How the Kremlin swindlers falsified the elections to the State Duma. Total falsifications. Vladimir Zhirinovsky (United Russia) Will there be another falsification of election results

The video belongs to Evgenia Volnova's channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA--CSselU0qtyQTjSTa5Ug Support the channel - LEAVE A LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpcmsqsEnn59ufzz1b5gnhg Affiliate program for YouTube channel http://join.air.io/maxmail Channel Vyacheslav Maltsev https://www.youtube.com/user/artpodgotovka/featured Spare channel Vyacheslav Maltsev https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6MZXJIIwSrwP4wFJg2mlsg For those who first entered our group dedicated to Vyacheslav Maltsev, 51117 and his YouTube channel "ARTPODGOTOVKA" and at this stage Maltsev's Elections to the State Duma 📗 1 Vyacheslav Maltsev - politician, professional revolutionary, former deputy chairman of the Saratov Regional Duma in three convocations . Read Maltsev's biography at the link https://vk.com/topic-47122274_29552934📗 2 Maltsev gained popularity thanks to his information and analytical program "Bad News" on YouTube. 📗 3 Vyacheslav Maltsev goes to the State Duma from PARNAS (Party of People's Freedom), because it was the only opportunity to take part in the primaries and become a leader, taking second place in the federal list of the party in the elections to the State Duma. And also to declare their plans for the full power of the TV screen. 📗4 The PARNAS party is the only anti-Putin party represented at the vote in the State Duma on September 18. All the rest are maintained by the government (stolen money from the people). PARNAS exists on the money of supporters. The reality is this: either you vote for Maltsev, for PARNAS or for "Putin's Party" (United Russia, LDPR, KPRF, Just Russia, Yabloko, and so on, they are all the same - pro-Putin) 📗 consideration in the State Duma as a matter of urgency is the immediate removal of Putin from power (impeachment), the abolition of anti-people laws, the immediate end of all wars in which the Russian military takes part, the abolition of the 282nd anti-Russian article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the amnesty of all political prisoners. This is the official position of PARNAS. 📗 6 Maltsev and hundreds of thousands of his like-minded people want to build real democracy in Russia in the near future, namely, Direct Democracy. In the 21st information age and in richest country the world is possible. 📗 7 In order to build Direct Democracy in Russia and the onset of a New Historical Epoch, it is necessary to immediately remove Putin and all his entourage, who illegally hold power, from power and condemn. This is exactly what will happen according to Maltsev's forecasts on November 5, 2017. 📗 8 Vote for PARNAS on September 18th if you want all of the above and Maltsev's ideas are close to you. 📗 9 In every city there are PARNAS campaign headquarters with active supporters of Maltsev, a link to the groups - https://vk.com/topic-47122274_34198510 If possible, join the volunteers, help us convey the goals of PARNAS and Maltsev to the best possible more people, campaign people online. It will bring great benefit us - the inhabitants of Russia, in the near future. 📗 10 answers to frequently asked questions to Vyacheslav are at the link

The Center for Scientific Political Thought and Ideology (Sulakshin Center) carried out a mathematical reconstruction of the true, scientifically substantiated voting results.

Mathematics provides a way to prove not only the very fact of falsification, but also its scale, nature and organization of the management of the falsification process, and, in addition, allows you to reconstruct the true results of voting; results both in terms of turnout and in terms of the number of votes actually received by parties and candidates;

I.Analysis Methodology

The initial data for the analysis are data officially published on the website of the CEC of Russia for all more than 95,000 polling stations.

The methodology for revealing the truth of elections is based on the following principles.

If the distribution deviates from the gaussoid, then there was interference in the elections (Fig. 2).

Elections to the State Duma 2016 (party list)

Fig. 2 The deviation from the Gaussoid in favor of the candidates (parties) from the authorities - United Russia - is shaded in black. The ratio of the black area under the curve and the white area under the gaussoid gives the falsification coefficient

Citizens' preferences of different parties or candidates in "fair" elections do not depend on turnout. If you see a Gaussian “honest” cloud of votes, but on increasing turnout, an increase in votes in favor of the candidate and party from power and a fall in votes for the opposition, then this is clearly a falsification, which is clearly seen in the example of the 2016 elections in the Penza region (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 An honest “cloud” of the opposition is higher than the “cloud” of the United Russia party. The rest is thrown in and attributed in favor of the United Russia party and at a loss to the opposition

If at many polling stations in the region the result of the party in power is the same with an accuracy of hundredths of a percent, then this means that the command was given to “get” just such a result. This is especially clearly seen in the Saratov region for the United Russia party in 100 polling stations - the result is 62.15%.

If the falsification coefficients for the regions of Russia coincide with statistical accuracy both for the falsification of the results on the party list and on the majoritarian districts, then this proves centralized x falsification management character.

