EISI held a round table on the topic “Russian Presidential Elections: Who will take second place?”

The Expert Institute for Social Research (EISR, one of the main analytical centers of the presidential administration) held a round table on Thursday on the topic “Elections of the President of the Russian Federation: who will take second place?” True, its participants devoted a lot of time to Boris Nadezhdin, whom the Central Election Commission had already refused to register by that time. As for the registered candidates, according to experts, everyone can claim second place (after Vladimir Putin), although so far none of them is leading a “breakthrough” campaign and the election result is unlikely to greatly influence their political future.

The situation with Boris Nadezhdin was explained in detail to the round table participants by member of the Central Election Commission (CEC) Evgeniy Shevchenko. Having first given a short information about the presidential elections as a whole, he conducted a detailed analysis of the actions of the former candidate by that time. For example, after submitting signatures, “responsible candidates” and their representatives “day and night” are in the commission building, observing the verification of autographs, a member of the Central Election Commission said.

“We spent five days checking Boris Borisovich’s signatures. How much time did they spend with us? Not for a second! And when they were handed the protocol, they said: we don’t agree!” – Mr. Shevchenko was indignant.

He also did not like the slowness of the “Civil Initiative” party, which held a congress to nominate Mr. Nadezhdin only on December 23: the law allowed this to be done on December 7, which would have given additional time for collecting signatures, but Mr. Nadezhdin “himself stole” three weeks, complained a member of the Central Election Commission. However, to this, EISI representative Firdus Aliyev objected that the candidate could simply be “accumulating strength.”

The remaining experts, discussing the reasons for the refusal to register the candidate of the “liberal forces,” preferred a purely political interpretation. For example, political scientist Vladimir Shapovalov put forward three versions at once: “foreign agents” who first supported Boris Nadezhdin, and then framed him because of the struggle for resources; incompetence of the candidate’s team; and even “the cynical calculation of the politician himself, the desire to attract attention.” At the same time, experts defended the signature filter itself in the presidential elections with all their might. And Yevgeny Shevchenko called Kommersant’s question whether it is even worth preserving this institution in its current form if none of the candidates, except the current president, were able to collect signatures of the proper quality.

Political scientist Alexander Asafov attributed scandals with signatures to the “commentary agenda,” contrasting it with the “real” agenda, which, in his opinion, is handled best by Vladimir Putin. For him, as a “people’s candidate,” there are no taboo topics, the expert explained, citing as an example how he answered the question about rising egg prices. Mr. Asafov also recalled Mr. Putin’s interview with the American journalist Tucker Carlson, which indicates that the Russian President is ready to communicate even with people of pro-American views, if they are not openly hostile.

And only when the timing of the round table exceeded the 45-minute mark, the experts finally moved on to other candidates, among whom, as it turned out, there was no clear contender for second (after Vladimir Putin) place.

Thus, political strategist Sergei Chernakov noted that voters of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation always go to elections, but its current candidate Nikolai Kharitonov is not so convincing, and the party will have to count on “crumbs” within 6% of the votes. “I don’t know if this is enough to become second,” the expert admitted. Vice-Rector of RANEPA, Doctor of Political Sciences Andrei Polosin said that he sympathizes with the leader of the LDPR Leonid Slutsky, who also has a doctorate, and recalled that this party has its own research institute (in the form of the Institute of World Civilizations founded by Vladimir Zhirinovsky). According to the expert, the Liberal Democrats have formed a new strategy for these elections; their campaign may involve interesting moves related to “theses in the mode of truth, in the mode of direct conversation, including claims.”

Political consultant Evgeniy Minchenko, in turn, singled out “New People,” who are still “perceived as new,” which means their nominee Vladislav Davankov also has a chance for second place. “He is a man, just like you, just like me. He is a politician of a different generation, a different style. Davankov is a candidate of calm, balance. This message may find a response,” explained Mr. Minchenko. And Alexander Asafov complained that he personally would like more brightness and activity from all candidates. “The communists will get their second place without doing practically anything if the other two candidates do not strengthen their campaigns,” concluded Firdus Aliyev.

But the current campaign, by and large, is unlikely to have a serious impact on the political future of the candidates vying for places two to four, the round table participants believe. Leonid Slutsky will strengthen his leadership in the LDPR, Nikolai Kharitonov will help Gennady Zyuganov in this matter, and Vladislav Davankov will remain one of the frontmen of his party, but there is nothing sensational in this, experts are sure. “If Davankov takes second place, it will be a serious breakthrough and will cement his authority as the second person in the party. But the authority of Alexei Gennadievich (Alexey Nechaev, chairman of the “New People” – “Kommersant”) is unshakable,” noted, for example, Evgeniy Minchenko.

Andrey Vinokurov