Whoever wants to win in the political struggle, must take the capital. The Communists, the task was not on the shoulder. The results of the performance of the Communist party — shocking. Say about them below. And despite the fact that it is impossible to say that capital the Communists were short of funds for the election campaign. No, the money spent enough campaign came out very expensive. Try to figure out what’s the cause of the failure.
Zyuganov and Rashkin. Photo: kprf.ru
Refer to the dry statistics. In the elections to the state Duma, in December 2011, the Communist party won 19.9% of the votes. Now 13,54%. It is in General in the country. While in Moscow in 2011 for this party voted 852 541 voters. And now — all 365 083 votes. That is two times less! The Duma passed only one candidate-the Communist capital’s single-mandate constituencies, and that in a district where there was no representative of “United Russia”. Disaster. Indeed, in other parts of the country candidates-odnomandatniki from the Communist party surely won. Add to this that in 2011, the Communist party delayed the vote facing the peak of activity the protest movement “belolentochnikov” — angry citizens. Now this spoiler was not — he died long ago.
According to political analysts, this failure of the Communists improper campaign that they held in the capital.
First, they had a bet on the image of the head of the Moscow city organization Valery Rashkin. It is really well-known politician, but his fame is scandalous. Rashkin was rambling and trying to find allies in the camps of ideological and political opponents of the Communist party. For example, before the election he tried to gain footing in the liberal camp. Then the city party office has announced that it intends to invite to participate in the debates and primaries, which the Communists will hold in Moscow, a number of opposition not red orientation, including Alexei Navalny, Ilya Yashin, Dmitry Gudkov, Maxim Katz… the Bloc of Communists and “belolentochnikov” Rashkin poetically dubbed the “headquarters of the revolution”, which aims to create the front For change.”
This was done without the knowledge of the party leader Gennady Zyuganov. Rashkin then disown the idea and swore that he is a Stalinist. Well, you know, there’s a twist — not for horses normal voter who has at least some order in my head. Such moves push him away, though, and attract interest.
Affected and that the person selected by the person of the party, for the Muscovites — the Vikings. Yes, imagine, Valery Rashkin — not a Muscovite, he has a few friends that would without any requests and orders, but simply out of solidarity with “his guy” to start word of mouth.
It seems to me that the capital had to bet on an aging Rashkin and any of the young Communists, which everyone in town knows not on TV and in person. A lot of them. Well, for example, Andrei Klychkov.
Played a role and failed PR campaigns of other politicians of the Communist party. Well, you can not be both the face of the Leninist party and stand with candles in a Church in front of cameras. As it did before the election Komoyedov, a little earlier Zyuganov. Well, you go to Church, but do not advertise this before the part of the voter, which is traditional for the Communist party of materialistic values. Otherwise, the part will begin to consider you hypocrites, traitors to Leninism.
There is an objective reason for the last failure. The voter of the Communist party is aging and, unfortunately, dying. Zyuganov and communication with a young audience, which is theoretically alien to the Communist ideals of social justice, looks more funny than effective. The entire program of the Communist party is unsystematic criticism of the government, but with the same sort of agenda advocate and other parties. Only their arguments for a young audience often look more intuitive than arguments Rashkin with Stalin.
This is the second big mistake. Under the banner of Stalin is possible and necessary to go in some regions, but not in Moscow.
Against this background, incidentally, a winner looked Zhirinovsky, who although doesn’t offer anything new, but involves a greater variety of topics. And indeed it is more vibrant personality than Zyuganov with Rashkin.
Not being able to offer Muscovites nothing new, the Communists in Moscow conducted a campaign of aggressive. They just annoyed the voters loud music at meetings, inconsiderate behavior agitators, peremptory and unsubstantiated claims.
The result of these deplorable errors. In the state Duma of the seventh convocation from the Communist party will have only 42 seats. So weak the Communist party was not represented never before in history. The number of chairs in the building at Okhotny Ryad for the Communist party has halved, and is now unfolding sad intra-party struggle to carve these chairs. Half of the Communists, who used to be members, will have to go.
photo: Ivan Skryplev
COMMENTS OF POLITICAL SCIENTISTS
Pavel Danilin, expert of Fund of an effective policy: “the Communists chose for their campaniles Stalin. If the whole of Russia campaign with Stalin was attractive, for Moscow it was not very good, especially for those target audiences that are opposed to the current government, I mean intellectuals. She has a pretty entrenched anti-Stalinist myth, and it was obvious misses. The failure of such a policy can even be seen in the fact that in the whole country, the Communist party’s result is higher than in Moscow. And Rashkin personally, the result is lower than that of the Communist party in Moscow. It’s too revealing”.
Yevgeny Minchenko, Director of the International Institute of political expertise: “the Communists have had a poor campaign. Instead of fighting for new voters, they decided to consolidate already existing. And in the end failed. The Communist party was a real opportunity to reach 25-30 percent. What they did is entirely their technological shortcoming, wrong strategy”.
Anton Orlov, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Institute of contemporary policy: “a Sharp decline in the results of the Communist party in Moscow, in my opinion, due to several factors: first, it is clear that ideological Communists of the Soviet school becomes every year all less than that caused by demographic reasons. And to attract new supporters of the Communist party have not learned. Secondly, it is obvious that the economic crisis caused by the sanctions impact on the capital affected to a lesser extent, and Muscovites have decided not to risk it and vote for the status quo. In the minds of most voters, it was Putin, not Zyuganov or anyone else is capable of resisting external pressure. Another major reason, crippled the Communists, was the emergence of the party-spoiler “Communists of Russia”, biting off more than 2% of the traditional electorate. Don’t forget about voter fatigue from the same. we All remember that Gennady Zyuganov is at the helm of the party stands since the early 90’s, and journalists at the time, hung on him the label “the eternal second”. And, perhaps, more detail is few people can trust a leader that cares more about your grandson, unexpectedly izbraukums in Moscow than about the true Communist ideals.
And the way Rashkin, who was chosen as the leader of the Moscow Communist, at least one of: old, inconsistent, not a Muscovite. Only the “not”.