Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Drink Driving, Don't Risk It!

Christmas Gift Guide

Turn out and vote – it will well worth your while, Russians told

Disco tickets and cheap groceries if you go to the polls, the sack if you don't – that is the choice tomorrow

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 March 2008
YOUNG voters will get discounts for nightclubs. Cheap groceries will be sold at polling stations. Schools and hospitals, meanwhile, are threatening to sack workers who don't cast ballots.
Voters across Russia say they are being urged, cajoled and pressured to vote in an effort to ensure the Kremlin's candidate scores a big win in tomorrow's presidential elections.

Dmitri Medvedev, Russia's first deputy prime minister, is all but
certain to win. But authorities are still taking extraordinary steps to make sure he wins by a huge margin and with a high turn-out.

Compared to the December parliamentary campaign, which was marred by allegations of harassment and intimidation, this race has been calm, in part because there are no real opposition candidates.

It is widely viewed as a referendum on Vladimir Putin's choice of successor as president, rather than an electoral contest. The outcome is so predictable, some critics say, that many of Mr Medvedev's supporters may stay home – and a low turn-out could cast doubt on his legitimacy.

In Moscow, many teachers and doctors said their public-sector managers ordered them to vote – and told them to call to confirm they had done so.

Yelena, 45, who works at a housing office in Moscow, said her bosses demanded the right to cast ballots for both herself and her colleagues at polling stations where turn-out was expected to be low.

To do that, the managers demanded she submit a copy of her passport and her absentee ballot, which allows one to vote anywhere in Russia, Yelena said. That would be illegal because citizens must cast votes themselves.

"We were furious," said Yelena, who declined to give her last name out of fear of losing her job. "They are making sure their candidate wins, and you cannot argue with your boss."

In a small town near Vladivostok, teachers were told to call their bosses from polling stations to prove they had voted, and urge parents to vote as well.

"The authorities have long stopped trying to convince people – now it all boils down to the use of administrative pressure," said Vladislav Korolyov, a regional leader of the liberal SPS party in Krasnoyarsk.

He said local authorities had warned private firms that if they did not ensure their employees voted in big numbers, they would face a tax fine. He also alleged college students were threatened with failing grades if they did not vote.

In the central Russian town of Dzerzhinsk, authorities planned to reward young voters with flyers giving entry to discotheques. Elderly voters would be able to buy sugar, grain and canned fish at a discount at the polls.

In St Petersburg, some teachers were promised a day off if they voted, one said.

Meanwhile, numerous mobile phone operators were sending their subscribers text messages urging them to vote and noting that "your vote is important for the country".

Anna Aibasheva, spokeswoman for the phone operator Vympelcom, said the request to send out the messages had initially come from the Kremlin and the Central Election Commission. The company liked the idea and adopted it as its own. She said the government did not offer money.

Some observers say the pressure to get out the vote may be coming from regional officials who want to show their loyalty, rather than federal officials. The Kremlin, they say, may not want Mr Medvedev to surpass the turn-out of 64 per cent in the presidential contest of 2004, when Mr Putin won re-election.

Whatever the figures, the chief mystery of the election is not who will win. It is how Mr Medvedev will share power with Mr Putin, who is expected to become his prime minister.
THE CANDIDATE – SORRY, CANDIDATES – IN BRIEF

DMITRY MEDVEDEV, 42

Slogan: "Forward, Russia!"

Background: A loyal protégé of Vladimir Putin and Russia's first deputy prime minister. His campaign has been helped by extensive TV coverage.

Quote: "We are not asking anyone to love Russia, but we will not allow anyone to cause harm to Russia."

GENNADY ZYUGANOV, 63

Slogan: "Zyuganov: our president"

Background: Veteran leader of the Communist Party, Russia's biggest opposition force, he appeals to voters nostalgic for Soviet rule.

Quote: "We (the Soviet Union] were a great power and we knew how to do anything."

VLADIMIR ZHIRINOVSKY, 61

Slogan: "You will answer for everything!"

Background: A nationalist with a knack for eye-catching stunts and blistering rhetoric, most directed against the West. He got into a fist-fight during a television debate.

Quote: "I alone am for the people."

ANDREI BOGDANOV, 38

Slogan: "Andrei Bogdanov: the right candidate."

Background: Bogdanov used to handle public relations for the pro-Putin United Russia party and critics say he retains links to the Kremlin.

Quote: "Democracy in Russia will be even better than in the United States."







Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 29 February 2008 10:59 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Haggis, neeps 'n' tatties for me!,

01/03/2008 01:23:24
Scotland has a very poor %-age turnout in elections.

The current minority "government" is based on the actively soap-embracing electorate who make up 30-odd per cent of the eligible count.

Had the soap-dodgers got out of their pits and scraped their knuckles along to the polling stations, who knows what would have happened!

Annabel Goldie rocks!

She is the most intelligent speaker in Follyrood.

Salmond is a propagandist par excellence but Annabel Goldie actually has a profound grip and thinks clearly through the issues with a genuine desire to deliver quality services for the Scottish people.

2

Dáithí,

San Jose 01/03/2008 04:03:45
From the article:

"Democracy in Russia will be even better than in the United States."

Good for Russia. Aim high and good luck.
3

Richardinho,

01/03/2008 08:38:15
This is the reality of the New World Order where the west forces democracy on the rest of the world. Democracy only works where it is the result of an internal process within a society. Otherwise it is just window dressing.

4

Tobydawg,

Alloa 01/03/2008 09:30:38
Who is writing the headlines today??? have they been on the bevy ??
5

Neil,

Glasgow 01/03/2008 10:45:26
I suspect this is the first time the Scotsman have ever run a "news" story attacking somebody trying to improve voter turnout at an election. May we expect the same editorial line when few bother turning out when Cameron & Brown put their "alternatives" before us.

Even so the paper cannot quite bring itself to lie & say that this campaign was insiting on who people were to vote for, which would be more reprehensible.

Of course the British media can be expected not to support any candidates & to give equal coverage to everybody as long as they are Cameron or Brown, who combined will probably get & deserve, votes from a smaller proportion of the electorate than Medvedev. He is going to win because his predecessor promised & deliverd on 8% growth. All our leaders will promise is to make it more difficult to fly off on holiday.
6

Sensor,

01/03/2008 11:23:59
"Democracy in Russia will be even better than in the United States."

Not exactly difficult when you consider that during the last Presidential elections in the US of A the Russia observer left the States in disgust at the lack of democracy. Prior to the Ohio debacle they had Florida. The last Scottish election(s) was not exactly democratic either.

The Russian media have been pushing for Putin's Boy Wonder. If you control the media, you control the election. Where the west is advanced is in the use of two parties, either of which will be fine for those in a position of power.
7

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 01/03/2008 12:12:48
hmmm... my wife is currently in Russia, and most of her friends are employed in hospitals. Have not heard about anyone being threatened with the sack if they do not vote, though. But it is always interesting to read stories about Russia in the UK press (when I say 'stories' I mean stories, not journalism).
8

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 01/03/2008 18:14:14
Well, I am wrong. The doctors have indeed been told that there will be problems for them if they do not vote. They, and th patients have also been informed that there will be problems for them if they anounce that they intend to vote for the 'wrong' candidate. Maybe they will get the hang of it some day....
9

rancid brown,

EU Soviet 01/03/2008 20:45:56
Putin is a corrupt ex-KGB criminal. Russian votes are easily bought and anti-corruption campaigners are silenced. Britain and the US are heading the same way.

Soon, euroskeptic parties like UKIP will be banned by the EU. The Lisbon Treaty will ensure this happens. Criticism of the EU is not tolerated.

"Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship"
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865


10

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 00:41:02
#6 sensor

to the statement: ""Democracy in Russia will be even better than in the United States."

sensor said:

"Not exactly difficult when you consider that during the last Presidential elections in the US of A the Russia observer left the States in disgust at the lack of democracy. Prior to the Ohio debacle they had Florida"

That's not what happened but it does illustrate the difference between Russia and wherever sensor is from and the US. Sensor, it's a good idea before shooting off your mouth to learn some history and some current civics. Americans have been a self-governing people for four hundred years, the Russians have been a self-governing people for, hmmmm, no hundred years and still cannot claim that distinction.

This is what the Russian observer, State Duma deputy Aleksei Ostrovsky said:

"The parliamentarian noted that primarily he was shocked by the fact that U.S. citizens do not produce any ID as they come to polling stations. “It is enough to say ’I am Mr. Smith,’ and he is allowed to vote; the same person can exit one polling station and go to another and vote again using the same procedure,” the Russian MP said."

I suppose that may be typical of the way Russians and other Europeans, always on the lookout for reasons to feel superior to and scoff at Americans, would draw their idiot conclusions from the observations he made.

He left out some very important facts. Voting in the US, even for national elections is not the province of the Federal government. It is exclusively under control of the individual states and finally devolves upon the county, city, and individual precinct and ultimately on the individual citizen. In case the terms are not the same everywhere, a precinct is the smallest political division. It is basically a neighborhood. All voting is done in private places, usually a garage at someones house or a church rec hall. Most people recognize each other. The precincts are very small.

At the polling place c
11

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 00:43:21
#10 contd

At the polling place citizen volunteers are given a roster of registered voters. This roster has the names and addresses of each voter. When a voter enters the polling place he stands before one of these volunteers and tells him or her his or her name. To quote the Russian, "I'm Mr. Smith." The volunteer will then look down the roster until Mr. Smiths name is found and it is marked off. The voter is then given a ballot and a private stall to make his or her choices.

Now if the same Mr. Smith moseys over to another precinct and tries to vote again he will be hard pressed to do so because his or her name is not on that precinct's roster of eligible voters and Mr. Smith will then be in a very tough situation. You see, at each polling place there are representatives from at least each party and also interested citizens. Very interested, and no small percentage of the poll watchers, as they are called, are hardassed women of a certain age, and they are not the chatty happy go lucky ones. Think Irish nun. You would rather be given the hairy eyeball by a Bulgarian border guard in 1958 than to run afoul of one of these ladies, who are both fearless and mean.

Now keep in mind the four hundred year deal. Americans are VERY committed to keeping our democracy. At the polling place there will be from a dozen to fifty, sixty people in line to vote. Now, if a volunteer at the polling place sees Mr. Smith trying to pull a fast one, Mr. Smith will be hard pressed to make good his escape, that kind of thing being equated with child molestation and wheel chair theft in the eyes of the other voters. This is where your basic cowboy mentality has its charms. Because at this point Mr. Smith will be praying that a policeman will come along and arrest him because, lacking that law enforcement protection, Mr. Smith will be facing a stomping.

Sensor neither you nor your commie friend have a clue of how a real democracy functions. You are both statist troglodytes an
12

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 00:44:23
#11 contd

You are both statist troglodytes and simply cannot conceive that in the US the people are self-governing in the absolute sense. Citizens, not the Feds, not the state, not the county, no government agency at all is involved in the process, it is all done by the citizens themselves. No one is better at it than we are and no one ever will be. If it comforts you to think otherwise go right ahead. Who cares?
13

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 01:40:06
Nomad -

Perhaps even more telling is the countries that they DIDN'T want to be like!

Did he say he wanted to be like:

The UK? Nope.
Canada? Nope.
Australia? Nope.
China? Nope.
Germany? Nope.
The Netherlands? Nope.
Ireland? Nope.

They are shooting for the highest mark and, regardless of the pathetic whining of the trendy socialist anti-American 'one-trick-ponies' that post here daily, people looking for freedom apparently know where to look.
14

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 02:29:22
#12 - Nomad

>"You are both statist troglodytes and simply cannot conceive that in the US the people are self-governing in the absolute sense."

No, they CAN'T! I reached this answer quite a while ago, when I researched the Magna Carta for a family project.

More importantly, WHY can't they?

They are coming from exactly an OPPOSITE direction than we are, and unfortunately the gap between Europeans and Americans is being exploited for cheap political reasons.

Here’s what I’m researching:

The Magna Carta generally doesn't outline citizen rights, it limits what the KING can do. European history is one of moving AWAY from tyranny (kings, queens, lords, etc). I think it's safe to say that right now, Europeans have NEVER been freer than they are right now, and are rightly proud – but there are a lot of Americans that do NOT understand that!

The Constitution outlines, specifically, rights that the citizens of the United States have. Our history is one of fighting off efforts to REDUCE those! There are probably many Americans that feel that we have never been LESS FREE than we are now – and there are a lot of Europeans that do NOT understand that!

Many of them fail to appreciate what we proudly feel are our freedoms – in the same manner that Americans fail to understand where Europeans are coming from.

If you follow, Nomad, let me know and I’ll continue. If not, I’ll leave it.
15

57Nomad,

02/03/2008 05:14:14
#13 Dáithí,

I just finished reading, for the thrid time, A History of the English Speaking Peoples, by W. S. Churchill. The British are a remarkable people and we owe them an immense debt. Not just for what the Nobles did at Runnymede but for the stubborn refusal of the ordinary Brit to submit to the notion of absolute monarchy. The most important of these was the idea that the king had to listen to the concerns and demands of the people before they would cough up the money he wanted. This is a vital and fundamental idea in the relationship between the individual and the State. Nowhere else in Europe, or anywhere else in the world for that matter did ordinary people stand up for their rights like the Englishman of a thousand years ago.

Nonetheless, the idea of an overarching authority, not vested in the individual, but in a single authority was still there. Hobbes outlined it as well as it ever has been in Leviathan. During the past two hundred years the Europeans have thrown off the monarchies that ruled them for millennia. Having done so, however, the longing for a monarch could not be squelched and one monarchy was replaced by another, the State.

So, in Europe, even today, the idea of the repository of rights lying with the State still predominates. In this view, the State loans rights to the citizens or subjects as the case may be, and may withdraw them as the State sees fit.

The American notion of government is by far the most radical political idea ever conceived. Here rights are granted to each individual by God and are inalienable. The state possessing no power whatsoever to interfere with them. I believe this is the biggest and most fundamental difference in the way government is viewed by Americans and Europeans. The two different points of view are so ingrained and the weight of history lies so heavily on the Europeans that they are nearly irreconcilable and are the cause of much of the misunderstandings between us.

The similarities w
16

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 05:15:22
#15 contd
The similarities we share with our British metropolis regarding the fundamental rights of the individual is the source of the bond between us. On the European continent, however, there is little common ground and great differences arise. Differences so profound that the hope of bridging them is vanishingly small. They will never understand us.
17

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 06:13:29
Nomad - Exactly right.

You reached the same conclusion, for the same reasons, that George Orwell (a Socialist) did in his book '1984' when he included Britain, Australia (and NZ), South Africa, Canada and the US as allies in 'Oceania'.

The European continent was part of 'enemy', ie 'Eurasia'.

BTW, I've read the same books. There is a passage about Henry I ('Longshanks') and how he financed part of his wars against the Scots.

Are you familiar with it? This will be important for some of my planned, future posts.

Thanks - Dáithí
18

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 06:26:15
#17 Dáithí,

I believe it was Edward I and all I can recall is that Churchill noted that although he was a pretty ruthless guy that's what the times called for. The financing part I don't recall. Can you fill me in?
19

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 07:07:32
Sorry to be slow, my internet (DSL) doesn't work a lot of the time.

Edward I financed his war against the Scots by rounding up London's Jews, taking their money, and running them out of England.

I've been trying to understand Europe's 'interesting' relationship with it's Jewish citizens.

I think that Americans have understand as little about European's feelings towards Jews as Europeans have about American's feelings towards other things.

Can you check this out for me? I don't have the books any longer but it would be during Henry I's reign about the Jews.

Thanks! :)
20

57Nomad,

02/03/2008 07:15:47
#19 Dáithí,

Yep I recall reading about the incident but I couldn't recall which king it was. What I remember is that the Jews had loaned the Crown a lot of money and instead of repaying it, they confiscated what the Jews had left and then put them on boats with a strong suggestion not to return nor to expect to be repaid.

That's a very effective way to get out of debt but it's not that farsighted if you're ever going to need another hefty loan.
21

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 07:25:00
Nomad:

Some interesting stuff from the 'Magna Carta', 1215 AD.

"Article 10 - If any one hath borrowed any thing from the Jews, more or less, and die before that debt be paid, the debt shall pay no interest so long as the heir shall be under age, of whomsoever he may hold..."

"Article 11 - And if any one shall die indebted to the Jews, his wife shall have her dower and shall pay nothing of that debt; and if children of the deceased shall remain who are under age, necessaries shall be provided for them, according to the tenement which belonged to the deceased..."

The English, in the 'Magna Carta' (a brilliant document and achievement for its time), made certain and specific provisions for the dispensation of debts owed to Jews.

Americans, myself included, don't understand the way that Europeans see Jews, especially as alluded to in the Magna Carta.

As a Californian (and an American), I see Jews as one of many immigrant groups that have prospered under what I see as a system that rewards hard work, thrift and ingenuity.

As such, I don't understand the European, or at least European Leftist, reluctance to, or sympathy for, a Jewish 'homeland' - especially in light of the treatment Jews received in Europe from 1930 - 1945.

Have you noticed this also - that American and European have far different views concerning this?

Thanks once again.

22

Dáithí,

San Jose 02/03/2008 07:27:03
#20 - Nomad:

>"Yep I recall reading about the incident but I couldn't recall which king it was."

It probably happened more than once, but check out Henry I (the 'Hammer of the Scots') for this event, I'm pretty sure that this was at least one of the events where the Jews were rounded up and robbed.
23

57Nomad,

california 02/03/2008 21:31:29
#21 Dáithí,

I had the same experience. I'm Catholic. Some of my friends were Methodists, some were Baptist, some were Jewish, some 7th Day Adventists, etc. It meant absolutely nothing. This thing with the Euros and the Jews is just as puzzling to me as it is to you.

The only time I can ever remember Jews being singled out was a couple of times a year Father McCormick or Father Nee would remind us at church that Lord Jesus was a Jew and consequently it was a bad idea to not like Jews just because they were Jews.

24

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/03/2008 06:16:22
22 - "Henry I, Hammer of the Scots" ???? I see Peter Peacock has been influencing the teaching of history in TS schools as well !
25

Pilrig.,

Livingston 03/03/2008 06:17:24
25 sorry meant US schools.
26

Paul Barbara,

London uk 03/03/2008 06:30:14
The US should have sent a delegation to Russia to show them how to arrange voting 'US-style'; sehttp://youtube.com/watch?v=PKQEQ7qHvgM
(and back it up with a stacked 'Supreme Court'


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.