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.
Review of the ROIPP report "Mathematical Tools for Delegitimizing Elections" Review of the ROIPP report "Mathematical Tools for Delegitimizing Elections" Андрей Бузин / Sunday, September 6, 2020 0 8467 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! Read more
Mathematical tools for delegitimizing elections. Report Mathematical tools for delegitimizing elections. Report Report of the Russian Public Institute for Electoral Law (RPIEL) EG / Thursday, September 3, 2020 0 9283 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. Read more
A triumphant victory over myself A triumphant victory over myself Сергей Шпилькин / Tuesday, July 21, 2020 0 23061 Сергей Шпилькин made an interesting comparison of statistics from the 2020 Constitution Referendum and the 2018 Presidential Election. Read more
A bell, a saw, an axe A bell, a saw, an axe EG / Monday, July 20, 2020 0 32832 Journalists "Важных историй" Alesya Marokhovskaya and Alexei Smagin made a curious "explainer" in their article. Recommended."Analysts believe that the last vote on amendments to the Constitution was a record-breaking vote on the scale of falsifications. They cite many complex graphs to prove it. «Important Stories» made a simple visual «explanation» which should help to understand them". Read more
Dependence of "Yes" share on types of turnout Dependence of "Yes" share on types of turnout Андрей Бузин / Friday, July 3, 2020 0 18311 Dependencies of "YES" response rates on total, early, and non early turnout in the 2020 nationwide vote: The "YES" response rate has a VERY high correlation with early voting and is almost independent of the July 1 vote. See the following. Read more