Russian Presidential elections abroad in 2012: Blue = Putin; Green = Prokhorov.
However, while Putin failed to get an absolute majority even in Germany in 2012 – a country where most Russian dual citizens are ordinary Volga German, not the SWPLs and bobos who populate London – this time round, there was not a single country where he got less than 50%.
Putin got 80% in Germany, 78% in Italy, 74% in Canada, 63% in the US, and 52% in Great Britain.
Even the Washington Post noticed this, with Anton Troianovski and Matthew Brodner noting that not only Putin’s share of the vote, but Russian diaspora turnout, were all up.
A Washington Post analysis of precinct-level data from Russia’s Central Election Commission shows support for Putin surged in Sunday’s election among Russians voting in the West. Russian embassies and consulates in the 29 countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization reported a total of 129,231 votes cast for Putin at their ballot boxes, according to the Post analysis. In the last presidential election, in 2012, Putin got just two-thirds that amount of votes in those countries.
In Germany, the number of votes for Putin nearly tripled from 2012 to more than 27,000 in Sunday’s election. In the voting precinct run by the Russian Embassy in Washington, votes for Putin roughly doubled to 1,531. The overall rise in Putin votes in NATO countries is about double the rate in the Russian election as a whole, in which Putin’s vote tally increased by about 24 percent from 2012.
In all fairness – and as they themselves note – this doesn’t necessarily equate to a major turnaround in the Russian diaspora’s anti-Putin sentiments.
For instance, it is estimated there are at least 100,000 Russians in London. Even a doubling of the number of the number of votes for Putin still only reflects about 2% of the Russian community in Great Britain.
Meanwhile, since Navalny – who told his supporters to boycott the vote – has by far his strongest constituency abroad, it is likely that a lot of the hardcore anti-Putinists stayed at home.
As in 2012, the largest and most pro-Putin bastions were countries and regions where many Russians were stranded after the collapse of the USSR – Russians in the Baltics, in Abkhazia, and in Transnistria all gave Putin more than 90% of the vote.
Finally, the results from Syria are interesting, in that they reflect the views of the Russian military. The 3,839 voters there gave Putin 84.4%, Zhirinovsky 3.6%, Grudinin 2.4%, Sobchak 1.2%, and Yavlinsky 0.1%.
Considering that in Russia itself Grudinin beat Zhirinovsky by a factor of 2, while Putin got 77%, this confirms my point about the conservative-nationalist tilt of the military.
From the Duma elections of 2016:
Syria – Had 4,571 voters total, which incidentally gives one a pretty good idea of the magnitude of the Russian military presence there (i.e., probably around 5,000, since turnout is close to 100% at military bases). United Russia got 63%, LDPR got 20%, KPRF got 6%, Fair Russia got 1.6%, and Yabloko and PARNAS got 0.5% between them. This is a good proxy for the political views of the Russian military.
Incidentally, the lower numbers of voters in 2018 relative to 2016 may imply that Russia has indeed marginally drawn down its military presence in Syria.
Finally, all this goes to show to what extent Russia really is a normal country.
1. Liberal elites/globalists abroad tend to vote against the conservative/nationalist vector in their country’s politics [Putin, Zeman, Le Pen, Trump, anti-Brexit].
2. Ordinary people who ended up or were stranded abroad vote FOR the conservative/nationalist vector in their countries’ politics [see Poles in Chicago voting for PiS, Hungarians in Romania voting for Orban, etc].
3. The military has a strong conservative-nationalist tilt [2/3 of US military voting for Trump, half of French siloviks voting for National Front].