Some are against the system: what happened to the teachers who exposed election fraud. How Kremlin swindlers rigged elections to the State Duma. What options were offered to you?

“Before I quit, I cried 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 committing fraud in election commissions.

We contacted those teachers who know first-hand what election fraud is. These people are from a different “camp”: at one time they did not remain silent about what they were forced to do.

Teacher Tatyana Ivanova from St. Petersburg became famous five years ago. After the December 2011 elections. At that time, deputies of the State Duma and the city parliament were also elected.

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

Tatyana Ivanova. Photo from personal archive

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

- Tatyana, five years ago you had to quit your home school. What are you doing now?

Nothing. I'm seating at home.

- Didn’t you get a job at another school?

There were no options. No proposals were received. I was only invited to a private school, but I’m not interested. I refused.

- Were you no longer invited to the elections as a member of the election commission?

In the spring of 2014, I was still a member of the territorial commission. At that time, gubernatorial and municipal elections were held in St. Petersburg. But this election became my “swan song.” My powers ended in May 2015, since then I have the same attitude towards elections as you.

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

Everyone says that this time everything went more or less clean. I tend to believe 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 they carefully removed me from all meetings, they took all measures to ensure that I was away from the chairmen of the election commissions and did not see any violations.

On election day, they put me in the basement - that’s how the responsibilities were distributed. The TEC chairman and I had 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 found yourself a stranger among your own?

Certainly. Will you ever forget this? In 2011, I was appointed chairman of the commission. It was time for the first pre-election meeting, where valuable instructions were distributed. Let me note that I worked in elections for 14 years. Decent experience. I know the technology "from" to "to". Until 2011, the chairmen of the commissions were not school directors; they already had a lot to do. But this year they introduced an innovation. I remember my colleague and I came to the meeting and were stunned - the chairmen of precinct election commissions were all school principals.

- What were the reasons for the changes?

Apparently, someone realized that it was easier to put pressure on school directors. The most vulnerable link in the education chain.

- But not everyone pushes through?

Hope. But when I refused to participate in the falsification, not one of the teachers who was 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 to their faces: “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 election commissions gathered in the city administration building. And this time we were invited to the social center. I walked into the room and was simply amazed. Of those present, there were only 5 chairmen, whereas usually at least a hundred people gathered, we have a large region. The conversation was conducted behind a closed door.

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

- What options were offered to you?

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

- And how many ballots did you have to throw into the ballot box?

It was assumed that there would be 200 of them. And then we had double elections - Duma and legislative (in the city Legislative Assembly - "MK"), accordingly, it was necessary to throw in 400 ballots. Then I asked how we would carry out fraudulent voting according to the documents? After all, 200 people need to be added to the lists. Passport information required. They openly explained to us: “They will give you disks containing all the lists and information about your voters. What do you mean, you’re at school, consider yourself at home. Put your man on the floor above him, and he will fill out the documents so that observers won’t notice anything.”

- Was this all paid for?

They promised to pay us 70 thousand rubles.

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

I rejected any offers. This is taking into account that at that time I was a member of the party for which they offered to do stuffing. After the first meeting, my colleague and I left dumbfounded.

Then we were gathered 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 election meeting were relentless, and my words fell on deaf ears.

The last time we were gathered was two days before the elections. We have already begun work at polling stations. And that day they brought me the “leftist” lists. A member of the election commission gave them to me. However, later at the trial, he insisted that he was not present at the site at all. By the way, the prosecutor’s office is now dealing with this person, as far as I know. By the 2016 elections, he was promoted and made chairman of the TEC.

- Despite your refusal to do stuffing, they still brought you the lists? For what?

Perhaps they hoped until the last minute that I would change my mind and 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.

Immediately on the eve of the elections, I and another colleague were summoned to the TEC. The chairman of the TIC personally invited: “Girls, come, we need to talk.” Let me note that we have collaborated with this man for many years, and I have nothing but good things to say about him. We never let him down. He knew that elections in our polling stations were always clean.

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

- So they made it clear to you: in the event of an emergency, they will cover you?

Exactly. I then hinted to her: “Aren’t you afraid that I will tell everyone about this story?” And I heard in response: “You won’t prove anything.” In the end, we parted on bad terms. But at that moment I clearly decided for myself that I wouldn’t just leave it like that. I returned to school, and imagine my surprise when I saw those same “leftist” lists on my desk. While I was away, they finally brought the lists and left them there. The commission was already working at the school. And my subordinates were given the instruction: “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 the safe. I kept them for a long time. Like a memory. I burned it literally a year ago.

“We need to kick her out, but you want to give her a bonus”

- How was the election day itself?

On election day, no one bothered us anymore. Although the night before the leadership of RONO proposed to remove my candidacy from the post of chairman. Thank God they didn't have the authority to do that. We worked through the elections, reported, and submitted the documentation. It was mid-December. And at the end of the year, teachers were usually given a bonus. The chickens laugh at how much this is, if the teachers’ salary is 19 thousand rubles. And when the director of our school took the lists for bonuses to RONO, they widened their eyes when they saw my name: “Ivanova should be removed from her position, and you are writing out bonuses 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 working part-time. He received a salary of 2 thousand rubles and was a building maintenance worker.

After that visit to RONO, the school director returned not herself: “I’ll probably be fired.” I immediately understood what was going on: “What do I need to do so that we can be allowed to finish the work in peace?” The director perked up: “Refuse the bonus.” I refused and wrote a statement. And then I asked, maybe I should quit after all?

The director shrugged her shoulders: “Not yet, we’ll work on it for a year and we’ll see.” This phrase cut me so much - “we’ll finish the year.” I understood that if I stayed, the school would be tormented with inspections, as 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 it up."

At that moment I wanted to scream to the whole world. And I decided 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 she was leaving. I left and then told journalists about my story.

- After what did you have to sue representatives of 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 opinion, court is bad. I didn't have a lawyer. I didn’t know how to speak in court. I didn’t even understand how to address the judge correctly. But when at the meeting I saw ordinary people who came to support me, I felt better.

Representatives of RONO did not appear in court even once. The process lasted a long time, I was constantly asked what I would do if I lost the trial? I said that I would file a lawsuit with an international authority.

Everything ended in my favor.

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

In my opinion, it is naive to assume that someone will be punished, let alone imprisoned. After my trial, when the truth came out, the head of RONO, who 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 feel sorry for those teachers who are now accused of stuffing? They do not do this of their own free will.

No pity. Every person has a choice. It's not easy. I won't lie. Before I quit, I cried all night. I devoted so many years to education. I was supposed to graduate my 11th grade class that year. I understood 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. That's why I don't feel sorry for such teachers. I don't think they should teach children.

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

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, we were gathered at least five people at a time, everything was done secretly, quietly, then in 2014, the school directors gathered everyone in a large hall, and everyone was given instructions on how to work with early voters. And when someone noticed me in the hall, I heard a whisper: “Ivanova is here, everything is gone.” Then I, too, as a member of the election commission, tried to reach out to the authorities, but they did not listen to me. If at least one person were to leave office after such elections, people would think next time - is it worth getting dirty? But here they only fire teachers for insubordination.

You first encountered mass fraud only in 2011. It turns out that before this the elections went more or less smoothly?

This is my story. We weren't really touched until 2011. We worked through the elections for five plus. The now deceased chairman of the TIC called us “excellent bird students.” We have not received a single complaint from observers. Moreover, these observers worked with us for one election and asked to join us for the next. Because they enjoy working in a calm environment.

As for the observers - if a throw-in is planned at the site, then the observers should be “their own”?

