Jun 20, 2021
0 0

To whom the multi-day vote is a dear mother, and to whom – a stepmother

To whom the multi-day vote is a dear mother, and to whom - a stepmother

Photo: Sergey Fadeichev / TASS

More than half of Russians are positive about the opportunity to vote within a few days. These are the findings of a study presented by the head of the political analysis practice of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion (VTsIOM) Mikhail Mamonov during a meeting with CEC experts.

According to the poll, 56% of Russians are “rather positive” to the multi-day voting in the elections to the State Duma; of those who intend to vote this year, 21% are “rather negative”, 22% are “indifferent”.

In favor of the multi-day voting, according to the expert, they say, in particular, convenience and safety. 61% of respondents would prefer a three-day vote, 34% – a one-day vote.

“Last September, when we conducted a survey on this topic, 63% said that the length of the voting does not affect the credibility of the elections and the results, 12% said that elections are more credible if they are held within a few days.”, – noted the expert.

According to the researchers, the results of the survey indicate that the multi-day voting practice is already gaining approval and understanding.

An all-Russian representative survey was conducted by telephone interview on June 15, 2021, the sample size was 1.6 thousand respondents. The statistical error does not exceed 2.5%.

Lawyer Dmitry Agranovsky the idea of ​​multi-day voting is negative:

– Anything that makes it difficult to control the voting process is bad. I don’t see any advantages to this idea at all. Neither e-voting nor multi-day voting. This is done for greater control.

If someone wants to increase the turnout, then it is necessary to postpone the elections from September to December, as it was before, or to March. Everyone remembers: the elections were postponed to September so that the turnout would be lower.

And I would like to draw the attention of citizens that electronic voting, in principle, cannot be anonymous. No matter how they are authorized, no matter how they retain their identity, it is still possible to establish where and what kind of voting took place. Sooner or later, hackers will get to these databases.

Unfortunately, in my opinion, all these are elements of manipulation of the vote, to distort the will of the people. And to distort the will of the people, as an atheist, I say – to anger God. The ancient Romans said: The voice of the people is the voice of God.

In the course of vaccination, it is very clear that our state is faced with the fact that the results it receives in the elections and the true attitude towards it are fundamentally different things. The state itself began to believe in its manipulative technologies, which is very bad. The state believes that they vote for it that way, and when epidemics happen or, God forbid, war, it turns out that the state had no idea how citizens treated it.

It is simply not wise to distort the will of the people. I understand that this is very convenient for local elites who retain control over financial flows, convenient for the supreme leadership. But in practice, from a strategic perspective, this does nothing but harm. As soon as problems arise, it turns out that the state is cut off from the people and does not represent the true picture, and does not understand how to govern. Further, stability is threatened, and in peak cases the very existence of the state.

Elections don’t decide that much. I would advise making them really free, democratic, so that the Duma, which has almost no powers in comparison, for example, with European parliaments or Soviet supreme councils, more or less reflects the balance of power, and not the total domination of one party in power.

Let’s say that now the ruling party will twist all its hands, get a constitutional majority. So what? At least one problem will be solved? No, on the contrary, everything will only get worse, distrust will grow. And this is very bad.

Right now, people need to be vaccinated, at least 60-70%, and such distrust that has been accumulating for a long time. I understand that people are acting unreasonably, but the fault lies primarily with the long-term policy of the authorities, which, in my opinion, distort the will of the people for some strategic reasons.

Director of the Institute of Contemporary State Development Dmitry Solonnikov sees several advantages of multi-day voting, including the ability for citizens to choose a voting day:

– People work, go out of town etc. On the other hand, in the current difficult coronavirus situation, people are worried that they might get sick. This is possible with a large crowd of people in one place. If the voting lasts three days, then three times fewer people will be at the same time at the polling station. These two points speak about the desire of people to see a multi-day vote.

“SP”: – How much can you trust its results?

– Still, there is more confidence in multi-day voting than in voting by mail and other types of expression of will.

“SP”: – Will not the multi-day voting lead to an increase in scandals related to stuffing and other things?

– Any vote can have factors of falsification, stuffing. We saw voting in the old form, and in no way guaranteed the absence of conflicts. Various political groups and groups of observers have always tried to challenge the results of the voting. And without the many-day voting, questions of attitude to the results arose. Multi-day voting has additional doubts, but we choose from lesser and greater evils: which is better – early voting, absentee ballots, voting via the Internet, by mail, or three-day voting? This is a controversial question.

There are difficult moments. According to the law, observers have the right to be at the polling station during the entire voting time. In this situation, it is three days. At this time, observers can be near the safes with ballots, ballot boxes. But the bulk of our polling stations are located in schools. The issue of a large number of observers in schools at night is not regulated in any way. At night, everyone will be removed from schools, there will be representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and that’s it. Under current conditions, no one will allow observers to sit at school at night.

This discrepancy between the law and educational regulations will raise questions. We need to prepare for this. It is necessary to somehow guarantee the legitimacy of the results obtained.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply