Critical thinking time! Why? Because the West is looking at these results and suggesting it is a sham election. We have an obligation to look at these results and determine if they could be fake.
Are the results "too good to be true"? Absolutely there are! 99% is a ridiculous level of agreement that just doesn't happen in normal democratic systems. People are different and have different opinions. These numbers look totally made up and we'd be wise to question them if they appeared in one of our states, for example.
Are there methodological inconsistencies here? Hell yes, there are! The most obvious is that these referendums were conducted by an occupying power during a hot war.
The war itself has driven well over a million from their homes. Refugees living in Poland now were not polled. We have no idea how many people are residents of these regions, but who had no chance to give their opinions because they were not in their homes when the vote was held. This is a clear sampling bias.
The people who are there are those who could not leave. These people either support the occupying force or are voting under duress for the occupiers afraid of retaliation if they vote "incorrectly." Voting under duress not genuine reflection of opinion. This clearly is a sampling bias.
The votes were held during active fighting including in the affected regions. Those who were living near the active combat zones and hiding in their basements from the shelling were not asked their opinion. More sampling bias.
The referendums were carried out with less than a week's notice. There was no chance for public debate of the issue or careful consideration. In fact, given the active fighting, it is not clear that everyone in these regions was even made aware that there was a referendum to vote in.
The polling was carried out door to door. Russians pollsters came door to door to collect the votes. There is no way to ensure there was a secret ballot under those conditions. If a Russian soldier with a loaded rifle is watching you vote, how likely are you to vote "no"? A vote under duress is not a genuine reflection of opinion.
There were apparently "dispassionate" observers watching the election procedures. We know very little about these people to very their objectivity, let alone to verify that they actually had power to intervene if they found inconsistencies. If you're being escorted by armed Russian soldiers, are you likely to criticize? These observers are political theater, nothing more.
Can any of this be explained? To a point.
It was carried out during war time because that is the objective reality of the present and near future. There would never be a ceasefire to carry out such a poll.
Polling was not carried out in a standard way at polling places because Zelensky and the Ukrainians had rendered standard procedures unsafe. He had threatened to target missiles at any such locations. His military has, for 8 years, had no restraint at all in targeting cruise missiles at civilians in these regions. 15,000 are dead. Further, the Rada (Ukrainian Congress) passed a law declaring it to be illegal to vote in any such elections punishable by 5 years in prison and/or loss of citizenship. Our "champions of democracy" made it illegal to vote and was threatening prison time, exile, and death to anyone who voted. The Russians went door-to-door as a means of ensuring safety and giving more people access to vote.
The sampling bias imposed by the war itself explains the skewed high results. The citizens voting had been subjected to Ukrainian discrimination for decades as a result of Russian ancestry and language. In Donetsk and Luhansk, they had been subject to full-scale warfare from the Ukrainian side, while the Russians backed the citizens. Pro-Ukrainian civilians had 8 years to flee the war zone, and certainly did. Further, during the SMO, Russia actively fed and supplied the civilian population which Ukraine had been unable or unwilling to provide for. If your own country is starving you and shooting at you and an opposing force comes in to protect you and provide for you, you are very likely to be loyal to the new power.
On the whole, we clearly have a political show here. There's no way this poll should be interpreted as anything but a product of the war that's being fought. The loyal Ukrainians left long ago. There are going to be thousands in Poland who are loyal to Ukraine, but who now, have no homes to return to because they're Russian homes. Welcome to war. The ethnic Russian separatists stayed, fought, and won their freedom - not at all unlike the citizens of 13 British colonies who spent 10 years fighting Britain for their freedom ~250 years ago. We chose to live differently and paid in blood. So, too, have these Russians. Zelensky ruled like a tyrant and paid the price in land.
You completely ignore the last 8 years of history in your "analysis". You completely ignore the last 70 years of history in the region and never touch on the last 1500 years of history.
You are taking a snap shot in time, September 2022, and applying all events to that narrow window. These people are, and have always been, Russian. These oblasts were gifted to Ukraine during the WW2 and Soviet eras. These people have suffered 8 years of genocide at the hands of UkroNazis.
So why would the People in a Russian oblast, who have been attacked and shelled for 8 years, vote at a 99 percentile to return to a Russian nation they had been a part of for 1500 years, until just very recently in history?
These numbers I see fall right in with the reality on the ground, as seen through history, very well. Americans have very little real sense of History. How could they? 240 some years versus 1500 years.
I think you mean 80ish years max and a bunch of papers making historical claims. Nobody has been alive for 240 nor 1500 years. Everybody is working from the same starting point. Just because someone lives in an older country doesn’t mean they’re better at deciphering history than anybody else. (All those European leftists are true scholars of history)
In fact, if that is how it worked we’d still all be equal in our abilities because we all have an ancestry that goes back to the same place at the same time.
Hummm I saw people going to the polls by independent reporters, not main stream MSM. The voting looked “real”. Present your papers, have them checked, get ur ballot, vote in secret, put ur vote in a sealed transparent box. Some Voters were happy to say what they voted for, some would not say. Many would speak to reporters some would not. I did not see any polled at their “homes” although there were reports of that happening. I have not seen any counting of the votes on uTube or other venues. It would be interesting to see that if independent reporters have video.
Critical thinking time! Why? Because the West is looking at these results and suggesting it is a sham election. We have an obligation to look at these results and determine if they could be fake.
Are the results "too good to be true"? Absolutely there are! 99% is a ridiculous level of agreement that just doesn't happen in normal democratic systems. People are different and have different opinions. These numbers look totally made up and we'd be wise to question them if they appeared in one of our states, for example.
Are there methodological inconsistencies here? Hell yes, there are! The most obvious is that these referendums were conducted by an occupying power during a hot war.
On the whole, we clearly have a political show here. There's no way this poll should be interpreted as anything but a product of the war that's being fought. The loyal Ukrainians left long ago. There are going to be thousands in Poland who are loyal to Ukraine, but who now, have no homes to return to because they're Russian homes. Welcome to war. The ethnic Russian separatists stayed, fought, and won their freedom - not at all unlike the citizens of 13 British colonies who spent 10 years fighting Britain for their freedom ~250 years ago. We chose to live differently and paid in blood. So, too, have these Russians. Zelensky ruled like a tyrant and paid the price in land.
You completely ignore the last 8 years of history in your "analysis". You completely ignore the last 70 years of history in the region and never touch on the last 1500 years of history.
You are taking a snap shot in time, September 2022, and applying all events to that narrow window. These people are, and have always been, Russian. These oblasts were gifted to Ukraine during the WW2 and Soviet eras. These people have suffered 8 years of genocide at the hands of UkroNazis.
So why would the People in a Russian oblast, who have been attacked and shelled for 8 years, vote at a 99 percentile to return to a Russian nation they had been a part of for 1500 years, until just very recently in history?
These numbers I see fall right in with the reality on the ground, as seen through history, very well. Americans have very little real sense of History. How could they? 240 some years versus 1500 years.
I think you mean 80ish years max and a bunch of papers making historical claims. Nobody has been alive for 240 nor 1500 years. Everybody is working from the same starting point. Just because someone lives in an older country doesn’t mean they’re better at deciphering history than anybody else. (All those European leftists are true scholars of history)
In fact, if that is how it worked we’d still all be equal in our abilities because we all have an ancestry that goes back to the same place at the same time.
Thank you for this helpful analysis!
This whole breakdown should be its own stickied post.
Wow, the only smart comment here
Hummm I saw people going to the polls by independent reporters, not main stream MSM. The voting looked “real”. Present your papers, have them checked, get ur ballot, vote in secret, put ur vote in a sealed transparent box. Some Voters were happy to say what they voted for, some would not say. Many would speak to reporters some would not. I did not see any polled at their “homes” although there were reports of that happening. I have not seen any counting of the votes on uTube or other venues. It would be interesting to see that if independent reporters have video.