Russian Presidential Elections

Who will win the Russian Presidential Elections

  • Putin

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Putin

    Votes: 3 23.1%

  • Putin

    Votes: 1 7.7%

  • On Planet X, we all vote for Putin

    Votes: 9 69.2%
  • Total voters
    13
  • Poll closed .
Here's England from 2010:

6a0105369912fb970b013480aab2c0970c-pi.png


We can see noticeable differences between the North and the South.

See? Normal.
 
The regions that have the most voter turnout are the ones that voted for Putin more, I guess they really really wanted to vote for him in those parts.

Those high voter turnout areas include Chechnya and Dagestan, usually very hostile (I guess they forgot).

So far the symbiosis between Putin and the elites in the North Caucasus has worked out well for the Russian leader. In the March 4 elections, Putin received 99.76 percent of the votes in Chechnya and nearly 93 percent of the vote in Dagestan. Putin won over 92 percent of the vote in Ingushetia and over 91 percent in Karachaevo-Cherkessia (http://dagestan.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/202380/, March 5). Paradoxically, it appears that the worse the security situation in a republic, the higher percentage of its electorate voted for Putin, who presided over the deteriorating security situation for more than a decade. In Adygea, arguably the quietest territory in the North Caucasus, Putin received the lowest percentage in the region – a little more than 64 percent (http://www.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/202391/, March 5).
Click to expand...

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=39105&tx_ttnews[backPid]=7&cHash=0b9e8552c8063c5a07127b53c4a5afcd

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews
 
Last edited:
Two things going on here:

#1, The Russian elections were obviously severely manipulated, if not fixed outright.

#2, Even if they were free and open, Putin would still likely have won. I think people in the West subconsciously assume that authoritarian thugs are inherently unpopular among the populations they rule, due to the fact that they are, well, authoritarian thugs. This is not necessarily the case. We're talking about a country in which a significant chunk of the population still has a positive view of Josef fricking Stalin.
 
We can only hope that his term as president is very, very short.

What a nasty little man.
 
Cleon said:
Two things going on here:

#1, The Russian elections were obviously severely manipulated, if not fixed outright.

#2, Even if they were free and open, Putin would still likely have won. I think people in the West subconsciously assume that authoritarian thugs are inherently unpopular among the populations they rule, due to the fact that they are, well, authoritarian thugs. This is not necessarily the case. We're talking about a country in which a significant chunk of the population still has a positive view of Josef fricking Stalin.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and #3, the candidates *allowed* to run against Putin were ones who were not real threats to him, regardless.
 
Cleon said:
Two things going on here:

#1, The Russian elections were obviously severely manipulated, if not fixed outright.

#2, Even if they were free and open, Putin would still likely have won. I think people in the West subconsciously assume that authoritarian thugs are inherently unpopular among the populations they rule, due to the fact that they are, well, authoritarian thugs. This is not necessarily the case. We're talking about a country in which a significant chunk of the population still has a positive view of Josef fricking Stalin.
Click to expand...


Ah, I see. So "he" had to manipulate the election to prove what an authoritarian thug he is so that people would vote for him. Sure, Cleon. Sounds logical. ;)

In reality #1 didn't happen because #2 is true (although I would formulate it nicer) and there are no serious competitors. Don't forget that in all of Russia's history, the history of their democracy spans twenty years.

And in reality you think that the illogical #1 is "obviously" true because the US media is crying bloody murder ad infinitum and points as proof to the unprofessional NGOs which are payed by your tax payer money to say what they say.

Nicolai Petro, professor of international politics at the University of Rhode Island, who served as the US State Department's special assistant for policy on the Soviet Union under President George HW Bush, gives some advise on How to not lose Russia:

[...] A good place to start would be with a more balanced assessment of the Russian presidential elections. Secretary Clinton now has a rare opportunity to undo the damage that she did in her hasty condemnation of last December's Duma elections. A few simple words of praise for the enormous efforts undertaken by the Russian government in the past two months would place Russian-American relations on a new and much more positive trajectory.

Here are just a few things she could cite:
  • The five registered candidates represent a very broad spectrum of political views, from the communist Gennady Zyuganov who wishes to re-nationalize industry and isolate Russia from the West, to the liberal Mikhail Prokhorov who would like to break up existing national monopolies and join the European Union. The only candidate of any note who was denied registration - social-democrat Grigory Yavlinsky - failed when more than a quarter of his registration signatures were revealed to be forgeries.
  • Each candidate received nine hours of free prime time television and radio space (not including four TV and radio channels that offered addition free air time), and up to 18 hours of air time for paid campaign ads. Surveys reveal that, thanks to these and to a slew of televised debates, the public was quite familiar with each candidate's views.
  • Finally, in an effort at transparency as yet unmatched in any other country, the election process in all 91,400 polling stations was carried live on the Internet. More than three million visitors each watched an average of 50 minutes of live feed. Democracy advocates should take note - this innovation is cited by 28% of people as the most important reason they trust these election results. This is in addition to an estimated 200,000 registered election monitors from opposition parties, some 700 international election observers, and new, transparent ballot boxes installed in Moscow and other cities. In short, it would be very hard to argue that the Russian government has not done everything possible to ensure a free and fair election, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) head of mission, Heidi Tagliavini, pointedly refused to label them as not free or unfair. If after these bona fide efforts the official US reaction is still as condescendingly dismissive as it was last December, most Russians will assume that the real purpose of such criticism is to undermine the legitimacy of Putin's presidency. This will in turn cast a long and very dark shadow over future relations at a time when the United States needs Russia more than ever.
[...]
Click to expand...


