
“These are the most dirty elections of all that I have seen over the past many years, these are just some hell-total falsifications on a home-made vote, the lack of registers. Social workers drain some kind of invented people and real pensioners in the PECs, who are not issued in any way. If at the same time there are observers, then out of 100 people votes 0, and if there are no observers, then 100 out of 100.
Complaints are not satisfied in any way: “refuse because to refuse” in direct contradiction with the law.
Observers filed dozens, hundreds of complaints. A lot of formal disorders that concern, in particular, how the register of home -made voting is decorated. This is a complex thing, but it is very important. According to the law, in order to avoid the drain of personal data, a member of the election commission puts his signature when he accepts the application (paragraph 24 of Article 66, FZ 67). An application for a subdominal vote is submitted personally, through a relative or social worker, it is necessary to enter the data of the person who transferred this application. For example, if you want to transmit an application through me, then you need to enter my name, place of residence, phone and other data, and the one who makes them fills out time, his name and puts a signature.
In these elections, everything is simpler: just Excel signs with fictitious people: 400 people on one site, everyone lives in neighboring apartments, each of which has 4 people. Observers come to these addresses, but none of them are there. All this is on the video, complaints are written about all this.
The chairman of one of the commissions by the name of Sarma offered us today: “Come on. If you want to cancel the results on this site, let's throw the ballot and cancel the result, and you will not raise the boom in other areas. ” This is in the record.
The calculation of the results is almost completed, but the results are not introduced in GAS “Elections”. This is done so that there is an opportunity to send WICs to recalculate if they understand that the candidates from “smart voting” win, and “United Russia” suffers a great defeat. This is a well -known technology: without observers, early in the morning, in a few hands, so that there are other results.
Now several hours have passed since the end of the vote. Everything has already been calculated, simply not introduced into the system from which traces of intervention cannot be removed. Obviously, they expect an understanding of whether electronic voting will help to falsify the results, to block the wave of folk support that the candidates opposing United Russia has.