“Important Stories” concluded that the result of “United Russia” in the State Duma elections does not exceed 35%, and linked this to the possible falsification of up to 18.4 million of the 30 million “paper” votes for the party.
To make the estimate, the publication used the method of electoral analyst Sergei Shpilkin: in a fair vote, a party’s share at a polling station should not rise together with turnout, but for “United Russia” it increased more strongly the higher the turnout was.
According to the CEC, turnout was 59.32% — a record figure since 2011. Analyst Ivan Shukshin pointed out that commissions adjusted it to round numbers: on the first day of voting, an abnormally large number of polling stations reported exactly 30%, on the second day — 40%, and on the third — 85%.
In the “Sovetskaya” TEC in Dagestan, turnout at neighboring PECs matched to hundredths of a percent; similar matches were found in the Ivanovo and Leningrad regions, Kuzbass, Primorye, Krasnodar Krai, and St. Petersburg. In Kabardino-Balkaria, almost identical turnout was recorded at all polling stations in the republic.
At two neighboring PECs in the 48th district of Kamchatka Krai, two hours before the polling stations closed, turnout rose from 7–17% to 100%. In this district, Irina Yarovaya was running for the State Duma, and in the last two hours of voting she received the same 97% at both polling stations and again won a seat in the Duma.
Starting from a turnout above 82–83%, another anomaly appears on the graph: votes for parties other than “United Russia” stop rising with turnout and begin to disappear from the protocols, while the UR result grows by the same amount. Boris Ovchinnikov estimated the share of such fraud at about 55% and suggested that at such polling stations the protocols may have been filled out without any connection to the actual counting of ballots.
Stanislav Andreichuk also pointed out that on September 21, 60,000 votes for “A Just Russia” suddenly appeared — exactly as many as the party needed to clear the five-percent threshold. In Moscow, in the Mozhaysky district, a revised protocol changed the party affiliation of a thousand votes, and in Krylatskoye 2,500 votes were redistributed between the first and revised protocols, while the commission did not revise the results for single-mandate candidates.
Sources
