Election winner lacks strong voter mandate

TALK ABOUT AN EXCUSE TO TWIST STATITICS TO MEET AN OBJECTIVE.

Ukraine's regional administrative districts are just that administrative. They do not represent and significance in the elections outcome. To say that Tymoshenko won a majority of the regional districts as if it has some significance is BS. Each regional district is not the same in geographical or demographic size on electorate has less the half a million constituents and anther 3.5 million. There is no relational connection between the two. Unlike the United States where the States plays an important role in the outcome of the US presidential election in Ukraine the regions play none other then providing an administrative breakdown of votes . Ukraine is a single unified elections. Producing a highest winner regional map and claiming that one side had one a majority of the regions is false and misleading as a result.

Then there is the issue of against all. A rather Unique voting option that exists in FSU states. The Venice Commission in its review has rightly criticised this option in voting as it serves no real purpose in determining then election result. You can add to the 4% Against all protest vote the 1.19% that voted for no one or even the 31% THAT DID NOT VOTE.

And then ho0w do you judge the situation in the United States and Canada where the a person can be elected on less then 40% of the vote which comes form only 40% of the electorate voting. The President in the USA can be elected with only 16% of the over all electorate.

The greatest problem with any presidential election is your are electing one person and Te odds are that a large section of the electorate will go unrepresented as a result.

Another reason why Ukraine would have been better off if the President was in fact elected by a two thirds vote of Ukraine's parliament. At least it could not have been a circus parade. the person elected would have been truly representative by a larger section of the community not just who ever can spend the most money and attack the populous vote.

If a direct election must be held then a single round preferential voting system would provide a much outcome as the person elected would have secured a majority of votes. Something that would be a great value in Ukraine's Local Government elections scheduled for May.

Actually I would like a chance to vote for none of the above here in the UK.. but we cant its not allowed, but it would wake them up here, they think we want to vote for either of the candidates the push at us.

But then in our elections we dont have thugs with sticks and knives pointing out who we should vote for.

Just thought I would point out some differences between our voting systems.. you carry on you with your version of democracy being told who to vote for, it will be good you will see

It does not count in the ballot. You could just as well not turn up and vote and it would have the same effect. You can cross out the names of who you don't want, you decide to not participate.

Try reading the Venice Commissions report on the Against all option.

Under Ukraine's electoral laws the Against all option has limited impact ion then first round in that it is possible a candidate has 49% of the vote the second highest candidate could have 30% and 11% percent for minor candidates and the balance of 10% against all. As stupid as it is the electorate would be forced to a second round vote. but in the final round it plays no role other then assisting the lead candidate.

If your driving and fall sleep at the wheel waking up just on impact will not help much.

The presidential system is not democracy. It is institutionalised autocracy. America is not a democracy in the truest sense. Its present is not directly elected, The US electoral college is not representative of the people of the United States. The highest polling party appoints 100% of the states delegates. That's not democracy. Even Ukraine's flawed presidential system is more 'democratic" the the USA but ist still not democracy. Circuscratic maybe.

I have to disagree with you. The electoral college works well in the U.S. Now you can make the argument that Gore in 2000 won the popular vote over Bush however the electoral college is designed so that not one regional area of the U.S is favored over another. FOr example, suppose everyone in New York and California and Illinois and Texas voted for a particular person. It would be pretty hard for the other states to come up with the votes if they wanted someone else. The electoral college written in the consitition in 1789 does a pretty good job of evening out the vote with perhaps 1 or 2 exceptions.

Tube electoral college have never worked well. Its a total waste of resources. The whole structure of the US government is seriously flawed. You can have 40% of the vote and elect 100% of the states presentation on the College. Its certainly not democratic.

In any event Ukraine is not little America. It is a European State not a US State. The Parliament should be the body that elected the head of state. A two thirds majority would ensure that the person elected would represent a cross section of the Country not just the highest vote. Latvia and Estonia's model is best.

you calling the most powerful country in the world little...well i

see that you have a deep hatred and fear of the U.S...you should go back to your cave in Mongolia little monkey

He never said that the U.S. was little. He said that Ukraine is not some smaller version of America. Learn to read English a little better before you go slinging stupid insults on an English-language forum!

Dudesky,

Any way you look at it, neither side mustered the majority of the popular vote -- therefore its tough to say that you are the sole victor.

