Read on Twitter
Huge difference between data reported by activists and officials in #Russia's constitutional plebiscite. According to this exit poll, 62% voted against the reform in St. Petersburg and 53% did in Moscow. https://twitter.com/netpopravkam/status/1278351094528315393
Turnout figures also look very questionable. https://twitter.com/meduza_en/status/1278396293170311170
In the Komi Republic the Electoral Commission first published data suggesting that with 5.2% of votes counted almost 70% voted against the constitutional reform. Then quickly "corrected" the official data. https://meduza.io/news/2020/07/01/tsik-soobschil-o-protestnom-golosovanii-v-komi-a-potom-rezultaty-pomenyalis-na-protivopolozhnye
More evidence of massive fraud from the statistical analysis of the vote. The official line now seems to be that the vote was a significant victory for Putin, and it may still be, but most of the country has to accept this as normal or at least inevitable https://twitter.com/max_katz/status/1278587116818178048
According to the observers of Golos, neither turnout figures, nor "yes" and "no" figures have to do with reality. https://www.currenttime.tv/a/russia-constitution-golos-vote/30702267.html
A comment by CEC head Ella Pamfilova that the one official outlier, the Nenets Autonomous District (NAO), where the majority voted against, is supposedly a "proof" that the votes were counted accurately, is nonsense. But this may very well be the purpose of publishing that result
The NAO is also the smallest federal subject, thus it is difficult to add a large number of fraudulent votes to the tally. Furthermore, it has recently experienced protests agst planned unification w the Arkhangelsk Region, plans that also left some officials angry w the Kremlin.
I cannot be the only one thinking that Kadyrov must have waited until the results were announced in Tuva just so his officials could announce an even larger turnout and "yes" figure. https://www.interfax.ru/russia/715560
Based on anecdotal evidence, adding a thousand votes to the "yes" side by writing a "1" in front of the number on the official record of votes before publishing it electronically seems to have been a fairly popular way of rigging. https://zona.media/chronicle/nedelya-popravok#32399
To recap, ultimately whether Putin & allies will get away w this depends on how many voters recognize this as fundamentally legitimate or at least inevitable & how many in the elite find it sustainable. As regards legitimacy Yudin makes an important point https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1278653337240514561
...but let's also consider the effect COVID19 has had on people's sense of normalcy as well as on their perception and tolerance of risk, and add that Putin openly hinted at his needing this vote fundamentally to prevent instability. The Kremlin surely has data on these attitudes
Ultimately, though, the vote does little to resolve Putin's "pre-2024 problems" if the message to the elite is that the majority will tolerate Putin as long as the alternative is chaos, but demonstrating this support requires frequent/continuous high-degree use of admin resources
Until I come out with my inevitable hot take on the results (or rather, cold take, because you'll have read everyone else's takes by then), let me re-up my piece from last week on why Putin's pitch to the voters was not terrible but not very good either http://www.noyardstick.com/?p=746