I heard that Obama finally congratulated. :)
 
Finally, in an effort at transparency as yet unmatched in any other country, the election process in all 91,400 polling stations was carried live on the Internet.

How stupidly naive. We don't need webcams to tell us that people cast ballots. The people themselves can tell us that they cast ballots.

What the people can't tell us is what happened to those ballots. And, interestingly enough, neither can the webcams.
 
Pardalis said:
Here's England from 2010:

[qimg]http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a154/perdalis/6a0105369912fb970b013480aab2c0970c-pi.png[/qimg]

We can see noticeable differences between the North and the South.

See? Normal.
Click to expand...

That's not England. It's Britain. That North is Scotland. The middle Western bit is Wales.
 
Honestly I'd put more trust in the results from Duma elections under Nicholas II. At least they were honest about who was allowed to vote and who they could vote for!
 
Childlike Empress said:
Link again, judge yourself about Pardalis' observation skills.
Click to expand...

Pardalis said:
Blue or dark blue, it's all Putin. The darker regions are the ones who voted for him even more.
Click to expand...

No, you're looking at the figures for voter turnout, which differed from region to region, making it different shades of blue. Click on Results, and you get to see the country painted in the Putin blue.. :)
 
Childlike Empress said:

My boyfriend is in trouble once again:
Got in a fight, got drunk on something nasty
I've had enough and I chased him away
And now I want a man like Putin

One like Putin, full of strength
One like Putin, who won't be a drunk
One like Putin, who wouldn't hurt me
One like Putin, who won't run away!

I've seen him on the news last night
He was telling us that the world has come to crossroads
With one like him, it's easy to be home and out
And now I want a man like Putin

One like Putin, full of strength
One like Putin, who won't be a drunk
One like Putin, who wouldn't hurt me
One like Putin, who won't run away!

:D
​


So, he won't have to rig sunday's elections to bring this home. Why is he so popular while "the West" paints him as a sinister "KGB" goon? He's published a series of essays over the last weeks, the last one is his read-worthy take on Russia and the changing world. Still essential to understand where he is coming from is his infamous 2007 speech at the Munich Security Conference (don't blame me for the youtube title):


Discuss (and vote!)​
Click to expand...


In his first major interview after his inauguration, comrade Vladimir Vladimirovich tells RT (who else) his views on issues like the upcoming APEC summit, Syria, the Missile "Defense" Shield, US presidential elections (including an "I looked into his eyes" moment making fun of Bush), Pussy Riot ("can you translate that into Russian for me" - yes Vlad, they appealed), corruption and even the Assange case (sticking it to the UK for extraditing him while harboring "people with blood on their hands" - obviously referring to super-villain Beresovsky who just lost a UK case against fellow oligarch Abrahimowhatshisname and is wanted in several countries including Russia). Interesting.

​
 
Last edited:
Does he say anything about the murder of journalists and the corrupt courts that turn a blind eye?
 
Last edited:
Yeah I'm just not that interested in 43 minutes of a thug's opinion from a TV station invented to manipulate stupid Westerners.
 
Do you support the Russian occupation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia?
 
!BAM! and there it is again. Everything works like the last time (and the poll is still representative), just that the western pre$$titutes are even more in a frenzy now, hyping up the Islamophobe racist criminal clown Navalny as "Main opposition candidate" while polls show he has around 1-2% support while the ultra-nationalist and communist candidates both have around 10% support. And Uncle Vladimir safe 60+%

Being a convicted felon (his brother actually sits in for their machinations), Navalny is not granted candidacy, which is a bit unfortunate from a propaganda perspective. If I were Putin I would give him amnesty and allow him to run, just for the LULz.

Election will be on March 18th.

edit: While the adorable Superstar song is still there, the 2007 Munich Speech video hasn't survived the six years, so here is a fresh copy (it is still essential viewing):

 
Last edited:
Having arrested his principal opponent, I see that Putin is upholding the fine traditions, of Democracy in Russia......
 
