DOCSLIB.ORG

Variable Report Appendix A2: Left-Right Positioning of Political Parties

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Variable Report Appendix A2: Left-Right Positioning of Political Parties EVS 2017 – Variable Report Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties European Values Study (EVS) Acknowledgement This work was undertaken under supervision of the EVS Methodology Group (Ruud Luijkx, Alice Ramos, Bart Meuleman, Ivan Rimac, Frédéric Gonthier, Markus Quandt, Michael Braun, Dominque Joye). The fieldwork of the 2017 European Values Study (EVS) was financially supported by universities and research institutes, national science foundations, charitable trusts and foundations, companies and church organizations in the EVS member countries. The project would not have been possible without the National Program Directors in the EVS member countries and their local teams. Special thanks also go to the following members of the EVS teams at Tilburg University and GESIS-DAS for their contribution in preparing and distributing this document: Laura Barbonetti (EVS, Tilburg), Giovanni Borghesan (EVS, Tilburg), Evelyn Brislinger (GESIS-DAS), Claudia Brunori (EVS, Tilburg), Yasemin Celik (EVS, Tilburg), Viktor Decker (GESIS-DAS), Margarita Gutjar (GESIS-DAS), Nora Huth (GESIS-DAS), Andrea Kuczora (GESIS-DAS), Lucilla Losi (EVS, Tilburg), Angelica Maineri (EVS, Tilburg), Sandra Michaelis (GESIS-DAS), Elisa Mori (EVS, Tilburg), Chiara De Siena (EVS, Tilburg), and Ivet Solanes (GESIS-DAS). In addition, we would like to thank Kerstin Beck for helping to finalise and publish the documentation on the EVS 2017 data The creation of the harmonization report was supported by the GESIS CharmStats team. Citation of documentation EVS, GESIS (2021): EVS 2017 Variable Report: Integrated Datasets (ZA7500, ZA7502); Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties. GESIS-Variable Reports 2020/16. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. Harmonization report related to the EVS 2017 datasets ▪ EVS 2017 Integrated Dataset (EVS 2017) - ZA7500 Current dataset version: v4-0-0, 2020-10-20 (full release) DOI: 10.4232/1.13560 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13560) ▪ EVS 2017 Integrated Dataset (EVS 2017) - Matrix Design Data - ZA7502 Current dataset version: v2-0-0, 2020-10-20 (full release) DOI: 10.4232/1.13561 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13561) ▪ European Values Study 2017 : Finland - Swedish minority (EVS 2017 Country data file) - ZA7549 Current dataset version: v1-0-0, 2020-05-27 DOI: 10.4232/1.13513 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13513) ▪ European Values Study 2017: Greece (EVS 2017 Country data file) - ZA7546 Current dataset version: v1-0-0, 2020-05-27 DOI: 10.4232/1.13512 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13512) ▪ European Values Study 2017: Romania - Hungarian minority (EVS 2017 Country data file) - ZA7550 Current dataset version: v1-0-0, 2020-10-20 DOI: 10.4232/1.13562 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13562) ▪ European Values Study 2017: Ukraine (EVS 2017 Country data file) - ZA7539 Current dataset version: v1-0-0, 2021-05-03 DOI: 10.4232/1.13714 (URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4232/1.13714) EVS2017 Variable Report, Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties, v.5 Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties EVS 2017 Table of Contents Left right positioning of political parties ................................................................................................. 3 1. Project description ...................................................................................................................... 3 2. Variable description ..................................................................................................................... 3 3. Source Variables .......................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Albania (AL) ......................................................................................................................... 4 3.2 Armenia (AM) ...................................................................................................................... 6 3.3 Austria (AT) .......................................................................................................................... 7 3.4 Azerbaijan (AZ) .................................................................................................................... 8 3.5 Belarus (BY) ....................................................................................................................... 10 3.6 Bosnia and Herzegovina (BA) ............................................................................................ 12 3.7 Bulgaria (BG) ...................................................................................................................... 14 3.8 Croatia (HR) ....................................................................................................................... 15 3.9 Czechia (CZ) ....................................................................................................................... 16 3.10 Denmark (DK) .................................................................................................................... 17 3.11 Estonia (EE) ........................................................................................................................ 18 3.12 Finland (FI) ......................................................................................................................... 19 3.13 France (FR) ......................................................................................................................... 20 3.14 Georgia (GE) ...................................................................................................................... 22 3.15 Germany (DE) .................................................................................................................... 