What programs are the candidates approaching the end of the election campaign with?”

The Expert Institute for Social Research held a round table on Tuesday on the topic “Presidential Elections 2024: What programs are candidates approaching the finals of the election campaign with?” Only Vladimir Putin’s program received high marks. Nikolai Kharitonov (Communist Party of the Russian Federation) suffered more than others, including for the absence of the word “youth” in his plans. The program of Leonid Slutsky (LDPR) was described as populist, and the document by Vladislav Davankov (New People) has a lot of buzzwords, but no values. However, experts made a reservation, this does not mean that all these programs are useless: they can complement the strategy of action of the future president, especially since they still express the opinion of a small number of people.

“Our job is not to criticize, our job is to present,” began the round table in the press center of the Rossiya Segodnya news agency, its moderator, political scientist Pavel Danilin. But then he himself could not resist criticizing: “Some of the candidates’ programs demonstrate the inconsistency of the proposals. Unlike Vladimir Putin’s program, they often use populist rhetoric and have little to offer voters.” With this, the moderator actually set the formula for the entire future discussion, although the experts began with precisely the candidate who, in their opinion, deserves praise.

“According to the law, a self-nominated person is not required to publish a program. Therefore, of course, the message to the Federal Assembly, in essence, is the candidate’s program,” recalled political scientist Alexander Asafov. He praised Vladimir Putin: although the message was dedicated to the “peaceful aspects of our lives,” key elements related to the defense of our homeland were also taken into account. “The center of the candidate’s program is the person. All decisions are aimed at increasing, for example, life expectancy and quality of life. All new national projects serve this purpose in one way or another. The program is built on a logic that is understandable to people: “it was – it is – it will be”,” the expert listed the advantages, not forgetting to dwell on specific points. His speech included a personnel program for military personnel, new national projects, and the continuation of gasification of gardening partnerships.

Pavel Danilin decided to answer in absentia the skeptics who believe that Vladimir Putin, during his years in power, had the opportunity to implement the ideas he outlined: “It’s like going up to a little boy and saying: “Lift a 200 kg barbell!” Why can’t you lift it? ?” We must understand that the country is developing, everything goes from one point to another. To take a leap, you must prepare for that leap!”

Nikolai Kharitonov was next in line for discussion. Communists are traditionally criticized at round tables of the Expert Institute for Social Research (EISR), and the same thing happened this time. “In it (the program of candidate Kharitonov.— “Kommersant”) there is no word “youth”, no word “future”. The whole pathos of the program is that it is necessary to abolish capitalist society and return to socialism. Despite the fact that many members of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation enjoy the benefits of the capitalist system. The very fact that the program is not future-oriented is already a serious miscalculation,” political scientist Vladimir Shapovalov began the attack. And the word “sovereignty,” as an attentive expert calculated, appears in the program only once (according to Kommersant’s calculations – 2, but in the president’s message – 11). He then proceeded to criticize what was in the program. Mr. Kharitonov got it, for example, for proposals to develop agriculture and stop the outflow of capital: according to the political scientist, the former is now much better developed than in the USSR, and the outflow of capital in 2023, even without the communists, decreased six times.

The LDPR and Leonid Slutsky deserved some praise: Nikita Setov, deputy general director of the Polilog consulting group, noted that when the president proposed in his message to write off two-thirds of debts on budget loans from the regions, the liberal democrats got their bearings and sent out letters to regional authorities the very next day with a proposal to use this money to implement items from their program. “Populist rhetoric for the LDPR is traditional and understandable. This year there is also a populist component, this is the standard of party work. Zhirinovsky’s case lives on, but takes on new content. In the future, the party will obviously try to use this again, but we have yet to see the final form of this matter,” concluded Mr. Setov.

Finally, the matter came to Vladislav Davankov. According to the executive director of Minchenko Consulting, Evgenia Stulova, the 170 points of his program look large-scale and eclectic, but quite sincere. “It’s all about the future, all about youth. When we were analyzing the program—it was necessary to prepare for a round table—I was surprised to learn that many of its authors are under 30 years old,” the expert emphasized, adding that the youth focus of the program explains all its pros and cons. At the same time, the “New People” candidate seeks to expand his electoral base, Ms. Stulova believes. She also noted that Vladimir Putin actually took two proposals from candidate Davankov into his message: the opportunity to retake the Unified State Exam and the thesis about equalizing the incomes of public sector employees in the regions. “Davankov’s program is a program for people who enjoy following elections in Western countries. It has everything fashionable – biohacking, transhumanism and so on, but there is a form, but there is no value behind it,” EISI representative Ekaterina Sokolova could not resist her fly in the ointment. But Vladimir Putin’s program, in her assessment, is an example not only for other presidential candidates, but also for other politicians in the world who will definitely pay attention to some of its points – for example, on industrial mortgages.

“In the end, you and I understand how it will all end. We understand who is “first base”… We have an institutionalized super-presidential system, the winner takes everything,” admitted Ms. Sokolova. “But I see potential, because in the programs of all candidates there are some things that fit very well into national priorities and can complement the program of the incumbent (the current leader.— “Kommersant”), and further work for the benefit of our common future. Therefore, let’s hope that this work will not be wasted. Moreover, they (other candidates.— “Kommersant”) represent 4% of voters. But these 4% are also decent people, probably.”

Andrey Vinokurov