II. Scale of electoral fraud State Duma 2016

The official results of the elections on September 18, 2016 to the State Duma, published by the CEC of Russia, are as follows.

Turnout according to the CEC of Russia was 47.88%.

Based on the above methodology of mathematical reconstruction, we will analyze the results of voting in the elections of the State Duma of the Russian Federation on September 18, 2016 and identify their real results.

As can be seen from the above data, the Gaussian “cloud” for both party list voting and majoritarian districts indicates that the “fair” turnout of real voting is 35%, but not the 47.88% recorded by the Russian Central Election Commission.

Thus, based on the scientific methodology of mathematical reconstruction of the analysis of the voting results in the elections of the State Duma of the Russian Federation on September 18, 2016 first conclusion is as follows: in the organic Gaussian cloud of votes, the average turnout was 35% for both types of voting. Increase in official turnout to 47.88%, recorded by the CEC of Russia is unreliable and is the result of falsifications, which is clearly seen on the right wing of the Gaussian distribution, which goes beyond the boundaries of the pure Gaussian curve.

Second . From Fig. 4 - the results of voting by party lists and Fig. 5 - the results of voting by majoritarian districts, it can be seen that in the organic Gaussian cloud, that is, with truly fair elections, the United Russia party received fewer votes than the opposition.

Third . On the right wing of the results of voting on party lists and majoritarian districts (see Figures 4 and 5), there are clear, unambiguous signs of falsification - "picks" at turnouts that are multiples of 5% and 10%. A particularly outstanding "pick" - at 95% turnout is recorded for the "United Russia" party.

Fourth . The left wing of the organic gaussoid can be clearly traced at small turnouts, and this makes it possible to reproduce the right wing symmetrically as well. From here it becomes possible to calculate the true number of "honest" votes cast in the elections, and the number of votes assigned, falsified.

Let's evaluate the election results for the United Russia party by simply comparing the areas under the gaussoid curves and the falsified long right wing. The evaluation results are shown in Table 1.

Assessment of the true outcome for the United Russia party

The coincidence of falsification coefficients for party lists and majoritarian elections for the United Russia party is not accidental. This indicates that the campaign of falsification was under a single management and with a single goal. The same tasks were set - “bars” of the result.

Instead of 343 seats in the State Duma, according to the official total, the real total for the United Russia party is 134 seats.

The falsified 209 mandates transferred to the United Russia party are in fact in a state of “seizure of power and assignment of power”, which is prohibited by the Constitution Russian Federation and the Russian Criminal Code.

On fig. Figure 6 clearly shows how much the United Russia party conceded to the opposition in both types of voting in a more or less adequate turnout area.

Rice. 6. In reality, United Russia lost to the opposition

As can be seen from the fig. 6 data, in the field of unfalsified results, the United Russia party lost to the opposition by about a third of the seats. A complete falsified bacchanalia for the United Russia party to the detriment of the opposition parties is observed in the right wing of the graph.

The next regularity that helps to uncover falsification is the law of independence from the turnout of preference for a particular candidate by the electorate (Fig. 7).

Rice. 7. It is theoretically clear that voter preferences should not depend on turnout

If the distribution has a deviation from the horizontal in the angle of plus (from left to right upwards), then this indicates falsification in the form of an addition of votes. If there is a deviation from the horizontal in minus (from left to right down) - then this is falsification, on the contrary, in the form of theft of votes.

This methodological approach makes it possible to reveal the amount of falsification in voting for parties and their candidates in all subjects of the Federation.

A quantitative measure of the degree of falsification is determined by the slope of the distribution curve - the coefficient of falsification. If it is positive, then this is a falsification in favor of the corresponding party or candidate, votes are attributed to him. If negative, then, on the contrary, falsification at a loss, votes in this case are stolen.

On fig. 8 (Voronezh region) shows a typical and almost standard form of curves, which is reproduced in almost all subjects of the Federation. Each point on these diagrams is the number of votes for a particular party or candidate in a particular PEC. In all subjects of the Federation, with rare exceptions, the winner (the United Russia party) has a deviation of "+", the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - both the main opposition leader and the rest of the opposition parties - a deviation of "-". There are dense organic clouds with a small spread (Fig. 8), i.e., a small level of dispersion. And the second, elongated cloud, which has a very high level of dispersion. It will soon be seen that one of the "clouds" corresponds to the true results, and the second - falsified.

Fig.8. A typical picture of falsifications in favor of the United Russia party and the removal of votes from other parties. Deviation angles from the horizontal - falsification factor

This example for the Voronezh region shows a typical picture. The right "tails" of distributions for "United Russia", being falsified, are always directed to the right-up. For the opposition, the direction is always the reverse "right-down".

The Report contains data on falsification in favor of the United Russia party and the withdrawal of votes from other parties in all regions of the Russian Federation.

