5 percent passing barrier in the federal district and 225 in majority single-member districts. The general results of voting in the Federal District are considered by the independent election researcher Sergey Spilkin .

Certain hopes were connected with the 2016 parliamentary elections. The new head of the CEC Ella Pamfilova, who replaced the odious Vladimir Churova, seemed to have headed for honest elections as possible: she made communication with observant organizations, stopped several attempts by the regional election commission to remove unwanted candidates, etc. In addition, the past presidential elections seemed to be a trend to reduce falsifications on voting day, but, as a long time ago, but for a long time The election researcher Sergei Shulgin noted, the Duma elections in Russia are largely similar to previous presidentials. Therefore, on the voting day, the author of these lines expected the first data (namely, information about the intermediate turnout in the eastern regions of the country, which appear on the website http://izbirkom.ru even before the official end of voting in the country) with particular interest. Unfortunately, hopes did not materialize. Already the first information about the turnout in the areas of the Kemerovo region showed that the leaders of falsifications (and the Kemerovo region is the first in this list, counting from the east) in their repertoire. The turnout in ordinary neighboring sections of the Kemerovo region varied for 12 hours from 12% to 60% - an incredible spread for areas located in similar territories.

By the evening, when the voting data began to arrive, the picture was confirmed. As in the Duma elections of 2007 and 2011, the distribution of votes cast, depending on the turnout in polling stations, turned out to be “two -humped” (Fig. 1). At the same time, the first, the main “Gorb” of distribution was on an unprecedentedly low turnout-with a maximum in the region of 37%, less than ever in the recent history of the Russian elections. In the areas in this first part of the distribution, the leader in the vote "United Russia" received about 40% of the vote. The second peak of the distribution, where traditionally for all the latest Duma elections, United Russia had an overwhelming advantage, is located on the appearances of 80–95%.

It is easy to make sure that such a bizarre shape of the distribution of votes on the turnout is entirely due to the voices for United Russia. Imagine that United Russia is removed from the vote - we will exclude votes from the consideration (and voters that voted for it - from the formula for turnout). You will get the distribution of votes for the remaining parties on a new adjusted turnout shown in Fig. 2.

As a result of the exclusion of the votes for the “EP”, the first peak of distributions expectedly shifted from the appearance of 37% by 22%, the second “hump” on high turnouts magically disappeared, and the distribution of votes for all parties turned out to be simple bell -shaped curves (the reader waits for “Gauss” - it will not be).

Once again, we are convinced that voters of United Russia, voting in areas with a high turnout, are (at least partially) special voters with their original habits and laws of voting. You can, of course, make a seditious assumption that these are no voters at all, but phantom voices, drawn or thrown out by their hands of election falsifiers [1]. Then, as before, it is possible to determine their quantity by subtracting the distribution of votes from the distribution of votes from the appearance of the votes for other parties, scaled in such a way that they coincide in the main peak. The difference is shown in Fig. 1 pink hatching. It corresponds to 12.1 million “phantom” votes for “EP” of 28.5 million in total of almost 45%submitted for this party.

In terms of absolutely, this is comparable to estimates of the number of falsified votes in the 2012 presidential election, and in the relative, taking into account the current low turnout, with assessments of falsifications in the Duma elections of 2011.

Thus, honest elections did not work out again. Schematically speaking, one could imagine two possible elections scenarios - according to the 2003 version, with relatively low falsifications in the limited circle of regions, or according to the 2011 version, with mass falsifications in a large number of regions. As a result, the second scenario was implemented, with the exception that there were no mass falsifications in Moscow and St. Petersburg. But this assignment was more than compensated by an extremely low turnout in both capitals - 35% and 33%, Otherwise, the list of regions that contributed to the winding of the votes of the "EP" has not fundamentally changed. Among those who actively showed themselves, in addition to traditional Bashkortostan, Mordovia, Tatarstan and a number of republics of the North Caucasus, are Belgorod, Voronezh, Kemerovo, Lipetsk, Nizhny Novgorod, which unexpectedly greatly performed Penza, Rostov, Ryazan, Samara (where the former head of Morderia Merkushkin), Saratov region (the latter on these are these. elections deserve a separate article). Among newcomers, you can congratulate the Ivanovo region that had never been seen in them on the ranks of falsifiers that had never been seen in them. The Sverdlovsk region has preserved the reputation of the citadel of an honest counting of votes; It seems that the Republic of Komi, who was glorified at one time, was embarrassed by drawing results in Syktyvkar. Knowing the number of votes added to the “EP”, you can calculate what the results of the vote in the federal district would be if there were no votes.

It can be seen that even with correction, the list of parties passing to the Duma in the federal district does not change (although the size of party fractions in parliament is changing, which, of course, is very important). And even if our assessment is correct, Yabloko does not gain 3% of the votes necessary to obtain federal financing.

Be that as it may, the State Duma is chosen, “United Russia”, on the basis of official voting results in the federal district and single -mandate districts, received 343 places out of 450 (i.e. 75% + 5 votes - the vast majority). The following federal elections, if nothing changes, is presidential in the spring of 2018.

Sergey Spilkin

1. Sergey Spilkin. Statistical study of the results of the Russian elections 2007–2009 // TRV-hunger No. 40 dated October 27, 2009.