It turns out so. Because throwing ballots in unnoticed is problematic. This is necessary so that there is no one nearby. But in any case, throwing in 200 pieces is unrealistic. In 2011, there were old-style trash cans on my property. Theoretically, it is actually possible to throw in five ballots at a time without being noticed. A person enters a secret voting booth, fills out ballots, then leaves and casts them. Observers, by law, cannot stop him with the words: “Show me how much you throw in, we’ll count it.” But throwing in 3-5 extra ballots is not 400. Not even five extra pieces of paper would fit into the “electronic” ballot boxes. Probably, before those elections, everything was thought out in advance; stuffing was proposed to be done in areas where there were old-style ballot boxes.

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

No one called or supported. Friends met me on the street and said they were worried about me. I heard that many representatives of RONO were also worried about me. But I didn’t hear much support.

- You didn’t work in the elections this year?

I closed this topic for myself. I remember at 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 commission members called the police. Later they informed me that an order had been given - Ivanov should not be allowed to access other people’s sites, and especially not 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 my dismissal, I don’t want to have anything to do with schools.”

For many people who worked in elections and refused to participate in fraud, their lives were turned upside down.

Yulia Kapichnikova. Photo from personal archive

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

At the end of the voting, Kapichnikova refused to sign the protocol of the presidential election results. 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 commotion at school, they left me, but they looked at me askance. As a result, I worked until maternity leave, and then went to another school,” admits Yulia. “But since then I promised myself that I would never participate in an election campaign.” I know that in many regions teachers are still fired for insubordination. There are those who leave of their own accord after the elections.

Teacher at a rural school in the Ryazan region Raivo Stulberg was fired when he refused to agitate the people before the elections in 2015 (In the Ryazan region they elected the regional Duma - "MK") for a certain batch. The man published an exposing video online, where he laid out the truth about forcing teachers to vote. He said that the village was promised subsidies for “worthy votes.” However, in previous years, the villagers did not see the results of such injections of money.

Raivo Stulberg. Photo from personal archive

After this, the director of the school where Shtulberg worked advised the teacher to resign on good terms. Raivo wrote a letter of resignation of his own free will.

“I can’t say anything about the latest elections,” says Raivo Stulberg. - I haven’t had anything to do with school for a year now and I hope that I never will. Former colleagues didn’t say anything either. They are afraid for their places.

In my time, the authorities adhered to the following formulation: teachers were not forced, but were asked to agitate. That is, a person, it seems, can refuse, and nothing will happen to him for it. The school director then directly told me: “People asked me to hand out leaflets, am I going to refuse people?” The head of RONO was also asked - other people from above. I suspect that they are also being “asked for”.

There are pawns sitting in schools, and each of them is currying favor as best he can so that the authorities will notice and mark them. There are no ends to be found; the chain is too long. Well, a “criminal” charge for stuffing and so on will be brought against the “switchman,” that is, against the teacher. As far as I know, the sensational criminal case now opened against the head teacher of a Nizhny Novgorod school is almost the first in the history of election stuffing. Maybe she'll get off with a fine or she'll get probation. But it will fray a person’s nerves. And yet, “being 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 elections. But he also has something to say about teachers’ participation in 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. In the letter he asked to provide the school with at least some cheap video cameras so that they could prove how disgustingly this teenager behaves. As a result, the director forced me to write a letter of resignation. I left school. I worked in a hospital as a programmer for six months. But in September he returned back to school. No one wanted to take my place - there was no crowd willing to teach such children, and even go to a rural school for pennies.

Understand that unwanted teachers are removed everywhere. The main thing in this system is to be able to bend and obey..

As for the elections, I myself sat on the commission this year. My father was the chairman of the site. We didn't have any violations. It seems to me that similar things happen in crowded cities, where if someone gets fired, a person will still find a job. In the villages, no one risks carrying out fraud in elections, so how can they look their fellow villagers in the eyes?

It’s easier in the city - you don’t know anyone, no one knows you. Much also depends on the head of the section and on how independent the people sit with him on the commission. For example, our commission members were pensioners and people not related to the school. If something goes wrong, they will not remain silent...

