Experts presented their forecasts for the 2023 gubernatorial elections

On Monday, the Expert Institute for Social Research (EISI) and the Center for Political Conjuncture (CPC) held on the basis of the MIA “Russia Today” round table “Elections 2023: at the finish line”. At it, sociologists shared their forecasts of the results of the upcoming gubernatorial elections at the end of this week. According to their estimates, the undisputed leadership everywhere remains with the current leaders: in most cases, their calculated ratings allow us to hope for victory in the very first round. This suggests that referendum-type campaigns dominate in Russia, in which none of the opponents can impose a fight on the governors, the participants of the event concluded, linking this trend with the population’s demand for stability. An outside expert warns that this state of affairs is affecting the global competitiveness of Russian humanities technology professionals.

“Just as no war is like another, so no election campaign is like another,” Alexei Chesnakov, head of the scientific council of the CPC, began the discussion, after which he immediately turned to the general features of the gubernatorial elections taking place in Russia.

The key trend is the predominance of “referendum-type campaigns”, that is, the absence of worthy competitors for the incumbent governor and the high probability of his victory.

“Our political culture is moving in this direction,” said Mr. Chesnakov. To confirm these words, the sociologists present presented the results of polls devoted to gubernatorial campaigns. Most often, they made an unambiguous conclusion about the high chances of the current heads of regions to win. Thus, Mikhail Mamonov, a representative of VTsIOM, presented calculations for Ivanovo region, Moscow, Primorsky And Krasnoyarsk region. They were made on the basis of regional surveys with a sample of 1.6 thousand people who were interviewed both door-to-door and by telephone (research commissioned by the EISI in Moscow and the Ivanovo region were conducted from 18 to 24 August, statistical error – 2.5%). Estimated indicators of turnout and ratings of candidates were made taking into account data on awareness of the elections, interest in them, voting motives and other circumstances.

IN Ivanovo region, according to VTsIOM, Governor Stanislav Voskresensky is in the lead with a score of 83.1% of the vote, the expected turnout is 34.5%. IN Moscow sociologists predicted 77.5% for Mayor Sergei Sobyanin with a turnout of 38.2%. Estimated vote per chapter Primorsky Territory Oleg Kozhemyako – 75.6%, turnout – 34.6%. Finally, in Krasnoyarsk Territory Acting Governor Mikhail Kotyukov can count on 71.4% with a turnout of 34.9%. “I confirm the words about the referendum type of elections. It is exactly like this in all regions,” said Mr. Mamonov.

Grigory Kertman from the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM) presented data on Moscow, Pskov, Nizhny Novgorod, Samara And Omsk regions (calculations were made on the basis of an initiative door-to-door survey of 1.2 thousand respondents conducted in each region from July 25 to August 10, the error is not more than 3.8%). The calculations took into account the distribution of answers to questions concerning the political preferences of voters and the likelihood of their participation in the elections.

“These are not predictions. Our polls ended a month before the start of the active stage of the election campaign. The calculation is what would happen if the election happened at the end of the poll,” Mr. Kertman warned. According to these data, the head Moscow region Andrei Vorobyov will gain 69.9% of the vote with a turnout of 37%, Mikhail Vedernikov (Pskov region) – 81.3% with a turnout of 39.4%, Gleb Nikitin (Nizhny Novgorod Region) can count on 81.4% with a turnout of 35.2%, Dmitry Azarov (Samara Region) – 79.7% with a turnout of 39.8%, and the interim Omsk Governor Vitaly Khotsenko – 72.1% with a turnout of 41.4%.

Talking about the low percentage of opposition candidates (they receive less than 10% of the vote everywhere except Omsk region, where the calculated indicator of the Communist Party nominee Andrei Alekhin is 15.2%), Grigory Kertman explained: “Such a stable disposition is due to the fact that the ratings of candidates are not so much their personal ratings, but rather projections of support for their parties.” That is, according to the sociologist, the opposition candidates were practically unable to score personal points from their voters.

In turn, INSOMAR Director for Political Analysis Viktor Poturemsky spoke about the calculations for Altai Territory, Novosibirsk And Oryol regionsas well as by Khakassia. INSOMAR substantiates its forecast by multivariate mathematical modeling based on an initiative telephone survey of 1.2 thousand respondents in each region according to a quota representative sample (the survey was conducted in Altai and the Oryol region on September 2, in other regions – on August 30-31, error – 2, 9%).

In most cases, the data was similar to the examples from previous presentations. Yes, head Altai Territory Sociologists counted Viktor Tomenko 68% with a turnout of 34-38%, his Novosibirsk colleague Andrey Travnikov – 69% with a turnout of 30-34%, and Orlovsky Governor Andrei Klychkov – 79% with a turnout of 47-51%.

After that, Mr. Poturemsky moved on to the most difficult region – Khakassia. Recall that the “most competitive” elections were supposed there, where the incumbent head Valentin Konovalov (KPRF) was to be opposed by State Duma deputy from United Russia Sergei Sokol. The sympathies of the federal authorities were on the side of United Russia, but on September 2 he starred from the election race due to illness.

However, candidate Sokol still appeared in the INSOMAR study, and his rating among those who were going to take part in the elections was then 41%, while Mr. Konovalov’s was 40%. These figures meant that the confrontation between the two candidates would continue in the second round of elections. “Now it is simply impossible to talk about any calculations, especially electoral forecasts,” Viktor Poturemsky said diplomatically. Other participants in the discussion supported him.

Commenting on the predominantly referendum nature of the election campaigns, EISI managing director for interaction with the expert community Firdus Aliyev connected it with the voters’ request for “stability”.

“People want to lean against a strong government,” Mr. Aliyev said. According to the expert, the “beneficiary” of this request was, among other things, the communist Konovalov.

Political consultant Maria Sergeeva, who did not participate in the roundtable, warns that referendum-type campaigns are a “double-edged sword.” On the one hand, they work well to strengthen public consensus and political stability, but on the other hand, they reduce the competitiveness of Russian specialists in humanitarian technologies (soft power).

“How, in the absence of political competition within the country, will effective personnel appear for the global competition of ideas and numerous information wars? — asks the expert. — This is not the area in which you can listen to the theory and become a specialist. If the main criterion for the effectiveness of a specialist is the ability to be the first to reach the authorities with a beautiful presentation, such a specialist will inevitably begin to lose in the global market.”

Andrey Vinokurov