Figure 9 shows the distribution of the falsification coefficient by constituent entities of the Federation (comparative data) for voting on the party list and in majoritarian districts.

Fig.9. Fraud coefficient for the United Russia party for all subjects of the federation for majoritarian elections and according to the party list

It can be seen from the nature of the curves that the falsifications were synchronized both according to the party list of United Russia and according to its candidates in the majoritarian districts. The correlation coefficient of the curves is very high - amounted to 0.86!

We emphasize that the average rate of falsifications in favor of candidates and parties from power in 2016 became 1.9 times higher than in 2011.

III. Mechanism of electoral fraud

The results of voting during the elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation in 2016 were falsified in several ways: the stuffing of false ballots; drawing up false protocols; fraud with an absentee mechanism; fraud with fake voters (the so-called carousels); fraud committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or organized group associated with bribery, coercion, the use of violence or the threat of its use; threats to teachers and other poor fellows in the precinct election commissions with dismissal in case of a low result in the elections of the favorites of the authorities.

Numerous video evidence, personal eyewitness accounts, photo and video stuffing of ballots in many polling stations by members and even chairmen of election commissions testify to the facts of falsification.

In fair elections, citizens' preferences do not depend on turnout: that is, the ratio of the number of votes for one party to the number of votes for another, votes for one candidate to votes for another does not depend on turnout. In the direct exit pool conducted by VTsIOM, which you cannot suspect of opposition to the authorities and the CEC of Russia, at the exit from polling stations, there is no dependence on turnout!

The previous figures show that before the turnout of 47%, the United Russia party is seriously losing to the opposition. But, starting with a turnout of 47%, the opposite is true. And the greater the turnout, the more the United Russia party begins to "win" over the opposition. Moreover, the curves practically coincide for voting on the party list and on majoritarian districts. It is important that in the range of turnouts of 25-40%, which corresponds to the organic cloud of "fair" voting, the ratio does not really depend on the turnout. This means that the data here can be relatively trusted. In this range, the United Russia party lost to the opposition by 1.42 times. The average turnout in this range is 32.5%.

For this turnout, the number of voters who voted in the elections is 35,690 thousand people. The true ratio of votes for the United Russia party and the total opposition (1.42 times) revealed above makes it possible to obtain the true absolute number of votes for the United Russia party and the corresponding result (percentage). It turns out that the United Russia party actually received 14,750,000 votes. Officially, the CEC of Russia declared 28,525,000 votes for the United Russia party. And this corresponds to 54.28%. And the true result is 27.9%.

Results of the reconstruction of the true election results

As a result, we come to the conclusion that the United Russia party was supported by a little more than 13% of all registered voters and less than 10% of the country's population. The falsifiers illegally increased its result by more than 1.5 times! More than 200 people entered the State Duma of the Russian Federation “to work” on the basis of misappropriated powers! In other words, there was an illegal seizure of power!

Meanwhile, in the Constitution of the Russian Federation Art.3.ch.4. It is fixed that “no one has the right to appropriate power in the Russian Federation. The seizure of power or the appropriation of power is punishable by federal law» - the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In particular, article 278 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - Forcible seizure of power or forcible retention of power - states that “actions aimed at the forcible seizure of power or the forcible retention of power in violation of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ... are punishable by imprisonment for a term of twelve to twenty years.. .".

The falsification of elections of the federal body of state power of the State Duma of the Russian Federation is also a part of a criminal offense. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 142. Falsification of election documents, referendum documents.

"one. Falsification of election documents ... if this act is committed by a member of the election commission ... shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of one hundred thousand to three hundred thousand rubles or in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to two years, or by forced labor for a term of up to four years, or by deprivation of liberty for the same term….

2. Forgery of signatures of voters, ... or certification of knowingly forged signatures (signature sheets), committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group, or combined with bribery, coercion, the use of violence or the threat of its use, ... shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand ... either by forced labor for up to three years, or by imprisonment for the same term ...

3. Illegal production of ... ballot papers ..., absentee certificates is punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand rubles ... or imprisonment for a term of 2 to 5 years.”

Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 142.1. Falsification of voting results. “The inclusion of unaccounted ballots in the number of ballots used in voting, or the presentation of deliberately incorrect information about voters, or the knowingly incorrect compilation of voter lists, ... or the falsification of voters' signatures, ... or the replacement of valid ballots with voters' marks, leading to the inability to determine the will of voters, ... or deliberately incorrect counting of votes of voters, ... or signing by members of the election commission ... of the protocol on the results of voting before the counting of votes or establishing the results of voting, or knowingly incorrect (not corresponding to the actual results of voting) drawing up the protocol on the results of voting, or illegally entering the protocol on the results of voting changes after it has been filled in, or knowingly incorrect determination of the voting results, determination of the election results ... - shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand rubles ... or by compulsory labor for a term of d four years, or imprisonment for the same term.

Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Article 141

« 1. Preventing a citizen from freely exercising his electoral rights, violating the secrecy of voting, ... obstructing the work of election commissions, ... the activities of a member of an election commission, ... is punishable by a fine in the amount of up to eighty thousand rubles ... or ... by corrective labor for up to one year.

2. The same acts:

a) combined with bribery, deceit, coercion, use of violence or with the threat of its use;

b) committed by a person using his official position;

c) committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or by an organized group - shall be punishable by a fine in the amount of 100,000 to 300,000 ... or by imprisonment for up to 5 years.

3. Interference, using official or official position, in the exercise by the election commission ... of its powers, ... with the aim of influencing its decisions, namely the requirement or instruction official on issues of registration of candidates, lists of candidates, counting of votes of voters ... shall be punished by a fine in the amount of two hundred thousand to five hundred thousand ... or by imprisonment for up to four years.

I.Y. conclusions

1. The official turnout of 48%, recorded by the CEC of Russia, is unreliable and does not exceed 35% for both party list and majoritarian districts, or the turnout recorded by the CEC of Russia was falsified and overestimated by 1.45 times.

2. During the voting, the United Russia party actually received not 54% on the party list, as recorded by the CEC of Russia, but 27.9% of those who voted, or 13.2% of the number of registered voters and less than 10% of the country's population . The falsifiers illegally increased its result by more than 1.5 times.

3. Instead of 343 seats in the State Duma of the Russian Federation, according to the official total, the real result for the United Russia party is 134 seats.

The falsified 209 mandates handed over to the United Russia party are in fact in a state of “seizure of power and appropriation of power”, which is prohibited by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Russia.

General conclusion : a scientifically based analysis of the election process on September 18, 2016 indicates that the elections to the State Duma were held with gross violations, massive falsifications and must be canceled, and State Duma 2016 isillegal.

The saddest thing about this problem is that only certain individuals are actively fighting against gross violations, falsification, scandalous elections, such as, for example, T. Yurasova in Mytishchi, S. Posokhov in Krasnogorsk, R. Zinatullin in Tatarstan and a number of others, but not the opposition parties LDPR, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Just Russia, which were "robbed" during the election process and the only one from the media - Novaya Gazeta.

Meanwhile, it is the factions of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the Liberal Democratic Party, Just Russia in the State Duma of the Russian Federation that could bring to the meeting of the State Duma of the Russian Federation the issue of gross violations and massive fraud in the elections on September 18, 2016 in order to make a political decision - self-dissolution illegal State Duma of the Russian Federation and an appeal to the President of the Russian Federation as the guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the appointment of new elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation.

Mass violations and falsification during the elections of the State Duma in 2016 concern a significant number of citizens and have acquired a special socio-political significance. In this regard, within the framework of its powers, the CEC of Russia has the right to apply to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the protection of the electoral rights of the majority of citizens, as well as to the Prosecutor General's Office and the Investigative Committee of Russia to take prosecutorial response measures and initiate a criminal case on the fact of committing crimes under Articles 141, 142, 142.1, 278 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, identifying those responsible for violating the current legislation.

Sincerely yours (Yu.Voronin)

doctor of economic sciences, professor,

Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Tatar ASSR -

Chairman of the State Planning Committee of the TASSR (1988-1990);

First Deputy Chairman of the Supreme

Council of the Russian Federation (1991-1993); Deputy of the State Duma

(second convocation); auditor of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation.

“Before I quit, I sobbed all night”

Next week the country will celebrate Teacher's Day. Some teachers will not soon be able to cross the threshold of an academic institution, if at all - we are talking about those who were caught in fraud in the election commissions.

We contacted those teachers who know firsthand what election fraud is. These people are from a different "camp": at one time they did not keep silent about what they were forced to do.

Teacher Tatyana Ivanova from St. Petersburg became famous five years ago. After the December 2011 elections. Then, too, elected deputies of the State Duma and the city parliament.

Tatyana at that time worked as the head teacher at St. Petersburg school No. 575. Before the elections, the woman was confronted with a fact: it is necessary to ensure the victory of one of the parties. Ivanova went into denial. Her disobedience cost her her job. After her dismissal, Tatyana told reporters how employees of the RONO and the city election committee persuaded her to stuff her ballots. Later, the authorities tried to accuse her of libel in court, but the lawsuit was lost.

Tatyana Ivanova. Photo from personal archive

We contacted Tatyana. Surprisingly, for the former teacher, time seemed to have stopped. She still remembers the events of bygone days in great detail, has not forgotten the names of the offenders and cannot hold back her tears when she talks about her once beloved work.

