Dossier on the Election in the Lab

Dossier on the election available in the Lab -a collection of election information from our site. All materials where this election is mentioned.

Election Cards

Dependence of "Yes" share on types of turnout

Dependence of "Yes" share on types of turnout

Oh, how the electoral statistics would have gone wild if Bulayev in the AP had been told to publish data on how early voting was conducted by polling stations! Oh, how many fine examples of the falsification of this "triumph" we would have had, if it had been possible to look at the acts of early voting and scrutinize the lists of voters at PECs without scandals!

But the thundering statements about openness and publicity coming from the CEC are easily drowned out by the cotton-wool wall of lower-level commissions that guard state secrets from citizens.

I barely managed to break through the defenders of "nationwide approval" and to get some information at the grassroots level (at the level of TECs and PECs). But more about that in the next post.

Now I'll talk about what Bulayev failed to hide, and what came out even at the regional level. And what has come out is that the share of "YES" responses has a VERY high correlation with early voting and is almost independent of the July 1 vote. Here it is, an expressive picture. I dedicate it to the CEC, the AP probably doesn't care about it now.

(In the picture, the dots correspond to the subjects of the Federation)

Print
16821
Данные для статьиfull
Laboratory support for articlefull
Dossier's Block

RF Constitutional Referendum 2020

Theoretic depth
  • Observation
Please login or register to post comments.

Articles on the Elections

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 0 8059

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».

Review of the ROIPP report "Mathematical Tools for Delegitimizing Elections"

Андрей Бузин 0 7784

Yes, something must be done with our society, which «still has some flaws». It is very gullible and therefore prefers Shpilkin to Borisov. But it is necessary to implement a number of measures to remove distrust in the procedures for establishing the results of voting». It is possible, for example, to establish not only a captcha for obtaining these results, but to declare them a state secret for disclosure of which one can get 10 years. And for the use of the Gauss function, we should deprive them of the right to correspond.

It is time to fight back against the mathematicians who are invading our social processes!

Mathematical tools for delegitimizing elections. Report

Report of the Russian Public Institute for Electoral Law (RPIEL)

EG 0 8489

3 сентября 2020 года на сайте Российского общественного института избирательного права (РОИИП) был опубликован доклад "Математические инструменты делегитимации выборов". In it, the authors criticized one of the methods of analysis: unimodality. 
They concluded that "with existing methods of mathematical analysis it is impossible to describe and make an assessment of electoral behavior and voting outcomes" and reduced everything to a "political struggle". We suggest to read how convincingly and reasonably they did it.

 

RSS
First34568101112Last