How debates between representatives of presidential candidates are held in the regions

In parallel with the debates of the presidential campaign participants on federal television channels, similar events are taking place in the regions. True, it is not the candidates themselves who speak at them, but their proxies. As Kommersant found out, sometimes these people express very extraordinary ideas, for example about involving relocants in industrial espionage. However, they also make mistakes on live broadcast more often.

The most resonant debate so far took place in Kamchatka, where on February 26, candidates’ proxies discussed the “cultural code” live on the air of the regional branch of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Broadcasting Company. The stated topic outraged the sailor of the fishing collective farm named after Lenin Sergei Kinyabaev (he spoke on behalf of Nikolai Kharitonov from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation), who considered it “abstruse”: “We are not having a scientific symposium, but a discussion, so to speak, of pressing problems.” In support of his words, the speaker stated that “eighty percent of the population has no idea what this definition is,” and added: “What the f*** is the cultural code?” The interjection resembled an obscene one, however, when the recording of the debate appeared on the Internet, the regional committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation hastened to refute these guesses: according to the Kamchatka communists, their comrade-in-arms used a censorship euphemism – “to the monk.” As for the topic for the speech that outraged the sailor, it was approved by the Central Election Commission and the channel’s management in advance, the local branch of VGTRK explained to Kommersant.

Communists are dissatisfied with the issues proposed for discussion in other regions as well. “They were reported to us only the day before, I think this is undignified,” Roman Kobyzov, first secretary of the Amur regional committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, told Kommersant. “For example, the topics of federal debates are known in advance. The topics themselves – patriotism, tourism, family values ​​- do not reflect the real socio-economic agenda in the region and in the country as a whole.” At the same time, the head of the Amur cell of New People, Alexander Dodonov, told Kommersant that topics become known within a day, and “this is quite enough to prepare.”

It is interesting that in Kamchatka, as in a number of other regions of the Far East, the debates are taking place without proxies of the “New People” candidate Vladislav Davankov. Thus, he completely refused airtime in the Jewish Autonomous Region; His representative was not present at the debate in the Khabarovsk Territory on March 1, where the theses of the president’s message were discussed. “Absenteeism” of Mr. Davankov’s trusted representatives was also recorded in the European regions of Russia: for example, on February 27, a “shortage” formed in the Kursk region (measures to support the participants of the SVO were discussed), and on February 28 – in the Oryol region (they were talking about supporting families).

However, it is not only the associates of the “New People” nominee who skimp on joint campaign events. Thus, the debate in the Belgorod region on February 26 was also skipped by the speaker from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (they talked about preserving historical memory). And in the Altai Territory on February 22, there were no authorized representatives of either Vladislav Davankov, Leonid Slutsky (LDPR), or Vladimir Putin – only a representative of the communist appeared, who for 12 minutes told how Nikolai Kharitonov sees a solution to the problems of large and young families.

As for the content of the speeches, the participants often try to joke. For example, in the Lipetsk region on February 28, Mr. Slutsky’s representative Nikolai Kurguzov began a discussion of supporting young families with risky humor: “They gathered two men and two women in one studio and offered to talk about creating young families. Do we have exactly the transmission we need?” Mr. Kurguzov also compared the new leader of the LDPR to his shoe (taking it off his foot and showing it to the camera), which “may be old and unsightly,” but “reliable and confident.” The apogee of creativity was a ditty sung by a liberal democrat to the accordion: “Proud profile, firm gaze, curly brown hair. The girls want to give Slutsky their voice!”

TV presenter Marina Kim, who represented Vladimir Putin at the debate in the Sverdlovsk region on February 26, tried to joke in a similar way. She called on the “very handsome men” in the studio to “quit politics” and improve the country’s demographics themselves. “In order to raise the demographics, you should have been with your wives and girlfriends a long time ago. “Run faster and make children,” said Ms. Kim, praising the “gene pool” of her opponents.

Sometimes more extraordinary ideas are heard at debates. For example, in the Perm region on February 22, the head of the LDPR youth organization, Yan Romanov, proposed “returning to normal, absolutely natural in all countries” technological espionage. “We have a huge number of people who went abroad: some were scared, others may have somehow misunderstood the situation. These are people with education. Let’s send them to all companies and structures. Let them drag everything that can be dragged and bring it to us. And we will disassemble all this down to the screw and assemble our iPhones, Teslas and everything we need,” said a representative of Leonid Slutsky.

In the Saratov region, ex-deputy of the regional parliament and blogger Nikolai Bondarenko is participating in the debate as a confidant of Nikolai Kharitonov, who, in his characteristic scandalous manner, makes videos about it and posts it on YouTube (his channel “Deputy’s Diary” has more than 1.8 million subscribers ). For example, on March 1, he published an excerpt from a debate in which candidate Vladimir Putin was represented by ex-State Duma deputy Svetlana Smirnova: in his opinion, Ms. Smirnova could not cite “at least one law” that she is proud of.

Andrey Prah, corset “Kommersant”