Was the Smart Voting Strategy turned out to be victorious or not?

What Navalny thinks about it - and how are those who won thanks to him

According to the results of the elections at the Moscow City Duma on September 8, 20 out of 45 seats were received by candidates from the system opposition. Aleksey Navalny called on vote for them. His headquarters presented the concept of “ smart voting ”: in each of the districts they chose a candidate, not supported by the Moscow Mayoria, for whom it was proposed to vote to Navalny's supporters. At the headquarters, the election results are called a “fantastic victory” and promise to use a “smart vote” in the next election. However, candidates-winning believe that the effectiveness of the Navalny project is difficult to assess.

Navalny headquarters: Fantastic victory

“Last night, I myself did not really believe in what we were counting on - the defeat of the United Russia in most districts,” Oleg Stepanov, head of the headquarters of Alexei Navalny’s headquarters in Moscow, tells Medusa. “In the end, it happened.”

Stepanov believes that the “smart vote” - the system proposed by Navalny, was called upon to take places in the Moscow City Duma from the authorities - won a “fantastic and powerful victory”, against which the “uncertain victories” of pro -government candidates look very unimportant.

However, it was not without incidents. For example, in the 30s of the constituency around the “smart vote” a scandal even arose: the headquarters of Navalny supported here the candidate from the Communist Party of the Communist Party of Vladislav Zhukovsky, while the independent candidate Roman Uneman was running in the same district. Before the elections, he claimed that he could win - and reinforced his words with the data of the polls, which promised him first place. As a result, Juneman lost to a candidate from the city hall.

“Juneman held a delightful campaign, but according to the principles of“ smart voting ”we had to support the communist in this district, because the Communist Party previously ranked here with a relatively small margin,” comments the head of the Moscow headquarters of Navalny. Stepanov believes that Juneman still won: in his opinion, the candidate’s victory was not stolen by a “smart vote”, but by fraud and tricks from the authorities - for example, wrapping votes during electronic voting. “The election [candidate from the city hall of Margarita] Rusetskaya is theft of the mandate of the novel by Juneman,” concludes Oleg Stepanov.

Communists: They would vote for us and so

Of the 20 opposition mandates 13, according to the results of the elections, the Mosgordum went to the Candidates from the Communist Party - thus, it was the Communists who became the main beneficiaries of “smart voting”.

The head of the Moscow City Committee of the Communist Party, Valery Rashkin, told Medusa that he supports “everything that is aimed at uniting the opposition and the destruction of the monolith of“ United Russia ””: “to determine the effectiveness of“ smart voting ”is very difficult. The Communist Party increases its result: at first the party had one person in the faction [in the Moscow City Duma], then three, then five, now we will have 13 deputies. ”

Rashkin is convinced that voters recognized the Candidates of the Communist Party “thanks to their affairs and work during the campaign” - and not just voted at Navalny’s direction. “They voted well for all our candidates, for everyone! He emphasizes. -Someone did not gain percentage of the necessary percentage-among them there are supported by “smart voting”, there are not supported. The Communist Party is an excellent base, on which you can push off and win, but much depends on the candidates themselves. ”

Voice movement: without “smart voting” the Communists would not have received 13 seats

However, according to the coordinator of the Voice movement, Stanislav Andreichuk, the Communist Party brand "did not play a key role in a protest vote." “He lost, including the coordinated candidate from the Communists, Vadim Kumin, which means that the point is not in the brand, but in other factors. In the district, Kumina won [the candidate from Yabloko] Daria Besedina. In addition to her campaign and calls to vote for her from Navalny, I do not see other factors, the influence of UG on the final result in Moscow is great, ”Andreichuk said Meduza.

Self-nominated winning: it is difficult to evaluate the effectiveness

Daria Besedina herself, in an interview with Medusa, found it difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of a “smart vote”. “We conducted a very active campaign, so it is not clear how many votes the support of“ smart voting ”gave, in addition, there is a strong intersection of my supporters who would have supported me, and supporters of“ smart voting, ”she argues.

The newly elected deputy, however, does not doubt the effectiveness of the idea of ​​Navalny in other districts. “This is a very interesting tool for overturning the elections in protest districts, where there is no strong opposition candidate that is conducting the campaign,” Besedina added.

Navalny headquarters: the effectiveness of “smart voting” is denied by pro -government speakers and bots

According to Oleg Stepanov from Navalny’s headquarters in Moscow, comments that the victory of opposition candidates would be possible without a “smart vote” - this is “a part of the methodopian, which began to voice pro -government speakers and bots”. “Everyone who really led his campaigns, or did not even lead, but won, they perfectly understand that only a joint action in the framework of a smart vote led to such an amazing result. The candidates we supported all morning call and write, thank you for support, and we congratulate them on the victory, ”says Stepanov.

It recalls that “smart voting” was used not only in the elections to the Moscow City Duma, but also in other regional elections: “Khabarovsk, Irkutsk, St. Petersburg municipal and about 30 different elections, where the pro -government candidates received on the nose - this is precisely the result of the“ smart voting ”strategy.”

Voice movement: in the regions "smart vote" did not work

The Voice Coordinator Stanislav Andreichuk evaluates the results of a “smart vote” in the regions not so optimistic: “In other regions, Navalny and other oppositionists of the same flank does not yet have such a developed organizational structure, there are no such media capabilities. And the views there are more left in connection with a more complex socio-economic situation: people are poorer. In most cases, they are not at all up to politics. If they vote, then just for the Communist Party and LDPR as party brands. ”

Andreichuk clarifies that there is definitely one example of the influence of “smart voting” in the regional elections: the head of the Novosibirsk headquarters of Navalny Sergey Boyko in the elections of the mayor of Novosibirsk took second place and received about 20% of the vote.

Political scientist Kynev: Smart Voting won due to the mistakes of the city hall

Political scientist Alexander Kynev calls the main reason for the protest voting and victory of the candidates of the “smart vote” “City Hall Errors”. “If it were not for the greed of the political bloc, its unwillingness to allow at least a few people, then most likely the campaign would have passed calmly, as it has always been,” he said. -Having created a scandal, the authorities transferred the situation into a plane of moral and ethical protest. Voting turned into a referendum in relation to what is happening in the city, including the acceleration of protest rallies. Navalny proposed a technology against the basic technology of power, which is expressed in the blow with a sledgehammer on the head! ”

Kynev is sure that do not make the City Hall of errors, the “smart vote” would not help. At the same time, the political scientist declares: the disappointments of the townspeople who participated in a “smart vote”, if the winning opposition sides the mayor's office, will not: “There are no behavior in the Moscow City Duma to voters, there are no high expectations from the winners of“ smart voting ”. For protested citizens, it was an act, a gesture. ”

Navalny headquarters: Smart voting will also continue

In 2020, an experiment of Navalny’s headquarters with a “smart vote” will continue. “This is our long -term strategy. Now we have analyzed about 30 regions, next year we will expand the front and will be able to consolidate more voters in more elections, ”says Stepanov. “Now we definitely see: the authorities are afraid of people to go out into the street, the authorities are afraid of high -profile anti -corruption revelations, the authorities are afraid of consolidated voting against its candidates.”

Andrey Pertsev