24 3.16 Great Britain (GB) .............................................................................................................. 25 3.17 Hungary (HU) ..................................................................................................................... 26 3.18 Iceland (IS) ......................................................................................................................... 27 3.19 Italy (IT) .............................................................................................................................. 28 3.20 Lithuania (LT) ..................................................................................................................... 29 3.21 Montenegro (ME) .............................................................................................................. 30 3.22 Netherlands (NL) ............................................................................................................... 31 3.23 North Macedonia (MK) ...................................................................................................... 32 3.24 Norway (NO) ...................................................................................................................... 34 3.25 Poland (PL) ......................................................................................................................... 35 3.26 Portugal (PT) ...................................................................................................................... 36 3.27 Romania (RO)..................................................................................................................... 38 3.28 Russia (RU) ......................................................................................................................... 39 1 EVS2017 Variable Report, Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties, v.5 3.29 Serbia (RS) ......................................................................................................................... 40 3.30 Slovakia (SK) ...................................................................................................................... 42 3.31 Slovenia (SI) ....................................................................................................................... 43 3.32 Spain (ES) ........................................................................................................................... 44 3.33 Sweden (SE) ....................................................................................................................... 46 3.34 Switzerland (CH) ................................................................................................................ 47 4. Source variables (countries that are not part of the EVS 2017 Integrated dataset) ................. 49 4.1 Greece (GR) ....................................................................................................................... 49 4.2 Finland Swedish (FI_se) ..................................................................................................... 50 4.3 Romania Hungarian (RO_hu) ............................................................................................. 51 4.4 Ukraine (UA) ...................................................................................................................... 52 2 EVS2017 Variable Report, Appendix A2: Left-Right positioning of political parties, v.5 Left right positioning of political parties 1. Project description Project name: Left-right scale EVS 2017 Summary: Harmonization of political parties using the Left-Right scale. Correspondent questions: • Q49. “Which (political) party appeals to you most?” • Q49a. “Is there another party that appeals to you?” Concept description: The harmonized
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 Signature Page Past and Present Populism
    Signature Page Past and Present Populism and Protest in the Labour Party and New Democratic Party: Comparisons and Contrasts By Sydney Ann Hull A Thesis Submitted to Department of Political Science Saint Mary’s University, Halifax NS In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Honours Political Science April 2017, Halifax, Nova Scotia Copyright Sydney Hull 2017 Approved: Dr. Alexandra Dobrowolsky. Professor, Department of Political Science Saint Mary’s University Date: 21 April 2017 1 Past and Present Populism and Protest in the Labour Party and New Democratic Party: Comparisons and Contrasts By Sydney Ann Hull A Thesis Submitted to Department of Political Science Saint Mary’s University, Halifax NS In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Honours Political Science April 2017, Halifax, Nova Scotia Copyright Sydney Hull 2017 Approved: Dr. Alexandra Dobrowolsky. Professor, Department of Political Science Saint Mary’s University Date: 21 April 2017 2 Past and Present Populism and Protest in the Labour Party and New Democratic Party: Comparisons and Contrasts By Sydney Ann Hull Abstract: Recent election campaigns in several prominent liberal democracies have seen the rise to prominence of both right and left-wing populist candidates. While significant media and scholarly attention has focused on the former, this thesis examines the less studied but equally prevalent resurgence of left-wing populism through a comparative analysis of two populist movements in Britain and Canada, Momentum and Leap, that
    [Show full text]
  • FIRST PRELIMINARY REPORT on LONG-TERM ELECTION OBSERVATION (Covering the Period 23.07
    FIRST PRELIMINARY REPORT ON LONG-TERM ELECTION OBSERVATION (covering the period 23.07. – 02.09.2018) September 2018 Table of Contents 1. Report summary 2. Long-term election observation methodology 3. About the 2018 General Elections 3.1. The 2018 General Elections in short 3.2. What are the novelties at the 2018 General Elections? 4. Long-term election observation 4.1. Electoral irregularities 4.1.1. Premature election campaign 4.1.2. Maintenance of the up-to-date Central Voters Register (CVR) 4.1.3. Illegal trading of seats on the polling station committees 4.1.4. Abuse of personal information for voter registration 4.1.5. