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 32825 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.
The first governor of 2020 has been uploaded to the Lab: Krasnodar Krai The first governor of 2020 has been uploaded to the Lab: Krasnodar Krai EG / Wednesday, September 23, 2020 0 13359 Despite the CEC's best efforts to close to the public the possibility of processing data from the 2020 Single Voting Day election. Parsings have been received. The first of those elected - the governor of Krasnodar Krai - is already in the Lab. Read more
United Voting Day election data received (Russia) United Voting Day election data received (Russia) Telegram channel RUElectionData / Monday, September 21, 2020 0 18419 Let's start uploading EDG 2020 data to the Lab from the telegram channel RuElectionData Read more
Criticism and bibliography Criticism and bibliography Borisov I.B., Zadorin I.V., Ignatov A.V., Marachevsky V.N., Fedorov V.I., Mathematical tools of election delegitimization. Report of the Russian Public Institute of Electoral Law. Moscow, 2020, Alexander Shen / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 0 8761 The peer-reviewed paper again raises the question about the incorrectness of the statistical analysis. But it is based on a misunderstanding: the authors rightly point out and confirm with numerous examples that the histograms of elections may well be very different from the «Gaussian» even in the absence of falsifications. Probably, they have not seen the works mentioned above and assume that so far the conclusions about falsifications are based on the deviation from «Gaussianity». Read more
Funny story about the Tambov region Funny story about the Tambov region Сергей Шпилькин / Monday, September 14, 2020 0 29333 Governor Nikitin's result directly even resembles the cluster of the city of Tambov. One could rejoice, but this result is a draw. The result is a draw. Read more
The real turnout in Kuban was ~25% The real turnout in Kuban was ~25% Ivan Shukshin / Monday, September 14, 2020 0 26432 Kanevskaya, where I spent my childhood, drew the biggest turnout, 97%. And Pavlovskaya - the biggest percentage to Kondratiev, 94%. Crooks. Read more