Finally, we contacted workers in the teachers' trade union movement. Assuming that they should already 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 won’t even talk about such things anonymously. Why do they need problems?

As the values ​​of the Fraud Index for each case of presidential and parliamentary elections, as well as a referendum, the values ​​of the coefficient of determination of the trend line of regression of the election result desired by the current government (voting for the desired candidate and for the desired party in the elections, for the desired answer in the referendum) on the amount of turnout are used. voters by regions of Russia. An index value of 0 indicates that the distortion of election (referendum) results due to interference by the current government is generally zero. An index value of 1 indicates that all ballots additionally thrown into the ballot boxes (inscribed in the final protocols) were given to only one party or only one candidate in the election (only one answer to the referendum).

For example, there was practically no noticeable connection between the size of voter turnout and their support for the majority of political parties in the “elections” of September 18, 2016 (with the exception of the United Russia party and, to a much lesser extent, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation). The coefficient of determination of the trend line of voting for United Russia depending on voter turnout turned out to be equal to 0.95:

It was this value that became the value of the Voting Fraud Index for September 18, 2016 in the top chart.

Available official data from the Central Election Commission, as well as the results of calculations of the adjusted (actual) voter turnout and the adjusted (actual) number of votes cast for United Russia, carried out by S. Shpilkin, make it possible to assess the absolute and relative scale of fraud during the so-called. “parliamentary elections” in Russia in 2007-2016. Their main results are summarized in the following table.

The scale of fraud during the “elections” to the State Duma of Russia in 2007-2016.

The video belongs to the channel of Evgeniy Volnov https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCA--CSselU0qtyQTjSTa5Ug Support the channel - LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpcmsqsEnn59ufzz1b5gnhg Affiliate program for YouTube channel http://join.air.io/maxmail Channel of Vyacheslav Maltsev https://www.youtube.com/user/artpodgotovka/featured Spare channel of 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, ex-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 (People's Freedom Party), because this was the only opportunity to take part in the primaries and become a leader, taking second place in the federal party list in the State Duma elections. And also declare your plans for full power from the television screen. 📗4 The PARNAS party is the only anti-Putin party represented in the State Duma vote on September 18. Everyone else is supported by the government (with money stolen from the people). PARNAS exists with the money of supporters. The reality is this: either you vote for Maltsev, for PARNAS or for the “Putin Party” (United Russia, LDPR, Communist Party of the Russian Federation, A Just Russia, Yabloko and so on, they are all the same - pro-Putin) 📗 5 The first thing is that Maltsev with the entire PARNAS faction has been nominated for urgent consideration in the State Duma means the immediate removal of Putin from power (impeachment), the repeal of anti-people laws, the immediate end of all wars in which the Russian military takes part, the abolition of Article 282 of the anti-Russian Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and an amnesty for 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 the richest country in the world, this is possible. 📗 7 To build Direct Democracy in Russia and the advent of the New Historical Epoch, it is necessary to immediately remove from power and condemn Putin and all his entourage, who illegally hold power. 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 you like Maltsev’s ideas. 📗 9 In every city there are PARNAS election headquarters with active supporters of Maltsev, link to groups - https://vk.com/topic-47122274_34198510 If you have the opportunity, join the volunteers, help us convey the goals of PARNAS and Maltsev to as many people as possible, agitate people on the Internet. This will bring great benefits to us, the residents of Russia, in the near future. 📗 10 Answers to frequently asked questions for Vyacheslav are available at the link

Stuffing and “carousels” in elections can be proven mathematically - physicist Sergei Shpilkin first spoke about this in 2011. Then, citizens far from mathematics first learned about the “Gauss curve” - a graph that shows the normal probability distribution, in this case the distribution of turnout by polling station. Both in 2011 and this year, first specialists and then everyone else noticed an abnormally large number of polling stations with a very high turnout, and it was in these polling stations that the most votes were cast for United Russia. Sergei Shpilkin, a physicist and winner of the PolitProsvet prize, believes that this is a clear sign of falsification, and not an accident. In an interview with Novaya Gazeta, he explains that at least 45% of the votes for United Russia were falsified, turnout was artificially increased by 11%, and Moscow and St. Petersburg, which showed the lowest turnout, missed the opportunity to change the course of the elections.

— How do fluctuations in turnout indicate the presence of possible fraud?

— Russian society is very homogeneous: it is in a homogeneous information field created by television, and differs little in upbringing and education. We do not have a special stratification into strata that could behave politically differently. The exception is the conditional “Moscow educated class” - this is a rather narrow stratum, which is represented to varying degrees in Moscow, St. Petersburg and some other cities. Even the poorest urban areas do not differ from the average rich ones so much that it is noticeable in the vote - we do not have ghettos. It is possible to single out only a few areas where people vote completely differently than in other places, for example, the Main Building of Moscow State University or the Grand Park residential complex on Polezhaevskaya, where in 2012 there was the largest number of votes for Prokhorov. Therefore, turnout does not fluctuate too much. Even between urban and rural districts within the same region, the differences are small.

What happens when we want to fake elections, shift the result in favor of some candidate? I can just add votes in his favor, like bringing people in and telling them to vote for him - but it's hard to check what they'll actually do. I can simply demand that the election commission falsify the numbers. Taking away votes from one candidate in favor of another, but this is the rarest way. And the simplest thing is to throw a stack of ballots into the ballot box. At the same time, turnout grows: the more ballots you add, the more it grows. And in such polling stations we see a very large number of votes for one candidate and a small number for the opposition. In the absence of stuffing, the ratio of votes is more or less constant, and if we throw in extra ballots, the numbers of one party increase, in this case - for United Russia.

— What happened to the turnout in these elections?

— I break down all the polling stations by turnout, look at how many votes were cast for each candidate in each interval, and draw histograms. We see a characteristic picture: a peak in the number of polling stations with a turnout of 36%, then a dip, then an increase again. This means that the maximum number of votes were cast in polling stations where an average of 36% of voters voted, that is, from 25 to 40%. Most likely, everything was fine at these PECs. And what goes beyond these limits looks exactly as if they simply added votes for United Russia. When people vote, the numbers are random, the distribution curve is smooth.

When I start moving numbers in entire areas, instead of a smooth distribution, I end up with a sawtooth shape - in 2011 it was called “Churov’s beard.” Precincts with a turnout of 50%, 65%, 75% are suspicious: such beautiful numbers are almost never obtained by chance. If the turnout at a polling station is 95%, this is most likely a falsification, but this does not happen in a big city. Frauds occur at the stages from voting to entry into the GAS-Elections system.

— Which regions have the most anomalies in turnout?

— Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, the republics of the North Caucasus, except for Adygea, everyone’s favorite Saratov region, Belgorod, Bryansk. There are the most polling stations with abnormally high turnout, and they have high United Russia results. As a rule, this rarely happens in the North-West and north of Moscow; in Siberia, things are bad only in Yakutia, Kemerovo and Tyumen regions, and sometimes in Omsk. Voronezh has distinguished itself this time: there are a huge number of polling stations with a turnout of 80-100%. In my opinion, in Crimea and Sevastopol they considered it honestly ( about how the elections took place in Crimea - read in Novaya Gazeta). There is a high turnout there, but the distribution is quite urban, very similar to Moscow.

— Couldn’t the jump in turnout be natural: just more people came and voted?

“Then the entire schedule would shift, as happened in the Kirov and Kursk regions, but not parts of it: it would simply rise entirely.

— Is the situation similar to 2011?

— The CEC website has data on elections since 1999. And the deeper we dig into the past, the more the distribution of votes in elections resembles a bell-shaped curve, which is called the “Gaussian curve” - that is, a normal distribution.

