The number of political assets with a minus sign is growing at an unplanned pace.

Let's start, however, with the first one. Has Medvedev really become a burden for the regime?

There is no doubt about it. The Levada Center poll that worried him (45% of respondents were in favor of resignation, 33% were against) in all major parameters, including the breakdown of answers to other questions, is very close to the information from the weekly reports of the near-Kremlin FOM. All “Medvedev’s” indicators are worsening there with each new measurement, and the share of those who believe that the prime minister is “working poorly in his post” since mid-April has exceeded the number of those who believe that he is “good.”

Medvedev has never been perceived by our public as an independent figure. He shone with reflected light, and fluctuations in his popularity indices always followed fluctuations in those of Putin. Perhaps this is still the case. Putin's indices are also declining. But they still remain in the positive zone, while Medvedev’s have moved into the negative.

The prime minister’s reaction to the video “He’s not your Dimon” confirmed his lack of any political qualifications or simply the ability to take a punch. Until recently, the universal helplessness of the head of government created an atmosphere of comfort for Putin, but today it is desirable that people in his circle show other qualities to the people. There is not the slightest hope that Medvedev will find them. It has become an obvious political burden, which, with a strong desire, can, of course, be carried further, but it would be more logical to throw it off one’s shoulders.

However, the logic of the highest decisions cannot be so straightforward.

Who will replace Medvedev? Another figurehead? But premieres of the caliber of Mikhail Fradkov looked like something normal in completely different times. The reaction from below, and not only from below, to someone strange and weak is now completely unpredictable, and instead of releasing it, it can also increase tension.

And the elevation to prime minister of a person perceived as a strong figure is too similar to the appointment of an heir. So, at least, it will be understood and even, perhaps, interpreted as Putin’s most important strategic decision in the last ten years. Also risky and does not increase comfort.

You can, of course, choose a middle ground and appoint as first minister some technocrat programmed for so-called unpopular measures, in order to then please the people with his shameful expulsion. But events can easily spin out of control. The system is rusty and can crumble from any shock.

The fate of the so-called Medvedev government is no less important. “So-called” because this is not one structure, but several departmental alliances, and they are not led by Medvedev at all, but partly by Putin, and partly they act autonomously - both according to their own understanding and in the interests of competing lobbying teams.

But while the prime minister is merely a symbol of government, his political disappearance would call into question all these intertwined ambitions, established governance practices and hard-won balances.

For example, does Putin want the “economic bloc” to fall (the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economic Development and related departments, which, albeit with difficulty, work in conjunction with the Central Bank, which is nominally not part of the government)? After all, he is ideologically close to them, albeit not on all points. It is not for nothing that experts in economic history recognize Putin as a spontaneous adherent of mercantilism. There was such a doctrine in past centuries, which prescribed the accumulation of monetary reserves in the treasury, preventing the import of goods, relying on state business and not allowing large excess of expenses over income.

The “economic bloc”’s ideas about what it would be desirable to do are somewhat more sophisticated, but in reality it is pursuing exactly this course. Which the leader likes, but is not particularly popular in court circles, where many magnates feel deprived, and at the same time irritates the people more and more, since the burden of the austerity regime has shifted to him.

They say that “United Russia” will praise Putin at the May Day events, expressively keeping silent about both Medvedev and the government, and the state-owned trade unions working with it will begin to defame the “economic bloc.” The suspended state of the former prime minister, without any signal from above, is being exploited with might and main by fighters for tasty positions in the executive branch.

Promoting this insignificant person in ancient times, Vladimir Putin, of course, did not imagine that the system would spontaneously turn him into its most important unit, the replacement of which promised so many problems, and, moreover, at the most inopportune time.

Sergey Shelin

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev may resign as early as May. This is stated in the published report of the Minchenko Consulting group of experts, dedicated to the agenda of Vladimir Putin’s presidential campaign.

Experts note three dates when Medvedev’s resignation from the post of prime minister is most likely, but May 2017, in their opinion, is the most optimal option. If this happens, the government will be headed by Alexei Kudrin.

The second opportunity will appear in August-September - before the start of the new financial year and the formation of a new budget. Putin’s last opportunity to change the prime minister will be in January 2018, the first month of the official presidential campaign. In addition to Kudrin, experts name Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Trutnev and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin as candidates for prime minister.

The report notes that if the resignation does not occur within the specified time frame, then Medvedev will retain the post of prime minister. Analysts emphasize that since 2004, the president has consistently dismissed the government on the eve of elections.

The question of Medvedev’s resignation directly depends on the image in which Vladimir Putin plans to appear before Russian voters, experts add. They indicate the two most optimal ones. For the image of the Ruler-Sage, the best opponent in the elections is the leader of the LDPR Vladimir Zhirinovsky in the image of the Fighter-Rebel. For the election campaign under the slogan of the Ruler-Teacher, young politicians who grew up in the Putin era will be chosen as opponents.

Experts see risks in Putin’s election campaign; they counted nine of them. These include the age of the president, who will be 65 years old at the time of the elections, the deterioration of the economic and social situation in the country, the escalation of conflicts in Putin’s inner circle, the growing influence of the Internet on public opinion and the lack of interest among the electorate of the current president (why vote if Putin and will he win?).

Recently, rumors about the impending resignation of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev have intensified. Last week, Vladimir Putin said that “Dmitry Anatolyevich was not saved” and he was sick with the flu. This is how the president explained Medvedev’s absence at the government meeting on March 14. Later, the Prime Minister missed a meeting of the Russian Security Council. On the sidelines there were suggestions that Medvedev did not get sick, but was temporarily “removed” after the scandalous investigative film “He’s Not Dimon” by Alexei Navalny.

Last Thursday, March 23, Medvedev, at a meeting with representatives of small and medium-sized businesses in the field of road transportation, in response to congratulations on his recovery, said that he was not ill. “Yes, I wasn’t sick,” the prime minister replied, which made him start talking again about the existing confrontation between Putin and Medvedev.

On February 2, the Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) of Alexei Navalny published an investigation into the real estate of Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. The publication claims that the head of the Russian government owns plots of land in elite areas, manages yachts, apartments in old mansions, agricultural complexes and wineries in Russia and abroad.

This coming Sunday, March 26, protests will be held in cities across the country under the slogan “He is not Dimon to us,” demanding an official investigation into the facts discovered and calling on Medvedev to resign.

Head of the Russian government Dmitry Medvedev“more than ever” he is concerned about his political future, Bloomberg reports, citing sources close to the prime minister. This became known after the Kremlin’s public reaction to the results of a poll, according to which almost half of Russians (45%) support Medvedev’s resignation from his post.

According to Dmitry Peskov, The Russian Presidential Administration will analyze the data of sociologists, however, this will take time. At the same time, Peskov noted that the government’s work is difficult, since it “bears the burden of making many decisions related to the operational management of the economy.” “Of course, there may be a certain volatility of sociological data here, this is quite acceptable,” he said.

Meanwhile, survey data from another major sociological service, the Public Opinion Foundation, also indicate an increase in the negative attitude of respondents towards Medvedev. If at the beginning of March 44% did not trust him, then in mid-April it was already 50%. In this regard, the figure of 45% who want Medvedev to resign does not look like something incredible. Moreover, the prime minister has recently been pointedly ignoring questions raised by society about him.

Let us recall that on April 5, the United Russia faction in the State Duma, whose leader is Medvedev, refused to support the parliamentary order of the communists to investigate the facts of corruption mentioned in the FBK film “He’s Not Dimon to You.” In addition, the prime minister refused to talk about this during his recent report to the State Duma. Despite the fact that the film has already been watched by 20 million people.

“SP” spoke about the details of the survey Head of the Department of Socio-Political Research at the Levada Center Natalya Zorkaya.

— There is no such thing as “data volatility” in sociology. Peskov transferred this from economics. He spoke smoothly. On the one hand, he recognized the fact that public opinion reacts to government actions. On the other hand, he made it clear that public opinion, while reacting, could then recover.

In sociology, we can talk not about “volatility”, but about statistical error, which depends on the sample size. We have 1600 people. This gives plus or minus 3-4 percentage points. This is the range of data accuracy. Let me explain. For example, if the same Medvedev is approved by 52% in one month, 53% in the second, and 54% in the third, then we cannot talk about a stable rise or fall. It’s another matter if such observation is carried out over many years.

This is exactly the case of Medvedev. Confidence in him gradually decreased throughout the observation period. And this has been for many years. Indeed, in the last poll, in addition to the specific question about the resignation of the prime minister, there was also a question about trust in him. It also fell sharply. Moreover, if earlier the data on Medvedev was close to the data of President Putin, now they have begun to go down. The gap between them began to widen a long time ago.

“SP”: — Was the question about Medvedev’s resignation asked in previous years of observation?

— Previously, we asked a similar question about the resignation of the entire government. This was the first time they asked about Medvedev personally. Apparently, it was this moment that caused Timakova’s reaction. It is worth recalling, however, that high approval figures for the country’s president do not cause such a storm of calls and accusations about the customized nature of our data, as Timakova said.

“SP”: — By the way, did you receive an apology from her?

- No, but we received the well-known answer that they will not conduct a conversation with us in absentia. This sounds good too...

“SP”: — What are the reasons for such a drop in Medvedev’s rating?

- Medvedev is not perceived as a strong figure at all... But the impetus for the drop in the rating was given by what lies on the surface - the film “He’s Not Dimon to You.” We asked about this too. 7% of respondents have seen the film, another 11% have not seen it, but know the content, and about 20% have heard something. That is, the information is still disseminated and affects public opinion, which is confident that the highest officials are corrupt. Up to 70% of people have long held this point of view. And this also gave a negative impetus. In addition, dissatisfaction with crisis phenomena, economic and social problems is growing. Everything points to this.

There is no future set in the country. It is unclear where society will move. Many people talk endlessly about the lack of a future, but it is true. There is no faith that this government will develop an economic program capable of leading the country out of the crisis. There is accumulated irritation that spills out, in particular, on the first persons. At the same time, Putin maintains a high level of approval.

Political scientist Alexey Makarkin sees what is happening as an intensification of the struggle for the prime minister's seat after the 2018 presidential elections.

- Firstly, we must admit that this is a success Navalny. He was able to find a news story that attracted the attention of the population. I felt that the topic of corruption was returning again against the backdrop of economic stagnation, society’s fatigue and irritation with it.

"SP": - But the authorities, we see, are also fighting corruption and even successfully...

— Yes, the heads of entire regions are arrested. The last ones are Soloviev, Markelov. However, people react to this absolutely indifferently, because no one knows about them outside the regions. But they know Medvedev. He is an iconic figure, prime minister, was president. That is, the scale of the figure is important here.

But what started next (after the FBK film - ed.)- this is no longer Navalny’s game. There are several factors here. The first is who will become prime minister in 2018. Because it must be a serious, strong political figure capable of carrying out reforms. And the question arises to what extent Dmitry Anatolyevich corresponds to this. The scandal with Navalny's film added arguments against him. It is no coincidence that Timakova claims that a game is being played against her boss. That is, this is a fight for the premiership in 2018.

The second factor is complaints about the work of the Levada Center. I don't think they are justified. They record public sentiment. In this case, it is impossible to say that the Levada Center is biased, especially since the questions were posed quite correctly. This was not a so-called formative survey, which would give predictable answers in advance. This is the real reaction of Russians to Medvedev. And this irritation is likely to increase.

The third point is related to Peskov’s reactions. Perhaps this is the implementation of the line “good king - bad boyars.” Peskov did not take Medvedev’s side, did not defend him. Although he did not condemn. There was even a certain element of explaining the situation. It turns out that the good tsar protects the Russians, and the head of government Medvedev is a bad boyar.

Finally! A Just Russia, headed by Sergei Mironov, finally began to make real progress in the government and at least one person understood what Medvedev’s government was leading Russia to, namely Medvedev himself, whom Putin appointed to the role of prime minister.

According to Sergei Mironov, Medvedev needs to resign as quickly as possible, otherwise he will come up with even more dirty laws for the people of Russia. Personally, I cannot but agree with this opinion, because this is really so and it will be interesting to observe from the outside how power goes against power and hurray, for the sake of the people! But it’s too early to rejoice; of course, there are conditions so that signatures do not go to waste.

According to Sergei Mironov and A Just Russia, he will need about 10 million votes from Russians for Medvedev to leave the government, and of course, what is a collection of signatures without a name? The name of this event, as in the title of the article, was given by the media - “Medvedev resign.” And so, but this is still far from the most interesting thing that you could find out, we started collecting signatures, then okay, but for what merits and what exactly Sergei Mironov said, this is interesting, we read on together.

Sergei Mironov from A Just Russia began collecting signatures against Medvedev: “We are starting to collect 10 million signatures for Medvedev’s resignation from the government of the Russian Federation. Medvedev combines the positions of chairman of the government and leader of United Russia, which has a majority of seats in the State Duma, and with such a leader, they can adopt all his bills and reforms, which he will say, we are not happy with this, just like the people of Russia who did not vote for Medvedev, because Putin promised to change the government, but in fact left it.

The point is this, of course we understand what terrible reforms Medvedev is now proposing, and we also know that the people of Russia don’t like this, so we understand perfectly well that rallies in this country will not do anything, we need to act officially, briefly, through the courts, namely, collecting signatures.

You might think that the main reasons for this decision to collect 10 million signatures for Medvedev’s resignation are the pension age reform, but no, it’s much worse. Mr. Dmitry Medvedev has not kept his promises for a long time and is doing many things to the detriment of people, but not only people, and undermines the trust of the government.

The first reason for Medvedev's resignation is the unfulfilled forty-year promises to repair apartments in poor condition. As long as Medvedev is in power, he promises as much, but the houses were never repaired, there were emergencies associated with them, and people suffered from the destruction of these very houses.

The second reason that Medvedev deserved his resignation and, accordingly, why we began collecting signatures for his resignation is the abolition of the customs tax. As is known, it did not follow. Medvedev's government promised to raise excise taxes on gasoline and abolish the transport tax.

But gasoline prices have soared, the tax has not been abolished, this is a lie that people are tired of. And accordingly, of course, his reform to raise the retirement age, the VAT from United Russia, which has already been adopted, is all being adopted against the people. My party A Just Russia and I believe that such a person needs to be removed, he needs to be sent into retirement. Medvedev resign!

And at the end of this gorgeous speech in the Duma from Sergei Mironov, I’ll note that he noted the bar of 10 million signatures, in his opinion, that’s how many people’s signatures are needed for this person to leave the government through the court, or of his own free will, when he sees how big it is a number of people oppose his candidacy for the post of head of the government of the Russian Federation, or rather prime minister. We will, of course, monitor the development of the event; look, for the first time in history it will actually be possible to remove a person from the government based on the signatures of only 10 million people.

Well, on my own behalf I would like to say that yes, people very quickly forget what is happening in the country, what the authorities promise, and what they do not fulfill. But then, apparently, Sergei Mironov, together with the guys from his party “A Just Russia,” sat down in the evening and remembered all the mistakes of this man, because he sees that people take to the streets, and the police are twisting them, people can’t do anything. And so, when a person from the government, and not a little-known one at that, tries to collect 10 million signatures for Medvedev’s resignation, there is hope that life can still be good and without problems in Russia, and there are smart people left who can judge competently and take sides defenseless people.