How to interpret the results of the Ukrainian elections in Odessa
The signals that have been coming from Odessa over the past months have not inspired optimism. It seemed that the hero city had forgotten May 2 and was only able to demonstrate “patriotic” flash mobs in yellow and blue colors. However, the results of the parliamentary elections allow us to conclude that Odessa has not forgotten anything, has learned a lot and will show itself in the future.
Firstly, the Odessa region became the anti-record holder of Ukraine in terms of turnout - 39,5%. The result is lower only in Lugansk (32,9%) and Donetsk (32,4%) regions (this is not to mention Crimea and Sevastopol).
Moreover, there is every reason to believe that even this turnout was significantly overestimated. For example, in the 141 districts leading in turnout before the elections, an attempt to import 80 “electoral tourists” from the Cherkasy region was discovered. 80 were detained, but how many were able to come? And voters “multiply” mainly not through “tourists” and “carousel riders”, but through drawing commission protocols.
One way or another, the majority of Odessa residents “voted with their feet,” and Poroshenko now has another basis for complaints against Kolomoisky, or rather, against the governor appointed on his initiative, who did not ensure a decent turnout.
Secondly, the distribution of parties in voting in a multi-member constituency also looks sad.
The Poroshenko bloc, of course, took first place, but the result is worse than in the country as a whole (19,6 versus 21,8%). And, taking into account the turnout, the result of the BPP amounted to as much as 7% of all voters in the region.
But the second and third places were taken by the “Opposition Bloc” (18,1%, after all, the region is the “electoral homeland” of Firtash’s business partner Ivan Fursin and Alexander Presman, who is associated with Mogilevich) and “Strong Ukraine” (11,4%, obviously - merit of Svetlana Fabrikant), and fifth – KPU (10%, the team of Evgeniy Tsarkov worked well).
As a result, the Maidan parties received a total of 46,4%, and formally the non-Maidan parties received 39,5% (it must be understood that only the Communist Party of Ukraine was in opposition). Like a victory, of course... But against the backdrop of an extremely low turnout and the absence of forces in the elections for whom residents of the region would really like to vote, there is nothing to be happy about.
Thirdly, majoritarian voting clearly shows an even more interesting picture: 11 former deputies were elected in 6 constituencies, which significantly exceeds the average situation for single-mandate constituencies in the country (current deputies won in 43% of constituencies). This, of course, is less than in the Kharkov region (there only one non-deputy was elected for 14 constituencies), but much more than in the Kherson region (1 deputy for 6 constituencies).
In fact, the situation in the region is even more interesting. The 6 current deputies are the legendary Sergei Kivalov, Leonid Klimov (from Makeevka, by the way), Ivan Fursin, Alexander Presman, Vitaly Barvinenko and Anton Kisse. All are former members of the PR faction. In addition, the former head of the Regional State Administration under Yanukovych, Eduard Matviychuk, and the representative of Strong Ukraine, Alexander Urbansky, became deputies. The latter, by the way, defeated not only the current MP from Batkivshchyna Dubovoy, but also the famous politician Ruslan Bodelan and the popular chairman of the regional council Nikolai Pundik (what brought them all to the most remote Reni district?).
It is clear that these figures are ambiguous. Barvinenko, for example, in 2007-2010 was a member of the BYuT-Batkivshchyna faction and even filed a lawsuit to cancel the presidential elections. In the districts of Matviychuk, Fursina, Presman and Kisse, representatives of the BPP and the NF were nominated simultaneously, and in the first two cases there was a chance that a single candidate from the “Maidan coalition” could win. That is, they actually played along with them. Nevertheless, the penultimate point of the political biography of these candidates is important - cooperation with the “anti-people regime”.
In the 140th district, Vasily Gulyaev, one of the most successful (or rather, promoted) chairmen of village councils in the country, won. But the district was “crowded” for David Zhvania! When it became obvious that Zhvania would not pass, the entire electoral commission went on the run and was even dissolved by the CEC (the court, however, stopped the CEC’s decision, and the commission approved the protocol in which Zhvania took third place).
Thus, of the 11 deputies, only the nominated BPP Chekita and Golubov really represent the “Maidan team”.
The conclusion suggests itself that Odessa residents expressed distrust in the new political elite that came to power in the wake of Euromaidan.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.