Кто владеет информацией,
|19 jan 2017|
40% of Calculated Reports in Ukraine: without Surprises
Baranov Anatoly 19.01.2010
Preliminary results of a poll in Ukraine did not bring surprises - according to processing of 40,72% of reports of local election committees, 36,8 % of voters voted in the first round of presidential elections for Victor Yanukovych, 24.43% - for Julia Timoshenko. Such data was published in press centre of CEC at night on Monday. 12.98% voted for Sergey Tigipko, 6.72% - for Arseny Jatsenyuk, 4.97% - for Victor Yushchenko. 2.21% didn't support any of 18 candidates.
It densely corresponds to the data of exit-pools, 7 of which we published at midnight (we thanks for it a member of Central Committee of the CPU J.P.Solomatin). It means that most likely elections passed without mass falsifications though, of course, 16 candidates who did not pass to the second round, would be ready to make complaint. However rupture between the leaders and even the third - Sergey Tigipko - in 2-3 times does situation quite uncontested.
Opinion of one of the participants of our forum seems rather reasonable in this connection: "So-called "left-average" electorate of Ukraine didn't hear (the same way as in the Russian Federation not once!) to appeals of the CPU. It showed full consent with a current state of affairs, having voted for representatives of oligarchic (not own!) interests, not even let close to them Simonenko to ending but let him be 3% after Yushchenko. Marx used to say: "Existence defines consciousness". We can see it today in Ukraine - "exists" not badly, in full consensus with exploiters! Well, the blind said: "We'll see". It could be also expressed as: "One must reap as one has sown"! The Russians "have been reaping" it for already 20 years but they at least have formal reason - a pier, mass falsification and violence. While the Ukrainians are free from it".
Really, such result of elections is a failure for communists but even if to consider presidential elections as "rehearsal" of elections in the Supreme Rada, it is obvious that personal rating of the leader of the CPU appeared below party rating. First of all it sets thinking not about lacks of the Ukrainian voters, but about lacks of policy of the party. CPU failed to convince considerable number of the Ukrainian voters that it is representative of its class interests - even in a bourgeois society and bourgeois parliament. It failed to do it to such an extend that the Ukrainian voter preferred "professor" Yanukovych and oligarchs from "Party of Regions" - to "own" communists from CPU.
Probably, the leader of the Communist Party shouldn't do two mistakes - he shouldn't so frankly romp with oligarchs from the Party of Regions up to mixture condition when the voter was not sure where communists and where "members of the region". The second thing - they shouldn't pose the second Zyuganov. Here the logic of affinity to the Russian analogue works just in the opposite direction: if today to resemble Putin in Ukraine is a positive characteristic, to resemble Zyuganov is even worse, than to be real Zyuganov in Russia.
Actually it is strange and even wild that at the height of crisis, when strike movement accrues in Ukraine and a lot of labour collectives are on the verge of explosion, communists, moreover in block with other left receive something about 3 percent. It is a cause for serious postflight analysis - not only and not so much in personal plan but in the context of priorities in party work.
In the rest Ukraine becomes similar to Russia - predictably and not interesting. It only lacks police and mass falsifications but all these for sure will be present on the next coil of political history - neither Yanukovych, nor Timoshenko hide their orientations on Putin. While Putin means "Putin's Russia". Yes, there is some logic of political process here - whoever come to power today, he will aspire to get power in its entirety, without division on power to president, the Cabinet and Rada. First of all the new president will form parliamentary majority - if it is necessary, he will dismiss parliament and collect it anew. And, having received the majority, will immediately solve the problem with the Cabinet.
To the next presidential election, of course, there will be no 18 candidates, census will be more rigid and the number of applicants offered to the voter will be no more, than 5-6. It will be technologically worked out on the nearest elections in the Supreme Rada, new president aspiring to "Putin's model" will try to cut "tail" from political outsiders and political remakes somehow. Inevitable "putinisation" of the Ukrainian politicum demands simplification.
As to the forecast for the second round, the majority of analysts tends to Yanukovych's victory - his result in the first round is in one and a half time higher, than the one of Timoshenko and there's a rule - if representative of opposition in the first round gathers more than power representative, he wins. Yanukovych today - opposition, as the prime minister is without any doubt - power.
It is considered that in favour of Timoshenko will work the fact that in the second round all will unite against Yanukovych. But it's not for sure that everybody wants Timoshenko. For many including the leaving president Yushchenko softer and much quieter Yanukovych's nominee is more preferable - it's a chance to form steady opposition in the parliament, something like "Union of Right Forces" in Russia and also the chance at least during the first term to hope for power return in parliament.
Sergey Tigipko who has already declared that he does not intend to urge his supporters to vote for someone from two leaders of the race has chance to form in future Rada analogue of early "Yabloko" with left-liberal trend, unlike clearly liberally-nationalist bias of "Our Ukraine".
What Arseny think is even not interesting.
While the communists and left in Ukraine should concentrate on analysis of mistakes and failures of communists and left in Russia - they are waited by danger of the same failures and mistakes.
© 1998-2016 FORUM.msk