Statistically Ukraine is a more "democratic nation" then the United States as a higher percentage of the electorate participated in the vote then did in the USA. 69% participate rate is impressive. In the United States and in Canada less then 50% participation rate is common. The US system only "works" if there is two candidates only as was demonstrated in the case of Ross Perot and nomination a third Candidate. The US president being elected by a college of voters that the college does not reflect the will of the people of America. The highest supported party in each state/region elects 100% of the States representation. The so called "Swing States" making the difference. You can have 40% of the vote your opponents having 30% each and still you walk away with 100% state representation.

The model proposed by Yushchenko for his "Senate" would have given smaller Western Ukraine regions the same representation as the more populous Eastern and Southern regions. Mode worst by the Yushchenko proposal to introduce "first past the post" voting option where the highest polling candidates win all three senate seats allocated to each regions. Thankfully Yushchenko's undemocratic model will never see the light of day.

Exactly so. It is the silliest thing I read in a long time.

It does not matter by how many votes President wins. In fact, landslides are not common in most countries. Close results are the norm.

The president has the mandate by the virtue of winning. There is no constitutional provision for proportional anything.

Ukraine cannot conclude one Presidential election peacefully. Makes me wonder if the Orange rerun was actually above the Board, or a fraud. Perhaps Yanukovic got cheated then. Seeing what she is capable off, I have now my doubts.

In the meantime, Ukraine is heading into default. When the finances and the economy collapse, THANK YULIA. I am finding it nutty that anybody will support her, but clearly she is geting votes in spite of being the least competent Prime Minister anywhere.

I am starting to wonder what kind of split personality the country has.

You're wondering, strange, it's half Ukrainian and half Russian, kind of like Belgium, half Flemish and half Waloon. The Russians, who were settled in Eastern Ukraine after the Holodomor should either be repatriated or decide to become good Ukrainian citizens putting Ukraine first and not Russia, a good place to start would be to start using the state language and stop aggitating for equality of foreign languages in Ukraine.

The Russians should stay put. They are apparently the only guarantee that the country moves in the direction of consensus — and concentrates on the things that matter to everyone: decent standard of living, good quality of life.

Ukraine was never ethnically homogenous — Greeks, Armenians, Jewish Khazars lived on what is now Ukrainian territory before the Rus' ever arrived — and the attempt to recast her history in the same early 20th century ideological mold that inspired Pilsudski's Poland, Bardossy's Hungary, Antonescu's Romania — and Dugin's Russia — lead to the same miserable existence for the majority — and unbearable persecution for any minority.

If Yanukovych's victory serves to finally bury the ugly aspects of Ukrainian nationalism — it's a victory worth celebrating. Now, instead of ill-researched rants on Ukrainian "history" that resemble crude ancestor-worship, and ceaseless mausoleum-building celebrating the cult of victimhood, suffering and death — Ukraine might finally get to work — and make the contributions to humanity that her people have shown they are capable of, on a scale that the world cannot ignore.

Life is what matters.

You just make way too much sense. This thinking will not make a dent in the minds of rabbid nationalists --- they are having too much fun! And let's face it, encouragement from geopolitical forces that stand to benefit from this nationalist fervor.

Let's just hope that majority of people think your way.

This worship of the backward-looking "cult of victimhood" was one of the most distressing aspects of the Yuschenko presidency.

"Agitate", "repatriated" ? If this is the kind of thinking among "real" Ukrainians, Ukraine may not have any future.

To become like Belgium, citizens would have to accept the differences, respect them, organize state in a manner that gives equality to different regions, and full autonomy in its economy. There are just too many requirements that the rabbid parts of Ukraine cannot accept. Good model would be Switzeland, as well. German, French and Italian cantons do quite well, and nobody in Switzeland talks condescendigly about those "others".

I am constantly reminded reading this forum, that the rabbid intollerance displayed here --- and I am sure elsewhere --- cannot be papered over.

Not only that the "others" whom you would like to "repatriate" and take their properties, need to be concerned --- they need to act more forcefully to make their compatriots undestand that this is their country as well.

The "other" Ukraine is living under illusion that things will be well. The problem is, nobody is really reaching accross the divide except the "other" Ukrainians. The "real" Ukrainians feel like they do not have to respect them, feel entitled to oppress them, and even have dreams of ethnically cleansing half of the country!

Do you hear yourself? Do not you see the absurdity of your hate?

