Yu. G.Korgunyuk

Cleavages Structure and Distortion of the Electoral Space

The article presents the results of testing the hypothesis, according to which ballot stuffing in favor of the “party in power”, while causing minor distortions to the structure of electoral cleavages, does not fundamentally change it. The author tested the hypothesis on the data from the 2016 and 2021 elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation held via proportional system rules. He used the following method: in the regions where ballot stuffing was allegedly used in favor of the United Russia party, a certain number of votes were subtracted from the United Russia electoral results in accordance with the difference between the maximum and effective ranges of the electoral cleavage related to the confrontation between of the United Russia and the rest of elections’ participants. The author employed two models to run calculations: in the first model the threshold for deduction was a difference of 50% between the maximum and effective range, in the second model the difference was 5%.

For 2016 elections, the first model took away more than 6.1 million votes from the United Russia, the second model subtracted more than 12.5 million votes; for 2021 elections — more than 5 and more than 10 million votes, respectively. Nevertheless, there was no radical change in the structure of electoral cleavages, let alone its elimination. The study showed that although ballot stuffing in favor of the “party in power” artificially overemphasizes the role of the authoritarian-democratic confrontation, sidelining other confrontations, the structure of electoral cleavages per se is largely preserved. Mathematical methods, especially factor analysis, can be efficiently used to detect this structure.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2024-112-1-45-76

Pages: 45-76

Political Preferences of Young Voters in Contemporary Russia

The article is devoted to the political preferences of young voters in contemporary Russia’s elections. Building on the conclusions of their previous research on the relationship between modernisation and political pluralism in Russian regions, the authors attempt to evaluate the role of the age factor in voting behaviour by means of correlation and regression analysis, using as control variables the factors of modernization tested by them earlier.

Their research showed that the perception that young voters are more likely to support liberal and democratic parties than older generations is not entirely true. Voters aged 18 to 24 were indeed more prone to vote for opposition parties, but not necessarily liberal and democratic ones. In the 2016 Duma elections, the caricature neo-Stalinists from Communists of Russia benefited the most from the support of the youngest category of voters; in the elections to regional assemblies in 2016—2021 the radical imperialists from the Liberal Democratic Party did it. In the Duma elections of 2021 the greatest support from the youngest age cohort received, on the one hand, the “systemic opposition” in the face of the Communist Party and the Liberal Democratic Party, and on the other hand, the debutant of the election campaign, the New People Party, that adheres to liberal positions in the economic sphere, but is quite loyal to the existing regime.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2023-109-2-77-112

Pages: 77-112

Political Dimensions and Issue Divisions: Method for Determining Interaction

The article presents and justifies a method for determining the content of political dimensions. Political dimensions are calculated via factor analysis of party positions on popular political issues that are on the agenda. In addition, the author proposes to conduct a factor analysis of parties’ positions on specific issue domains — domestic politics, socio-economic policy, and systemic area. Factor loadings of the parties’ specific issue divisions are used as independent variables for building a regression model, whereas factor loadings of the same parties’ general issue divisions are used as a dependent variable. Such models allow the author to calculate the specific weight of this and the other specific issue division within each of the political dimensions and thus determine the content of the latter.

The application of the method to the analysis of the national discussion demonstrated that, in the late autumn of 2020, the first issue dimension was characterized by the confrontation between “hawks” and “doves” in the international affairs (systemic issue domain) and, additionally, the authorities vs. opposition competition in the socio-economic sphere; the second dimension — by the authorities vs. opposition competition in the domestic politics, coupled with the confrontation between “hawks” and “doves” in the foreign policy and the struggle between communists and liberals in the socio-economic sphere; the third one — by the confrontation between liberals and loyalists in the domestic politics and between authorities and Soviet traditionalists in the systemic sphere.

The application of the method to analyzing the results of the regional assemblies’ elections (2016—2020) allowed the author to conclude that the increase in the number of participating parties not only broadened dimensionality of the political space, but also increased the variety of issue divisions. The author also documented the change in the structure of the dominant specific issue divisions within the political dimensions, as well as the erosion of the political picture and the authorities vs. opposition confrontation coming to the forefront almost in every sphere.

The analysis shows that, on average, voters perceived political dimensions as independent political cleavages in only a third of the cases. The complex composition of these dimensions indicates an increase in the polyvariance of the mass political consciousness; however, this tendency is compensated by the prevalence of easier-to-perceive forms — the confrontation between the authorities and opposition in the political and socio-economic spheres.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2021-102-3-147-171

Pages: 147-171