From 1999 to 2005, in all elections in all Moscow districts, turnout deviated from the city average by no more than 5%.

And in 2008, the Moscow government, apparently, really needed to show loyalty to Dmitry Medvedev, and we got a wide range of turnout even in neighboring polling stations. Then this happened again in 2009 during the elections to the Moscow City Duma, when at the polling station where Mitrokhin voted, there was not a single vote for Yabloko. Then a scandal occurred in 2011 during the Duma elections, when, for example, in Ramenki in the same residential complex, one half gave 28% for United Russia, and the other - 58%. There was a scandal, protests and everything else, and in 2012 this machine of falsification in Moscow was sharply tightened, and the distribution of turnout returned to normal. It was also normal in the Moscow mayoral elections in 2013.

I assumed that this election would either follow the 2003 scenario (the fairest election we have data about) or the 2011 scenario (the most dishonest).

The worst of the available options was chosen. That is, she was not chosen, but the machine was simply already started and working like that, and in order to stop it, it was necessary to beat her on the wrist for a long time.

In general, it is very similar to 2011, only lower turnout and higher results for EP. And, unlike 2011, there was a complete absence of new faces in the list of winners - then A Just Russia appeared. An important point is how the LDPR acted. Across the country it is neck and neck with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, in half of the regions it is even ahead, and in the Trans-Baikal Territory it is almost catching up with the United Russia. The fact that there were falsifications in favor of the LDPR is unlikely: the distribution of votes for the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and for the LDPR is incredibly similar. That is, either someone very skillfully forged both, or this is what actually happened.

— Turnout was especially low in Moscow and St. Petersburg (35.2% and 32.7%) — how important is this?

— In Moscow 10 years ago the turnout was 56%. That is, now one Muscovite vote could decide twice as much, and even a small number of Democratic supporters could get their candidate into the Duma. Now 10% of state employees and pensioners are a sufficient resource to fool anyone, with such a turnout they decide everything. It is known that Navalny lacked 35 thousand votes before the second round: if more people had come, there would have been a second round. So maybe big cities missed some chances.

— What could be the real election results based on your calculations?

— 28 million votes were cast for United Russia, of which, according to my calculations, approximately 12 million were added - this means that 45% of votes for United Russia are falsified, and this is approximately 11% of all voters. This means that instead of the official turnout of 47.8%, we get 36.5%. Instead of 54% for United Russia - 40%. From a political point of view, this is a rather important result: it turns out that the party was supported by 15% of the total number of voters. And with these 15% real and 27% official they will need to somehow live.

As the values ​​of the Fraud Index for each case of presidential and parliamentary elections, as well as a referendum, the values ​​of the coefficient of determination of the trend line of regression of the election result desired by the current government (voting for the desired candidate and for the desired party in the elections, for the desired answer in the referendum) on the amount of turnout are used. voters by regions of Russia. An index value of 0 indicates that the distortion of election (referendum) results due to interference by the current government is generally zero. An index value of 1 indicates that all ballots additionally thrown into the ballot boxes (inscribed in the final protocols) were given to only one party or only one candidate in the election (only one answer to the referendum).

For example, there was practically no noticeable connection between the size of voter turnout and their support for the majority of political parties in the “elections” of September 18, 2016 (with the exception of the United Russia party and, to a much lesser extent, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation). The coefficient of determination of the trend line of voting for United Russia depending on voter turnout turned out to be equal to 0.95:

It was this value that became the value of the Voting Fraud Index for September 18, 2016 in the top chart.

Available official data Central Election Commission, as well as the results of calculations of the adjusted (actual) voter turnout and the adjusted (actual) number of votes cast for United Russia, carried out by S. Shpilkin, make it possible to assess the absolute and relative scale of fraud during the so-called. “parliamentary elections” in Russia in 2007-2016. Their main results are summarized in the following table.

The scale of fraud during the “elections” to the State Duma of Russia in 2007-2016.