If you do not, it may blow in your face. The "other" Ukarainians may just one day had their fill of this abusive treatment.

I have a serious objection to how the "other" Ukrainians have been handling this worsening issue. They need to make their points clear, and insure that the other side cannot just dismiss them. They need to spell out the consequences of such disguisting behaviour. They need not worry about being labeled "pro-Russian", or "Kremilin's stooges". They need to be PRO-THEMSELVES, and others can call them whatever they want.

By not being clear and firm in demanding their rights as citizens, they are inviting more abuse, and more problems.

Perhaps Ukraine could emulate US-sponsored deal in Macedonia between Macedonian's and Albanians. Albanian minority's language is now along with Macedonian the official language. Albanian minority has guaranteed powers in the Parliament, complete control of local government where they constitute majority, and virtual veto over the decisions of the state.

Want to be member of NATO? Then use the NATO formula for Macedonia.

Or you believe that for as long as you scream against Russia, you will be immune to any punishment for your words and behaviour?

I don't want to predict in advance that Eastern Ukraine's voters have saved Ukraine for a second time, because my optimism is still cautious.

However, we can definitively say that Eastern Ukraine's voters have already saved Ukraine once, when they elected Kuchma in 1994 despite overwhelming opposition in Western Ukraine - which, incredibly, gave 85-90 percent support to a corrupt, incompetent Soviet apparatchik on no other basis than that he spoke Ukrainian in public. From my point of view there are lots of similarites between Kravchuk and Tymoshenko.

Believe me, if Kravchuk had won that 1994 election, today we would all be living in a re-named RUS-UKR-BLR-KAZ union, and Vladimir Putin would be the president of Ukraine...

You make sense. Are you *sure* you belong in the KP?

And who took over the farms, houses and churches when Ukrainians were sent off to the gulags & siberia ?

Technically, given property ownership principles of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian Soviet Republic — the successor state of which recently held Presidential elections.

You are half right, or maybe even three-quarters right.

But the important point you don't address is that Ukrainians have always been the oppressed, while Russians have been the oppressors, on Ukrainian land. Even today, Russians, or those who lean toward Russia, still constitute the majority of Ukraine's elite in practically every field - save politics. Try to get a job today in one of Kyiv's top banks as a Ukrainian-only speaker. I guarantee that you'll be discriminated against. and quickly fired. Russian is the language of business and it is obligatory in Kyiv, regardless of what the Constitution says.

So the question is not of real oppression by the Ukrainian majority against the Russian minority, but more the resentment of cultural Ukrainians against the continued hegemony of the "Russkiy Mir" in their nation. And this resentment provides the opening for the disgusting demagoguery of Tymoshenko, Turchinov, and the rest of their gang - who are themselves members of the Russian-speaking elite and by no means even belong to the affected class of Ukrainians to whom they are appealing...

But there is hope, since Tymoshenko lost to a candidate who, despite his obvious limitions, has a far less confrontational stance on national and ethnic issues. And Tymoshenko's support was a soft 45 percent, not a hard 45 percent. She had many reluctant voters in the western areas who simply voted against Yanukovich at the last minute.

Let Yulia have her fun. She will discredit her corrupt self once and for all. Like the white tiger she posed with (the white tiger is a weakened, inbred creature that was originally bred from a mutant by a megalomaniac maharaja in India and is now bred for entertainment purposes by cruel breeders). Yulia is a sideshow and her whole image is a carefully braided fake.

And hopefully Tigypko will replace Yanukovych when the time comes, showing that last Sunday really was a Victory for democracy.

Its time for the younger, educated, patriotic politicians to take over from the tainted old guard and make Ukraine the proud, democratic & prosperous country it should be. Ukraine for Ukrainians !

"Ukraine for Ukrainians"........ Thanks, we have had that for a few years now witha catastrophic result.

Really? what was the catastrophe?

And who are Ukrainians according to you? Looks like you exclude "Russians", and also "others" that happen to be Christian Orthodox. That leaves Galicia. Is that what you call "Ukrainians"? Just curious.

I think it quite clear that Russians are not Ukrainians and vice versa. But Russians who are citizens of Ukraine and loyal to it are Ukrainians of Russian origin. We have the same distinctions here in the U.S. As regards "Christian Orthodox", I'm not sure I ever heard anyone claim that they are not Ukrainian.