- Tatyana, five years ago you had to quit your native school. Now what are you doing?

Nothing. I'm seating at home.

Did you get a job at another school?

There were no options. No offers have been received. I was only invited to a private school, but I'm not interested. I refused.

- Were you not invited to the elections as a member of the election commission either?

In the spring of 2014, I was still a member of the territorial commission. In St. Petersburg at that time there were gubernatorial and municipal elections. But these elections became my "swan song". My powers ended in May 2015, since then I have the same attitude to the elections as you.

Surely, you still have colleagues who are still working in the elections. How were these Duma elections compared to 2011?

Everyone says that this time everything went more or less cleanly. I tend to trust people.

But I can say that, compared to 2011, the situation in the local elections in 2014 was even more catastrophic. I could observe this from the inside as a member of the territorial election commission. Although I was diligently removed from all meetings, they took all measures so that I was away from the chairmen of the election commissions and did not see violations.

On election day, they put me in the basement - this is how the duties were distributed. The chairman of the TEC and I were supposed to accept documents, but not protocols, in the basement.

“We were offered to throw in 400 ballots”

- Do you remember well the time when you were a stranger among your own?

Of course. Will you forget this? In 2011, I was appointed chairman of the commission. It was time for the first pre-election meeting, where valuable instructions were handed out. I note that I worked in the elections for 14 years. Decent tenure. I know technology "from" and "to". Until 2011, the chairmen of the commissions were not school directors, they already have a lot of work to do. But this year they introduced an innovation. I remember that my colleague and I came to the meeting and were stunned - the chairmen of the precinct election commissions were all directors of schools.

- What were the changes?

Apparently, it dawned on someone that it is easier to put pressure on school principals. The most vulnerable link in the education chain.

- But not everyone is pushed through?

Hope. But when I refused to participate in the falsification, none of the teachers who were at that meeting came to my defense. Later, no one even confirmed the correctness of my words in court. Although I often met colleagues on the street, they all said in person: “We are all for you, our morning begins with a discussion of your situation and the day ends the same. We are all following the process." But no one supported me openly. They can be understood. Nobody wanted to lose their place.

Let's go back to that meeting. What exactly did they tell you?

Usually the chairmen of the election commissions were gathered in the building of the city administration. And this time we were invited to the social center. I walked into the room and was just amazed. Of those present, only 5 chairmen, while usually at least a hundred people gathered, our district is large. The conversation took place behind closed doors.

The head of the RONO and a man who introduced himself as Sergei Ponomarev spoke. They began to explain to us that it was necessary to ensure the victory of one party, they offered options on how best to turn this around. Sounded completely unthinkable options. Since I have been in this topic for 14 years, I told them: “I myself can offer any options.” And then she asked: “How do you imagine it?”.

What options were offered to you?

We were told that we should have two lists. And half an hour before the end of the elections, it is necessary to enter into the second list of those voters who will not come. Then throw the same number of ballots into the ballot box.

- And how many ballots did you have to put in the ballot box?

There were supposed to be 200 of them. And then we had double elections - Duma and legislative (in the Legislative Assembly of the city - "MK"), respectively, it was necessary to throw in 400 ballots. Then I asked how we will carry out the dummy voters according to the documents? After all, it is necessary to add 200 people to the lists. We need passport details. They openly explained to us: “You will be given disks containing all the lists, information about your voters. What do you mean, you are at school, consider yourself at home. Plant a floor above your man, and he will fill out the documents so that the observers will not notice anything.

Was it all paid for?

We were promised to pay 70 thousand rubles.

- As I understand it, you refused a solid increase in salary?

I rejected any suggestions. This is considering that at that time I was in the party for which they offered to do stuffing. After the first meeting, my colleague and I left dumbfounded.

Then we were collected a second time. I remember that the director of one school was present at that meeting, we knew each other well, but after a while, when I was accused of slander, it was she who testified against me in court. Despite the fact that I immediately voiced my position, the leaders of the pre-election meeting were inexorable, my words were ignored.

The last time we were gathered two days before the elections. We have already started work at the polling stations. And that day they brought me “leftist” lists. They were given to me by a member of the election commission. True, later at the trial, he assured that he was not present at the site at all. By the way, now the prosecutor's office is dealing with this person, as far as I know. By the 2016 elections, he was promoted, made the chairman of the TEC.

- Despite your refusal to do stuffing, did they still bring the lists to you? What for?

Perhaps they hoped to the last that I would change my mind, I would be afraid of losing my job.

- And what did you do with these lists?

She said: "I won't take it, take it back." They were taken away.

Just before the elections, I and another colleague of mine were summoned to the TEC. The chairman of the TEC personally invited: “Girls, come, we need to talk.” I note that we have cooperated with this person for many years, and, apart from good things, I can not say anything about him. We never let him down. He knew that elections in our precincts were always clean.

In short, my colleague and I came to the TEC. We were taken to a rest room. It was not the chairman himself who spoke to us that day, but a woman who, in my opinion, worked in SOBES. The lady immediately raised her tone. She shouted at us, saying that you are making yourself out of yourself, you want to be "white crows." In the end, she calmed down: “What are you afraid of? We have a whole commission of lawyers working.”

- That is, you were given to understand: in case of an emergency, they will cover you?

Exactly. I then hinted to her: “Are you not afraid that I will tell everyone about this story?” And I heard in response: "You will not prove anything." In the end, we broke up badly. But at that moment, I clearly decided for myself that I would not leave it just like that. I returned to school, and what was my surprise when I saw those very “left” lists on my desk. While I was gone, they brought the lists, and left them there. After all, the commission has already worked at the school. And my subordinates were instructed: "To transfer the lists to the chairman."

- What did you do with these lists?

That day I took them to my office and locked them in a safe. I have kept them for a long time. Like a memory. Burnt down just a year ago.

“She needs to be kicked out, but you want to give her a bonus”

How was election day itself?

Nobody touched us on election day. Although the night before, the leadership of RONO offered to withdraw my candidacy from the post of chairman. Thank God they didn't have the power to do that. We worked out the elections, reported, handed over the documentation. It was the middle of December. And at the end of the year, teachers usually got a bonus. Chickens laugh, what is the amount, if the salary of teachers is 19 thousand rubles. And when the director of our school took the lists for the award to RONO, they made big eyes when they saw my last name: “Ivanov should be removed from his post, and you are writing out awards for her.”

Then they started digging under me. They found fault with the fact that my daughter-in-law and son work with me at school. Moreover, my son worked part-time, consider moonlighting. He received a salary of 2 thousand rubles, was a building maintenance worker.

After that visit to the RONO, the principal of the school returned not herself: “I will probably be removed.” I immediately understood what was the matter: “What do I need to do so that they let us finish it in peace?”. The director perked up: "Refuse the bonus." I refused and filed a complaint. And then I asked, maybe I should still quit?

The director shrugged her shoulders: “We don’t need it yet, we’ll finalize the year, we’ll see.” I was so cut by this phrase - “we will finalize the year”. I understood that if I stayed, the school would be tortured with checks, as it always happens. It is no coincidence that there is an expression: “Tell me that someone needs to be drowned, send me to school. I'll dig."

At that moment, I wanted to shout to the whole world. And I made a decision for myself to retire. The next day, I put my resignation letter on the director's desk. And I noticed how she exhaled - thank God that she was leaving. I left, and then I told reporters about my story.

- After what did you have to sue representatives of the RONO?

Yes, and it was creepy. Let's start with the fact that I have never been judged. I'm already old. And in my concept, the court is bad. I didn't have a lawyer. I didn't know how to speak in court. I didn't even know how to properly address the judge. But when at the meeting I saw ordinary people who came to support me made me feel better.

Representatives of the RONO never appeared in court. The process took a long time, I was constantly asked what I would do if I lost the court? I said that I would file a lawsuit in an international instance.

Everything ended in my favor.

After last elections against the teachers who did stuffing, opened a criminal case. How do you think it could end?

In my opinion, it is naive to assume that someone will be punished and, moreover, imprisoned. After my trial, when the truth came out, the head of the RONO, which gave me instructions on stuffing, was promoted. She became deputy head of the district administration. She was not even removed from office during the trial ...

Do you humanly feel sorry for those teachers who are now accused of stuffing? They don't do it willingly.

No pity. Every person has a choice. He is not easy. I won't lie. Before I quit, I sobbed all night. I have devoted so many years to education. My 11th grade was supposed to graduate that year. I knew that I was betraying them. It was hard and painful for me. But I made this choice. In life, we all go through tests of love, power and money. Not many people can stand them. Therefore, I do not feel sorry for such teachers. I think they should not teach children.

Among the school principals who attended the 2011 election meetings with you, did anyone else refuse to do stuff?

I don't know about the rest. But I can admit that, basically, everyone made a deal with their conscience. When I watched our last gubernatorial elections, I was shocked. If then, in 2011, at least five people gathered us together, everything was carried out secretly, quietly, then in 2014, school principals gathered everyone in a large hall, and everyone was given instructions on how to work with those who voted early. And when someone noticed me in the hall, I heard a whisper: “Ivanova is here, everything is gone.” Then I, too, being a member of the election commission, tried to get through to the authorities, but they did not hear me. If at least one person, after such elections, at least flew down from his post, the next time people would think - is it worth getting dirty? And we only fire teachers for insubordination.

You first encountered massive fraud only in 2011. It turns out that before that the elections were more or less smooth?

