EG / Monday, July 20, 2020 / Categories: Articles by geography, Russia, Unimodality, Dependence of results on the turnout, Kiesling-Shpilkin method, Integer percentages, Observation, Strings of Gabdulvaleev, Geographical Anomalies, Russia A bell, a saw, an axe Scientists who study election statistics are calling last week's vote on constitutional amendments that, among other things, would allow Vladimir Putin to remain president until 2036, the most unfair in 20 years. According data to the Central Election Commission (CEC), with a turnout of 65%, 77.92% of voters voted in favor of the amendments, against — 21.27%. Immediately after the results were summarized, electoral analysts began to publish graphs proving that this result could have been achieved only with the help of large-scale falsifications. For example, in the opinion of physicist Sergei Shpilkin, the actual voter turnout was about 44%, and the share of those who voted in favor of the amendments — about 65%. That is, only 29.3 million Russians supported the amendments to the Constitution. It is not easy to understand the complex analysis and graphs of electoral analysts, so «Important Stories» has prepared a visual explainer explaining why the past vote cannot be considered fair and what was the real scale of fraud. Understanding these graphs will give you a better understanding of electoral statistics and whether you should trust the official voting results. Just scroll down the visualization. #document Print 32682 Tags: FalsificationsRF Constitutional Referendum 2020 Данные для статьиfullLaboratory support for articlefullDossier's BlockRF Constitutional Referendum 2020Theoretic depthObservation Related articles A triumphant victory over myself Doubting Thomas's Crash Test New parameters to explore Funny story about the Tambov region The real turnout in Kuban was ~25% Please login or register to post comments.
Moscow and the Motherland are united Moscow and the Motherland are united Сергей Шпилькин / Thursday, July 2, 2020 0 24162 Not really, the slight bend of the Moscow tail downwards shows that Moscow was rather topping up than overshooting - and you can only hit the point (100%, 100%) by overshooting. UPD: Mistake in the legend. Where it says "norm votes", it should read simply "votes" - including anomalous Read more
Stats 2019. "Correct Answers". The most criminal EDG elections of 2019 according to EG Stats 2019. "Correct Answers". The most criminal EDG elections of 2019 according to EG Responses to the assignment to students of the Visualizing Democracy course. Roman Udot / Tuesday, February 4, 2020 0 48679 In our version, the most criminal gubernatorial elections of EDG-2019 were in Bashkortostan, as well as in Volgograd and Kursk regions. Read more
Maxim Ya. Most Criminal Election 2019 Maxim Ya. Most Criminal Election 2019 Homework from Maxim Y. for the course "Visualizing Democracy" EG / Saturday, December 7, 2019 0 42715 The most criminal EDG elections 2019 according to Maxim Y.: Bashkortostan, Volgograd region, Transbaikalia / Kalmykia Read more
Dmitry V. The most criminal elections 2019 Dmitry V. The most criminal elections 2019 Homework from Dmitry V. for the course "Visualizing Democracy" EG / Saturday, December 7, 2019 0 48791 The most criminal EDG elections 2019 according to Dmitry V: Bashkortostan, Kalmykia, the third place was shared by: Lipetsk, Vologda, Volgograd regions and Transbaikal Territory. The most criminal EDG elections 2019 according to Dmitry V: Bashkortostan, Kalmykia, the third place was shared by: Lipetsk, Vologda, Volgograd regions and Transbaikal Territory. Read more
Inna K. The most criminal elections 2019 Inna K. The most criminal elections 2019 Homework from Inna K. for the Visualizing Democracy course EG / Saturday, December 7, 2019 0 40545 The most criminal EDG 2019 elections according to Inna K.: Zabaykalsky Krai, Kursk Oblast, Volgograd Oblast. Read more