I'm curious too. What is it that you are getting at? Seems to me that you are trying to create division among Ukrainians.

Well, lets see, Ukrainians are called Ukrainian, Russians are called Russians. Is there a difference? Yes. Thats why they have two different names. So yes, "Ukrainians" does exclude "Russians". just as Chinese excludes Japanese. Russians will never be Ukrainians, no matter how hard they wish they were.

The thesis of the article is pretty weak. How much less of a mandate does Yanukovich have than Yuschenko in '04 who won by 52 percent? Would Yanuk really have any more of a mandate if he had won 52 percent instead of 49 percent? Maybe it would have prevented Tymo from launching a spurious election challenge, and he could have claimed a thin majority win, but the main trend and underlying conflicts would have been the same.

The high turnout at almost 70 percent adds to the credibility of Yanuk's win.

Presidential elections are a winner-take-all affair in any country.

To add, as i remember, KP and the entire Western media was trumpeting after the '04 election that Yuschenko had won a convincing mandate to lead Ukraine to Europe and NATO and all that, so why the double standard now regarding Yanukovich?

Yushchenko's '04 margin of victory was more convincing -- plus he had a majority vote in parliament and strong popular support -- just follow Yanuk's rating as it dives

When all is said and done, the winner may not have a strong mandate according to the author, but it is certainly a little stronger than that of the loser.

This article by Rachkevych is the only original piece in KP this week that is not grossly slanted in favor of Tymoshenko and against Yanuk.

Just one question: If Yulia had won by exactly the same percentage that Yanu did (or even a much smaller percentage), does anyone believe that Mark Rachkevych would be writing that she "lacks strong voter mandate"???

And the election "LOSER" had an even smaller mandate. Get off this dead horse already!

These allegations are vague and baseless, and criminalizes Tymuscenko for passing judgements that is reserved only for the courts in Ukraine.

Julia is not above the law, she is not a judge either, and she must stop making these judgments, as only the courts can deliver judgement.

Julia is breaking the code of ethics here, showing what happens when some one calls another person criminal,,, she is one herself, except more cunning and more vicous...

Still the West is laughing off Julia's idiotic wrangling, Julia is yesterday's trash.

She could not govern a zoo, much less a nation full of potential and dreams.

She calls her colligues gangstters, criminals, bandits,, and what would she call the mass poor Ukrainians who earn $100 a moth??? goy or goulaggs,,, or slaves???

Julia has certainly had no respect for the peole of Ukraine, except their wealth which she had managed to steal..

Now she cries foul..

Well she is a foul mouthed crook, how can any one believe her...

She will not on closed doors, and as she refuses to accept her own fate, she carves out for herself the punishmnt and correction she duelly deserves.....

I'm not quite sure whether this fellow has simply assumed my identity, or whether he has the same name as I do. At any rate, if the latter is true, I will simply take the name "craig1".

If the former, you'll know the difference by my grammatical use of the English language, the correct spelling of words, the absence of obscenities and name-calling, and the lack of vapidity in my commentaries.

The US wants to give Ukraine back to Russia, as it has big trouble managing its own finances, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the rest of the turmoils it creates in the world. Russa had done a better job making Ukrane work.

The west installed tv stations, made UkrAINIANS LOSE THEIR JOBS, AND FORCE THE STARVING Ukrainians to watch tv, like millions of unemployed in the West do.

Democracy is morally and practically bankcrupt.

That is why the west wants to dump it on ignorant slavs, as they had done it with Socialism.

Russia will make Ukraine produce, and put food on the table for their families..

America now days is only good at creating wars without meaning or goals, that Ukraine is not interested..

Like Yugoslavia, Ethiopia, somalia, Iraq, Afghan, Honduras, Georgia, and so on..

The US is a war machine, it can not run civilisation as it is being built and designed to create wars turmoils and disasters..

Russia is the clean up specialist,,

THe US had financed Hitler, and the last minute when it got out of control, asked Russia to clean up the mess...

The same happened in Ukraine..

THe US bank rolled the orange revolution, it stuck in dirt, so the US s asking Russia to fix the usual American screw ups...

And Russia as it had done for the last 200 years, stands by its religious cousins in America...

That is what makes Russia so strong....

Sorry to disappoint but nobody really cares about Russia. They don't even give Russia a second thought. The only thing they do is laugh at russia.