Down, pet! Down!
Once again, there seem to be parallels between the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation. If you want your system to look like a democracy, there must be opposition parties. But if you want to rule, those opposition parties must behave (see China's multi-party politics).Elections in Siberia Show Russia’s Drift to Single Party
On the eve of regional elections, an opposition candidate named Olga V. Safronova arrived at a school for a campaign finale. She planned a rousing speech with a refrain that Russia had been seized by a dictatorial ruling party.
But operatives from that very party showed up to stop her.
What displeased them was this: Ms. Safronova’s political party was supposed to be a fake opposition, created by the Kremlin to give the illusion that Russia was a thriving democracy. Now, though, this puppet party was rebelling here in Siberia — battling for votes, defying the governing party and even assailing Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin himself…
When the Kremlin birthed A Just Russia in October 2006, Mr. Putin, then Russia’s president, said the new party would “promote democratic values.” But it would also allow the Russian leadership to declare that the country had a multiparty system — even though A Just Russia was loyal to Mr. Putin…
Wide Swings in Turnout Viewed as One Sign of Russian Vote Fraud
It was not hard to spot signs of possible fraud in Olga V. Safronova’s losing campaign for regional assembly in Siberia, according to nonpartisan election analysts. Consider two neighboring polling places in her district, No. 860 and No. 864.See also:
Both contained the same number of registered voters, 1,630, and both would be expected to have relatively similar turnouts, given that they are near each other.
Overall turnout in the election on Oct. 10 across the entire Novosibirsk region was 36 percent, according to official statistics. At polling place No. 860, the turnout was typical, 31 percent, and the governing party candidate, Anatoly V. Zhukov, received 41 percent of the vote.
Ms. Safronova came in second in that district with 26 percent…
But what happened at No. 864 hinted at the challenges facing opposition candidates in Russia, where vote-rigging in the chief party’s favor is rampant.
For reasons that voting officials could not explain, No. 864 delayed reporting its totals until the middle of the night. The polling place is located in a neighborhood where local leaders of the governing party live.
When No. 864 finally issued its returns, the turnout level, 59 percent, was nearly double that of No. 860. And Mr. Zhukov garnered 78 percent of the vote in No. 864. Ms. Safronova’s total was only 8 percent…
Prof. Mikhail G. Myagkov of the University of Oregon, a Moscow native who is an expert on Russian election fraud... noted that in Russia, spikes in turnout were a classic marker for malfeasance by the party in charge. “There is a very high probability, according to the data in Safronova’s district, that something fishy was going on,” he said...
Teaching Comparative blog entries are indexed.
The Fourth Edition of What You Need to Know is available at Amazon.com or from the publisher (where shipping is always free).
Labels: elections, parties, politics, Russia
posted by Ken Wedding @ 5:46 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home