Actual Results of Crimean Secession Vote Leaked
An anonymous reader writes "Forbes reported on Monday that The President of Russia's Council on Civil Society and Human Rights very briefly and supposedly by accident posted the actual results of the Crimean secession vote. According to the blog post, which has since been taken down, only 30% of Crimeans participated in the vote instead of the 83% participation officially advertised by Russia, and of that 30% only half voted for secession, which means that 15% of all Crimeans voted for secession rather than the 82% officially reported by Russia. There is no way for this claim to be verified as no foreign observers were allowed during the voting process. The vote is reportedly being conducted again during the 'May 11 referendum on the status of the so-called People's Republic of Donetsk.'" We've had a lot of discussion over the years about election methods and transparency; it would be interesting to hear from Ukranian readers in particular on this topic.
Given how many lies and half-truths have been circulated by the press about this, I am not sure I believe this at all.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
Edward Snowden fled there to escape US tyranny
Seriously, DICE? I'm sitting here looking at the first few comments, hoping for a little clarity and maybe even some insightful discussion - you know, Slashdot style - when the window contents scroll up and a video ad, with sound, starts playing.
I am done with this piece of shit website. How do I delete my account?
“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”
Joseph Stalin
Sounds like Putin has studied history.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Ben
Gore lost on every recount. Get over it.
Yes, every single one. Don't forget that Gore tried to goose the results by having only Dem heavy counties recounted rather than the entire state.
One last thing that just about no one knows about. All of the major news outlets proclaimed Florida to Gore before voting was finished in Florida. Florida resides in two time zones and the northwest "handle" of Florida is heavily Republican. Many voters left lines while voting was open once Florida was called for Gore. IF that hadn't have happened, the recount wouldn't have been close at all.
OSCE observers were invited, but the organization declined. Somewhere around 100 international observers from other organizations were present. They might have mostly been Russian schills, but they were there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
You should tell the 30 strong team from Poland, Austria, France, Germany, Belgium, Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Italy and Latvia that they weren't there...
http://rt.com/news/crimea-refe...
Why bother voting at all?
Because we have to maintain the illusion of a democracy, that's why.
If that's really true, well, those folks who walked out have nobody to blame but themselves.
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
Why do you need an ad-blocker on slashdot? If you have great karma from being a good member of the community they give you the option to disable all advertising. Just post constructively and no adblocker is necessary.
There is a blatant information war going on on both sides of this.
Here is basically what is going on:
Next) Either Russia invades and annexes Eastern Ukraine following the Crimea model or they simply foment separatism which either succeeds in splitting the country or causes a bloody crackdown by Kiev which further de-legitimizes that interim government.
- Probably China is cheer leading this US/EU/Russia split on because if the EU and Russia are forced further apart, then it forces resource rich Russia towards China which needs all the wood/oil/natural gas/mining that Russia has to offer to sustain its manufacturing economy and China doesn't want a strong Eurasian Union coming together either. This has already started with announcements of greater cooperation with China.
I think the bitter irony in all this is that the foreign policy leaders in the West that are so afraid of repeating the Cold War are precipitating something like it now because of that fear. Russia has every right to be concerned that it is stuck between a growing EU and China and that it needs to build up its own alliance in the middle. Their historical lesson is that a Europe united under Germany is a threat. It seems to me that the EU and US are being very shortsighted to have undercut Putin so blatantly and overtly in Ukraine. The US and EU needs a strong Russia and something like a Eurasian Alliance to counterbalance China to the East. If anything the EU should have invited Russia to join it to form an even greater Union that would be a direct counterbalance to China instead of just leaving Russia as a buffer state.
[Citation Needed]
Mexico is a country on our border that's been near at civil war and a drug and crime mecca. So um, yes...we haven't invaded Mexico....(not sure on vice-versa)
If the actual poll results are true, it suggest Ukraine is not that divided fundamentally at all, and that a small group of pro-Russian agitators lead by Russian military personnel out of uniform are creating this civil war.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yes, every single one
Except for the statewide recount carried out as a partnership with several news agencies after the SCOTUS terminated the official recount efforts. That one came out with Gore on top, and had Gore requested a statewide recount rather than recounting in only a few counties he probably would have won both numerically and by preventing the court challenge against his weird recounting efforts.
But you knew that, didn't you, liar troll?
This is an op-ed column, not a news article. Many news organization disclaim all fact-checking on op-eds; I don't know Forbes' specific policy.
They have a vested interest in keeping Ukraine stable.
So why are Russian troops and Russian-trained operatives fomenting the unrest we're seeing? Don't you think Russia would want Ukraine to avoid what's going on? Why lie about ethnic Russians supposedly being targeted when they could provide not a single shred of evidence to show this was happening?
Russia started this because the people of Ukraine got fed up being used as a pawn by Russia and all the corruption their former leader was doing. That is why they opened up his former residence to show where the Ukrainian people's money was really going instead of for roads, electricity, etc.
Russia is the one who is causing the problem and the lies of the Crimean vote show the reality of the situation. Putin has become a modern day Stalin, though without the gulags. From dictatorial control of the media, the false imprisonment of political rivals and those who oppose his authoritarian rule, manipulating vote counts and election qualifications, goon squads to rough up and kill opponents, he has taken Stalin's playbook and updated it for the modern era.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Not so fast. We have aided Mexico militarily by sending special forces for training, and also bringing Mexican troops to the US for training. Russia itself has not invaded Ukraine. Russian loyalists however have occupied several government buildings/regions because they're not a fan of the Pro-NATO, Pro-West stance taken by the Kieven government. I'm not going to say Russia is entirely innocent here, after all there were supposedly photos of Russian special forces training Eastern Ukrainians, but that behavior is nearly the same as what the US has done with Mexico in the drug war. We picked the side we liked and benefitted us the most, we gave them equipment and training, and told the other side that if they spill over our borders we will christen them with hellfire missiles.
That narrative is convincing only under duress of propaganda and threat of violence against any pro-unity Ukranians. Russia is effectively fascist; Yanukovych was effectively fascist. AFAICT, the Maidan protests were about severe discontent with Yanukovych's palatial corruption at scales not seen in most places in modern Europe, not just trade alignments -- the small number of right wing extremists that were anti-Yanukovych don't take away from the fact that -- according to most objective observers, journalists, etc -- the vast majority of the voices coming from Kyiv were effectively anti-corruption liberals, not right-wing extremists.
Yet the separatists are playing Wagner, detaining journalists, enacting violence against peaceful pro-unity rallies -- and at the same time talking about defeating fascists, the irony is either lost on them or their intended audience.
Modded insightful by other "Russian World" enthusiasts, apparently.
Ukrainian new unelected leadership is more like Hitler.
Putin's annexation of Crimea repeats Hitler's early annexations one for one, including the "referendum" part.
"Right Sector", the hardcore right-wing faction, is low in head count and public support (1-3%) and has zero representation in the current government. The more moderate but still nationalist-driven "Svoboda" has about 5% support and also not much power. The rest are normal politicians by Western standards.
The current government was temporarily appointed by the parliament, which was the single possible solution after the previous president had failed to suppress the protests and fled the country. A real election is scheduled on May 25, and Russia is trying hard to prevent it in order to prolong the current suspended state.
No-one was "abolishing equal rights". There was a move to revoke a controversial language law introduced by the previous administration, but the temporary president (whom you criticize) has blocked the move, demanding that a new, better version of the law should be negotiated and accepted by the parliament first.
Please stop trolling here.
Forbes reported on Monday that The President of Russia's Council on Civil Society and Human Rights very briefly and supposedly by accident posted the actual results of the Crimean secession vote.
Forbes is one of the primary neo-con internet mouthpieces. They have posted an incredible amount of ridiculous, 100% emotionally driven, and 0% fact-based articles on the Ukraine conflict.
Moreover, the claim that's based on a website that was taken down is pure garbage. At least give us an archive version, please?
There is no way for this claim to be verified as no foreign observers were allowed during the voting process.
Foreign observers were allowed in Crimea, and I have seen many on TV, from Finland, Serbia, etc. If Americans, Germans, or British refused to attend, that's their problem.
The vote is reportedly being conducted again during the 'May 11 referendum on the status of the so-called People's Republic of Donetsk.'"
The vote is NOT conducted AGAIN. That's a different referendum, concerning a different territory and has nothing to do with Crimea.
Ukrainian new unelected leadership is more like Hitler.
First all the current leaders were elected to Parliament. The only "unelected" part is the post of acting President. That was done when the previous president abandoned his post and fled. Second the main political party is Batkivshchyna which looks like a pretty progressive party. Show me how they compare to Hitler in what they have actually done. If you mean the few radical outliers the same thing could be said for the Republican Party.
Aggressively moved right away to abolish equal rights for Russian and Russian-speaking population who make up almost half the country.
You might want to look at the demographics of the Ukraine. The Russian speaking percentage is 30%. The Ukrainian speaking percentage is 67%. So the less than 1/3 Russian speaking portion is nowhere near half. Take a look at this map. Most of the Ukraine is primarily Ukrainian speakers. Notice how much of the Russian speaking population is concentrated in the Crimea. I agree that should have been a referendum in the Crimea but it was done improperly under vary shady circumstances. Democracy does not work very well during political upheaval. The only thing close to a rights issue was a bill to make Ukrainian the only official language. The bill was passed by the parliament but vetoed by the President. It is not in effect. Do you have any other examples?
Russia has no choice but to get involved.
There are other way to "get involved" than sending in special forces, supplying arms to insurgents, holding large military exercises on the borders and threatening invasion. Those are the tactics of an uncivilized bully. Russia won't even admit that the Holodomor happened.
You do realize stopping the flow of gas to Europe would hurt Europe more than it would Russia, don't you? That is why there are only economic sanctions going on and not the stopping of gas purchases because Europe needs that gas. And Russia knows this.
The supply lines run from Russia to the west, not vice versa.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
If you recall, Snowden absolutely didn't want to stay in Russia. He just got stuck there and nobody else would give him an asylum. He was simply abandoned by other "free" democratic countries.
If the actual poll results are true, it suggest Ukraine is not that divided fundamentally at all, and that a small group of pro-Russian agitators lead by Russian military personnel out of uniform are creating this civil war.
And if actual poll results are true, it would make them like a lot of US elections, where most people sit it out and the fringes determine how the country will be run.
If this were just about electing a mayor I'd agree. However, the referendum was controversial and many boycotted it.
If the local KKK had a referendum on whether black people should be placed in concentration camps or just shot on sight, and only 0.001% of the population turned out, would the conclusion be that most people don't care about black people being shot on sight?
Russian intelligence operatives along with Spetnaz Russian special forces out of uniform are occupying Ukrainian government offices. They are doing so with the assistance of several prominent Ukrainian oligarchs that backed and supported Yankovitch. It's been estimated that fewer than 15% of the "protestors" are actually even Ukrainian and many of those that are Ukrainian are being supported (and paid) by those oligarchs.
When US special forces out of uniform but still acting at the direction of the US government are seizing Mexican government offices by force let me know.
Let me point out that the article was based in the op-ed column by Paul Roderick Gregory, who referred to a web piece that we can no longer find ourselves. This guy has been posting anti-Russian articles, often quite ridiculous ones, about once a week of Forbes's web site. In my view, this guy is simply a neo-con mouthpiece and has zero credibility.
Crimea=Florida
But who's counting..
Russia can have Florida.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Except for the statewide recount carried out as a partnership with several news agencies after the SCOTUS terminated the official recount efforts. That one came out with Gore on top
Thanks for the link - I remember when the study came out but had lost track of the details. The wiki article indicates that Gore would have won only if the most generous standards for determining voter intent (e.g. dimpled chad, slight mark on optical ballots, etc.) were consistently applied in a statewide recount. So yes, there is a scenario in which Gore "might have won", but the wiki article also mentions some important caveats that make it impossible to say with certainty what the "correct" result of counting every ballot would have been.
liar troll
That's a bit excessive, as what he said is technically correct - Gore lost every official recount, and the study you link to indicates he would also have lost every recount effort he was asking for in court.
my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
You are wrong. There was an option to stay in Ukraine. Check your facts. Moreover, the Forbes article is garbage. The guy was posing hysterical anti-Russian garbage for months. The report said that _probably_ 30-50% of voters voted, with 50-60% voting pro-Russian. So why does the guy lowball his numbers? Forbes is the last place you should consult for the truth in international politics, by the way. It's a typical conservative, neo-con mouthpiece.
Quite honestly, I don't think they are true.
I was there around 18 months ago and the place had a very Russian (rather than Ukranian) feel to it. It is an accident of recent history that the Crimea ended up in the Ukraine at all, it was also taken for granted before the vote that there was a large majority for secession. That majority had not been evident in the Eastern regions as of a week or so ago, what effect the Ukranian Army marching in is going to have on public opinion - I would not want to hazard a guess. The secessionists there were using all means up to and including murder of public figures to intimidate the locals, but an army fighting their way in could also cause antagonism.
Western perception is of the Ukraine is that part of the country orientates itself westwards and part towards the north (Russia). It is a simplification but wtf. The problem is that whoever was in power, they lined their own pockets. When the last west-leaning government was voted out but still in power, they proclaimed Stepan Bandera a Hero of the Ukraine. Bandera was a figure who (to a certain extent) cooperated with the Nazis against the Soviets and Russians, and whose followers "ethnic cleansed" around 70 000 Poles - mostly women and children - around 1943. He himself was interned at the time because the Nazis considered Ukrainians to be only slightly less sub-human than they saw the Russians. Bandera's people had nothing agaist Ukrainian Jews.
Still, those who distrust "western leaning" politicians have been provided with good reasons.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
You might want to look at the demographics [wikipedia.org] of the Ukraine. The Russian speaking percentage is 30%. The Ukrainian speaking percentage is 67%. So the less than 1/3 Russian speaking portion is nowhere near half.
The thing in Ukraine is that most people there are actually bilingual, so what numbers you get depends on what questions you ask. If the question is "what language do you consider native", you'll get numbers like the ones that you've quoted. If you instead ask "what language do you speak at home", then around 45% say that they use Russian (so a bunch of people consider Ukrainian native, but use Russian day-to-day, including private conversations). If you ask "what language do you speak most of the time" (i.e. including work, official communication, and other communication outside of home), then Russian becomes dominant nationally, and in most regions except for the western ones.
So it's technically true that "most of Ukraine is Ukrainian speakers". It is also true, at the same time, that most of Ukraine is Russian speakers :) the country is often compared to Canada with its language issue, but the situation in Ukraine is radically different from that in Canada because there are no clear geographic borders defining language use, and language affiliation only weakly correlates with national self-identification and other political questions (case in point: the majority of people on Maidan spoke Russian).
. The only thing close to a rights issue was a bill to make Ukrainian the only official language.
Not quite. That thing that you speak of was an attempt to repeal a law, enacted under Yanukovich, that created a special category called "regional languages", with recognized official status on the territories of regions where their speakers constituted a minority above a certain threshold (it was still up to the regions to take up that opportunity or not) - it did not say anything about the official national/state language, however. It was clearly aimed at Russian, but in practice it was also used by e.g. Hungarian speakers in Transcarpathia. That said, it's a poorly written law because it has many vague definitions, and because it doesn't define the lowest level of territorial division on which it applies - so there were cases of e.g. individual villages declaring their own regional language (examples included Russian, Hungarian, Roma, Bulgarian, Tatar etc) - while the larger entity of which they are a part of did not do so. Needless to say, at some point it makes quite a mess, administratively speaking.
So the idea was to repeal that law, and then enact a new law on languages. However, the president vetoed the repeal because it was seen as politically inappropriate at the time (as many russophones took the repeal as an assault on their language rights).