#6377
#2
gazeta.ru
July 29, 2002
Elderly's forgetfulness helps Zyuganov - chief pollster
By Yelena Roudneva
In many respects owing to this particular disorder, suffered by many of his voters, Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov manages to hold on to the leadership in his party. Chairman of the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM) Alexander Oslon granted the following interview to Gazeta.Ru where he explained how FOM works and shared his opinion about the 2003 parliamentary election campaign.
At present, Putin’s rating is rather stable, and, as it seems, is dependent on neither political nor economic catastrophes. Do you anticipate changes in the president’s rating before the elections?
No. Putin today is the guarantor of tranquility and equilibrium. Let’s imagine his rating drops – he is making mistakes, grows unpopular with the people – then at the same time a feeling of anxiety would grow. That is why no one wants to lose that tranquility; the population would feel uncomfortable without Putin.
It is not that it is good today because we have Putin, but that it would be bad without him. Upon coming to power Putin has assumed the role of a psychotherapist. After 8 years of stress, chaos, and uncertainty Putin has become a sort of a stabilizer. Namely that is why nothing is going to happen with his rating.
The record surge in his rating occurred after the September 11 terror attacks in the US. The present-day 51 per cent of voters who are ready to vote for the incumbent approve of his foreign policy, active actions at home, power vertical reform and his criticism of the government.
How come Mikhail Kasyanov’s name appeared on the list of possible answers to the question: ''For whom would you vote at the presidential elections?''
An interviewer, who calls on a respondent, has a list of 50 names, but it is not shown to the respondent. The sociologist asks him to name politicians whom he trusts. And people name those whom they often hear of and know.
As soon as one of the rarely-mentioned politicians is named and gathers 2 per cent and over, his name is included on the list of possible answers to the question: ''Who would you vote for?'' The names of Tuleyev, Nemtsov, Kasyanov have long been on that list. Once, even the name of Matviyenko appeared on it. However, only 0.5 per cent of respondents were ready to vote for her.
According to the results of your poll, only 5 per cent of Russians assess the State Duma’s work positively, 39 per cent – satisfactorily and 49 per cent are not satisfied with its work. How would you explain such dissatisfaction, because lately (during the spring session) the deputies have been as active as ever?
Of all the power institutions in Russia, the Duma’s reputation is the worst. No matter what happens there, the population will still treat the parliament with distrust. Back in 1999, when the Duma engaged in anything but lawmaking, fought for power and launched impeachment proceedings, it was simply despised. At that time the pro-Communist parliament was a standing source of destabilization in the country.
But today also, one should not think that the only thing Russians do is keep an eye on the Duma’s work. It rarely happens that someone knows anything about the law on land, on insolvency, or what factions work in the Duma. Parliamentary correspondents report on news from the Duma, assuming that the audience keeps a close watch on the Duma’s life.
But common people are not in the least interested in what is going on there! They watch the news mainly for two reasons: something bad or worrisome may happen, and out of sheer habit.
For the majority of the population, discussion of the subject of ‘civil society’, ‘a democratic parliament’, ‘people’s elected representatives’ is incomprehensible.
Do you forecast a change in sentiment, and, in particular, towards the Duma on the eve of the 2003 election campaign?
The 2003 elections to the parliament will be held in line with the scheme ‘for Putin or against him’. The main campaigners will not be the journalists or spin doctors, but officials, availing themselves of the tremendous administrative resources.
Presently, the party in power (United Russia) acts as a rather adequate political creature – having the protection of the president and good resources, it will try to secure a maximum amount of votes. It does not mean, however, that the party in power will try to take away votes from the communists.
Today there are all the prerequisites for its growth. Some time later, though, after the State Duma is full of United Russia members, everyone will realize that this is nonsense, and the 2007 elections will be much more exciting.
Everyone will be sick and tired of the enormous party of bureaucracy - United Russia - and they will seek changes. United Russia reminds me of a high jumper. He clears the 2-metre height, then 2.5… he knows that soon he will injure himself, and still he continues jumping. It is impossible to stop him.
Does the Foundation poll the public on candidacies to the presidential post from the Communist Party, other than Zyuganov?
We constantly ask people about new candidacies. There are none. There is nothing strange about that. Until recently half of the population of our country did not know who Seleznyov was, and you say – an alterative to Zyuganov! And whom would you name?
Kuptsov, Lukyanov, Glaziev…
All these people, for your average citizen who watches TV daily, do not exist. They are not acquainted with those heroes. And the older generation, who should know these people, cannot remember their names. And this is quite normal.
Does the communists’ move to banish Duma speaker Gennady Seleznyov from the communist ranks and the registration of his Rossia party give him any chance of public recognition?
Not in the least. At the time of that scandal Zyuganov’s rating grew from 13 to 17 per cent in one week. The only thing that changed is the attitude towards the communists of those who sympathized with them, but were not their devoted supporters. Subsequently, the average number of those who vote for the CPRF decreased from 25 to 20 per cent.
The trade unions talk of the creation of a new party, the Union of Labour. Have your respondents somehow reacted to that?
So far, it is not a noticeable event for the public
Different results in polls conducted by your Foundation and by the All-Russian Centre for Public Opinion Studies (VTsIOM) often lead observers to accuse public opinion services of being biased. In VTsIOM surveys the communists hold the leading positions, while according to your reports, United Russia is the leader. Why do the poll results differ?
There are two methods of presenting poll results. The first one is easy. If 150 of 1500 respondents say they would vote for United Russia, we record 10 per cent. But there are people who answer ''don’t know'', ''will not vote'', ''find it difficult to answer''.
The number of those ‘undecided’ may reach up to 35 per cent. VTsIOM discards those answers, thus indicating the answers of those who intend to vote, and have made their choice.
But this is a sort of an illusion. They explain their technology of counting respondents’ answers saying that they model the situation before the elections. And I say that before the elections, in addition to the published poll results, sociologists also make forecasts where they try to say how many people will come to the polling stations; who has made his choice and who has not; how many are undecided or those concealing their true intentions…
Just now, it is absolutely impossible to make forecasts. That is why judging by VTsIOM poll results Women of Russia will get 7 per cent at the election, but that is far-fetched.
Such parties as Seleznyov’s Rossia, Yushenkov’s Liberal Russia and Mironov’s Party of Life do not exist in the public consciousness. They are called sham brands. That’s why our data is based on the number of respondents, theirs – on the number of ‘decided’. Our answer-list includes all parties that have factions in the Duma. Theirs – all parties ever mentioned.
Could your employees ask the same respondent more than once?
Under no circumstances. In Russia there are over 2,500 urban and rural areas incorporated in the regions. Regions form federal districts. We chose areas at random, and exclude areas difficult to access, such as Chechnya, Dagestan, Yakutia and Sakhalin. We work with approximately 100 areas in various settlements. Lists of respondents are compiled at poll stations in each selected area.
What is the goal of counting the negative rating of politicians? Journalists have noticed an increase in Boris Nemtsov’s negative rating.
Negative rating is merely the reaction of a person, one of the components of the politician’s reputation. That reaction may be positive or negative. By negative ratings we measure the emotional reactions of voters. As for Nemtsov, the 25 per cent of voters who in no circumstances would vote for him means only that approximately 25 per cent do not like him.
What is happening to the rightists’ rating?
The number of people supporting, heeding and to a considerable degree understanding the Right, amounts to only 7 per cent of the population. Those people welcome the ideas of the rightists since they are market and democracy oriented. But there are also non-democratic liberals and non-liberal democrats. They each enjoy the support of 10 per cent of our respondents. But only 1-2 per cent throughout the country sincerely support the rightists.
Another group of voters – supporters of the leftists, are more emotional. They are guided by the words ''justice'', ''expropriation'', Marx, Engels… 12 per cent of the respondents always vote for the left. Others respond to a brand, for instance, United Russia, the Liberal Democratic Party, the Women of Russia. People’s attitudes towards those parties are formed in the right cerebral hemisphere, under the influence of a widely propagated myth, and an active promotion campaign.
Back to the Top Next Article
- Back to the Top -