This is my story. Until 2011, we were not really touched. We worked out the elections for five plus. Now the late chairman of the TEC called us "poultry-excellent students." We did not receive any complaints from observers. Moreover, these observers practiced one election with us and asked to join us for the next one. Because they like to work in a relaxed environment.

As for the observers - if a throw-in is planned at the site, does it come out, and the observers should be “their own”?

It turns out so. Because it is problematic to throw in ballots imperceptibly. It is necessary that there is no one around. But in any case, throwing in 200 pieces is unrealistic. In 2011, there were old-style bins on my site. Theoretically, imperceptibly, it is really possible to throw in five ballots at a time. A person enters a secret ballot booth, fills out ballots, then exits and casts. According to the law, observers cannot stop him with the words: “Show how much you throw in, we will count.” But throwing in 3-5 extra ballots is not 400. Five extra ballots would not have made it into the "electronic" ballot boxes. Probably, before those elections, everything was thought out in advance, it was proposed to do stuffing in the polling stations where there were old-style ballot boxes.

- After the incident, did your school colleagues call you, support you?

No one called, no support. Friends met me on the street and said they were worried about me. I heard that many representatives of the RONO were also worried about me. But I didn't get much support.

- This year you did not work in the elections?

I closed this topic for myself. I remember that in my last elections in 2014, I came to one polling station as a member of the TEC and asked to see the lists. So the committee members called the police. Later, I was informed that a directive had been given - Ivanov should not be allowed to enter other people's polling stations, and even more so to the lists. So now I only go to the polls as a voter. And I believe that if all people came to vote, then there would be no stuffing.

“After the dismissal, I don’t want to have anything to do with schools”

For many people who worked in the elections and refused to participate in fraud, life turned upside down.

Yulia Kapichnikova. Photo from personal archive

Julia Kapichnikova a young teacher primary school from Tambov. In 2012, she was appointed as an observer at one of the polling stations. Julia honestly did her job. Recorded violations - stuffing, postscript 600 votes.

At the end of the voting, Kapichnikova refused to sign the protocol of the results of the presidential elections. The head teacher of the school where Yulia worked reprimanded her subordinate and advised her to quit. As a result, Kapichnikova's story received wide publicity.

After the hype at school, they left me, but they looked at me askance. In the end, I completed maternity leave, and then she went to another school, - Julia admits. - But since then I have given myself a word - never to participate in the election campaign. I know that in many regions teachers are still fired for disobedience. There are those who leave own will after the elections.

Teacher at a rural school in the Ryazan region Raivo Shtulberg was fired when he refused to agitate the people before the elections in 2015 (In the Ryazan region, the regional Duma was elected - "MK") for a particular batch. The man posted a revealing video online, where he posted the truth about forcing teachers to vote. He said that subsidies were promised to the village for "worthy votes". However, in past years, the villagers did not see the results of such injections of money.

Raivo Stulberg. Photo from personal archive

After that, the director of the school where Shtulberg worked advised the teacher to quit for good. Raivo wrote a letter of resignation of their own free will.

I can't say anything about the last elections, Raivo Shtulberg says. - I have not had anything to do with school for a year now and I hope that I never will. Former colleagues also did not say anything. They are afraid for their places.

In my time, the authorities adhered to such a formulation that teachers are not forced, but asked to agitate. That is, a person, it seems, can refuse, he will not get anything for it. The school principal then directly told me: “People asked me to distribute leaflets, am I going to refuse people?” The head of the RONO was also asked - other people from above. I suspect that those are also “asked”.

There are pawns in schools, and each of them is served as best he can, so that the authorities notice and note. There are no ends, the chain is too long. Well, the "crime" to start for stuffing and so on will be on the "switchman", that is, on the teacher. As far as I know, the sensational criminal case that has now been opened against the head teacher of the Nizhny Novgorod school is almost the first in the entire history of electoral stuffing. Maybe she'll get off with a fine or get a suspended sentence. But a person's nerves will fray. And yet, “he was under investigation” is a serious stigma for a teacher.

Anton Popov, a teacher from the city of Puteets also tried to fight for the truth. True, his story is not connected with the elections. But he also has something to say about the participation of teachers in the elections.

Anton Popov. Photo from personal archive

I once complained about one student who had no brakes. Then I even sent a video from the lessons to Putin's reception room. He asked in a letter to provide the school with at least some cheap video cameras so that he could prove how disgusting this teenager was behaving. As a result, the director forced me to write a letter of resignation. I left school. I worked as a programmer in a hospital for six months. But in September he returned to school. Nobody wanted to take my place - there was no crowd of people who wanted to teach such children, and even go to a village school for a pittance.

Understand, objectionable teachers are removed everywhere. In this system, the main thing is to be able to bend and obey.