A couple of days ago, Margarita Simonyan, head of RT and born 1980, answered the following to a question by what she called a "BBCnik" about "Isn't there somebody better than Putin?":

Margarita Simonyan said:
To understand this, you had to live here before Putin. Just picture it, you live in a country where a civil war has going on long since, which has no end and no end in sight. Where a crisis has just struck, which has nullified all your money, again.
Where everyone understands that Chechnya will not come to an end, and there will be Dagestan, Ingushetia and even Adygeya, and then Tatarstan, until we fall apart completely in torment, hatred and blood.
Where my regional governor, for example, forbade the sale of our Kuban grain to Moscow, because this Moscow would go away, far off, along with the rest of Russia.
Where our bloody and final collapse is inevitable, and nothing can be done.
Where for months or even years salaries and pensions go unpaid. Where every year is worse than the previous one. Where all hopes have collapsed long ago.
And then a man comes, and all this stops. War, hopelessness, collapse, massive permanent non-payment.
Wages, pensions are growing. By slight increments, but growing. Mortgages can be had, unheard of before, there are some bank account savings from the population, mass TOURISM abroad:
Not shuttling to Poland with trunks loaded with alarms, like my mother, for example, (with her advanced degrees), but rather to vacation in Turkey. And then to Italy.
And in general, - I say, I do not know any person who would not live here much better under Putin than before Putin.
The problem is that you compare our life with your own. But we compare our life with our own life before Putin.
And we understand: maybe with someone else all these years it would be better. But in fact it was worse, way worse. Would you take risk the of such a situation?
Click to expand...
 
I am concerned less about the apartment-bomber himself than the system of secret service control that he revived. Who knows when liberals in Russia actually get to dominate the discussion after centuries of tyrannical rule.
 
Margarita S is also very disingenuous, using the typical whataboutism to attack BBC when RT gets called out. The fact is any economic improvement would look good against the backdrop of Russia in the 1990s, a borderline 3rd world country. Yeltsin didn't do much to alleviate it, indeed he and his cronies, Putin included, helped rob the country slowly and the security service breakaways from the old KGB got the biggest pieces of the pie. A few rubles here, a few there, some false flag operations and wars uniting against Russia's next boogeyman.....the common people will come around, he thought. And they did.

From there, Putin has been successful in casting the Western powers as the scourge of humanity, while he tries to present himself as the innocent bystander who just wants to join the party, but the EEBUL NWO won't let him. So yea if Margarita S wants to be honest about post-Soviet Russian history she should tell the whole story, with all the bits and pieces, not a dubious before and after presentation.
 
Moscow Begins Crypto-Elections Testing: Thumbs Nose at US

Tom Luongo said:
The irony is so thick you’d think it was made from ballistic jelly. But, that’s exactly what’s needed to contain this shot across the election-tampering bow the Russians just pulled off.

According to Coindesk, the city of Moscow is unveiling an Ethereum-based version of its voting system called Active Citizen. By putting the votes on the blockchain, as long as the code is solid, then the results cannot be disputed.

This is one of the major promises of the trustless systems the crypto-community has been clamoring about for nearly a decade now. From the moment I heard about Ethereum and smart contracts, the first application that popped into my head was voting. [...]

There are concerns, rightly, about scaling and clearing enough transactions in a reasonable amount of time. So, it is best to test this system on inconsequential votes like the colors of seats on the Moscow Metro.

But, make no mistake, the message here is clear. Russia is moving towards a transparent, functioning democratic system. These small matters are simply beta-tests for wider adoption of this technology over time.

The first real milestone should be a local election with the final goal being national elections.

While trust in government institutions in the West is falling at an alarming rate, the evil, corrupt Russians led by chief Mafioso Vladimir Putin are acting to add faith in their system. [...]
Click to expand...
 
"How Putin won the Elections 2018", that's how the engaged translator of Russian media events into English, Inessa S, titled this video. A snippet of a prime time TV "debate" between the head of the communist party and the head of the head of Zhirinovsky, the two runners-up to VV with both having halfway realistic hopes to get a two-digit result, and a female gimmick close to the family Putin runs to troll the West who is lucky to avoid a zero in front of the result.

 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
"How Putin won the Elections 2018", that's how the engaged translator of Russian media events into English, Inessa S, titled this video. A snippet of a prime time TV "debate" between the head of the communist party and the head of the head of Zhirinovsky, the two runners-up to VV with both having halfway realistic hopes to get a two-digit result, and a female gimmick close to the family Putin runs to troll the West who is lucky to avoid a zero in front of the result.

Click to expand...

Isn't Inessa S the little YouTube Kremlin puppet who tried to explain away Putin's crimes in the most cringeworthy and transparent way possible?

And V. Zhirinovsky has been running for President for how many elections in a row now? If I were so cynical I'd say he's been shilling to keep his position but more likely it's cause he's anti-American like most of the bunch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom