COMMENTARY
Rayisa BOHATYRIOVA, MP, Regions of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych’s campaign agent:
The fact that this campaign has recorded transgressions of the election law points to its democratic character. Fortunately, these transgressions are not serious enough to call its legitimacy into question. However, it will be necessary to find methods to remove such obstacles, especially technical ones (which prove especially bothersome) in the three weeks before the runoff. I mean lack of ballot boxes or ballots, or even more serious cases like casting fake ballots or voting for one’s relatives who are abroad, even flagrant transgressions like canvassing on the election date — such transgressions are known to have been perpetrated by Viktor Yushchenko’s supporters, particularly in some constituencies in western Ukraine. We will work hard to correct such mistakes, and I hope that the mistakes already made will not seriously affect the end result.
Mykola KATERYNCHUK, MP, Our Ukraine, Viktor Yushchenko’s campaign agent:
Regrettably, today’s exit poll turnouts cannot be considered hundred percent unbiased. The reason is that in many cases people simply refused to comment or made remarks that were obviously false, simply because they were afraid to tell the truth. We applied another technique, a parallel vote count. It shows that Viktor Yushchenko has more than 50% of the votes and Viktor Yanukovych less than 30% in the first round. Now everything depends on how well our team can have truthful data entered into the election committees’ protocols and prevent fabrications from entering the basic instruments. More than 7% of Ukrainian citizens did not cast their ballots because some were not on the lists and others failed to visit the polling stations.
Uliana KYRYIENKO, political analyst, Institute for Global Strategies:
The main result of this campaign is that it was nothing that was unexpected, considering that the two leading candidates are running almost even, and that neither could win in the first round with a broad margin. In other words, both leaders of the campaign, Viktor Yanukovych and Viktor Yushchenko, could not chalk up the mark by the election date, allowing either to get to the top. However, I believe that there are two circumstances to be considered as important results of the first round. The first one has to do with the high turnout of voters, which showed that there was indeed a fierce competition between the two political forces, unlike the election campaign in 1999.
The second result has to do with possible falsifications, which were predicted. Here statistics show that such falsifications are only in the range of 3-5%, despite the apparent threat.
Now, a few words about election night. Sociologists were the first to announce exit poll results. The latter varied, as did those in polls held before the election. This is further proof of the complicated situation in which the sociological community found itself during this campaign. Several factors “shattered” sociological objectivity. First, a client’s tremendous influence on a given sociological structure as the performer, specifically the client’s right to dispose of the data thus received as he sees fit, meaning that such data can be used as political technology. Second, the fact that so many sociological services are involved in this campaign indicates that there is no agreement within the sociological community on the principles of dealing with political or election polls. What comes to mind at this point is the Russian Public Opinion Fund (FOM), whose performance has been criticized by the expert community because it violated the rules proscribed by law governing foreign companies operating in Ukraine. However, the Sociological Association of Ukraine is taking no retaliatory measures. Third, there is an important issue that no one but sociologists should deal with: the question of methodology. When carrying out exit polls, a number of methods were applied, which in some or other way led to a vague interpretation of the results, thereby lowering the degree of objective sociological assessment.
Another thing that sociologists, political analysts, and journalists mentioned on election night was the fear factor, which both the Yanukovych and Yushchenko campaign headquarters acknowledged.
However, whereas the Yushchenko HQ acknowledged this factor for the obvious reason that pressure was being brought to bear by the government, the Yanukovych HQ failed to explain this phenomenon, and I think sociologists should study this factor in the runoff.
As for runoff forecasts, the alignment of forces will depend on several factors: first, on how the first-round leaders, Yanukovych and Yushchenko, will use their respective electorate reserves; second, on how well the presidential race leaders will be able to communicate with the left “prize-winners” Oleksandr Moroz and Petro Symonenko, placed third and fourth, respectively; and third, on how the electorate dynamics will change, and how the Yanukovych and Yushchenko election headquarters will act under the circumstances.
Stepan HAVRYSH, MP, representative of presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych at the Central Election Committee:
Viktor Yanukovych started with a 9%-rating, while his chief rival Viktor Yushchenko had 2.5 times more backing. Global experience shows that when the ratings of a candidate start soaring before the first round, he is bound to win in the second one. Viktor Yanukovych fits precisely this formula. Despite the fact that he failed to collect 50% of the votes required to win in the first round, his result came as a pleasant surprise for all of us. It’s an excellent result and it cannot be ignored, no matter what the alignment of political forces. The balance achieved in the first round was the strategy of the Yanukovych team. We have apparently carried out our task. It is obvious that Viktor Yanukovych’s tactic is a tolerant managerial policy and that it has met with support from a great many Ukrainians.
Too bad the ideology of this election campaign almost caused a rift in the Ukrainian nation. Two spheres of support for the candidates have become manifest. Whoever wins this campaign will have to solve the strategic task of consolidating the Ukrainian nation.
At present, the tactical problem is building relationships with the regional elites. Whoever can come to terms with them will be our next president.