As for the elections, I myself served on the commission this year. My father was the chairman of the precinct. We didn't have any violations. It seems to me that such things happen in crowded cities, where if they are fired, a person will still find a job. In the villages, no one runs the risk of fraudulent elections, how then to look fellow villagers in the eye?

It's easier in the city - you don't know anyone, nobody knows you. A lot more depends on the head of the precinct and on how independent people sit with him on the commission. For example, our members of the commission were pensioners and people who had nothing to do with school. If something is wrong, they will not be silent ...

Finally, we contacted the workers of the teachers' trade union movement. Assuming that there really should know about such stories. We turned to the co-chairman of the Interregional Trade Union of Education Workers "Teacher" Andrey Demidov. The man honestly admitted: “Teachers will not even talk about such things anonymously. Why are they in trouble?"

After the opening of polling stations for the elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation, traditional reports of violations in the form of "carousels" began to arrive - the mass transportation of voters to polling stations. Disproportions and queues of "active citizens" are filmed on cameras. but Aleksey Venediktov, head of the public monitoring headquarters (editor-in-chief of Ekho Moskvy), considers this unlikely, since it should take hours to register groups of people voting by absentee ballots - according to his calculations. The deputy chairman of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Valery Rashkin cites on his Twitter a photo of the bus on which, according to his suspicion, the “carousels” were brought. This is how one of the polling stations in the Central Administrative District looks inside after a massive influx of the same type of voters. Single-mandate candidate Yulia Galyamina claims that there are a lot of absentee ballots in the SAO. According to her, the “carouselers” “do not come in Gazelles, but in five or six cars and disperse.”

Twitter broadcast (Updated)

Refresh without reloading the page:
Right-click just below the title / Select - Reload Frame
To download early messages, click - Read Next Page

You probably already know the official results of the elections to the State Duma: United Russia won, followed by the Liberal Democratic Party and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation are almost on a par, and the opposition parties scored a percentage of votes at the level of statistical error.

These results were generally predictable, so there is no big intrigue here. The government used all the resources available to it to ensure that the outcome was just that. I am interested in something else in this story: where, how and to what extent the election results were rigged, and statistics can answer these questions.

In the results of all Russian elections recent years there is one and the same striking feature: the higher the turnout at the polling station, the greater the percentage of votes received by the party in power. It is clear that in normal political life it is impossible: what difference does it make, how many people vote - one hundred or two hundred, the percentage of votes cast for different parties should be approximately the same.

The paradox of the Russian elections is explained by the banal stuffing of ballots for the ruling party: after all, the more ballots are thrown for it, the higher the total turnout is. This is very easy to check, because the percentage of votes cast for other parties still corresponds to a statistically normal distribution.

It is almost impossible to hide this kind of falsification, because it will require very accurate and coordinated ballot box stuffing in all polling stations at the same time, and this is far from always possible. It is clear that for our courts “this evidence is not evidence”, but we are not in court yet and no one bothers us to assess the situation by drawing the appropriate conclusions.

Moreover, all the tedious work of collating statistical data for us has already been done by a wonderful person - Sergey Shpilkin, who analyzes Russian elections since 2011.

Here is his graph, which shows the relationship between turnout and the number of votes cast for different parties:

All parties, except for one and only, have an identical picture: regardless of the turnout, the proportions are observed, and only United Russia has seen a grandiose surge in popularity in polling stations with prohibitively high turnout. This is nothing more than a trail of stuffing.

The entire purple area on the chart is stuffing. If we correct the official data, it turns out that the real turnout was around 36.5%, and not 47.76%, that is, about 23% of ballots were thrown in - every fourth, which is actually a lot. It turns out that about half (!) of the votes for United Russia are simply drawn.

Here are the official and corrected election results:

Belgorod, Voronezh, Kemerovo, Tyumen and Penza regions, Kalmykia, Mordovia, Tatarstan, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia, Bashkortostan, Dagestan and, of course, Chechnya are leading in falsifications. In these regions, the situation is simply catastrophic.

And, of course, these elections also have results that are difficult to measure in numbers:

• Record low turnout in Moscow and St. Petersburg shows that the population of these cities no longer sees elections as a way to change something in the country. What options remain - judge for yourself. And no percentages drawn by the Kalmyks and Chechens will help to keep power if riots break out in both capitals.


• A huge number of members of the election commissions became accomplices in the falsification of the election results, and this is not just playing with pieces of paper, but a criminal offense. Given that election commissions are most often made up of teachers, think about what criminals can teach your children.


• The election results are not recognized by Canada, Sweden, France, Denmark, Lithuania, Romania, the USA, PACE, and apparently this is only the beginning. The absence of a legitimate, from the point of view of the world community, parliament raises the question of Russia's ability to negotiate - after all, international treaties must be ratified by it. Simply put, now Russia can wipe itself with any of its treaties.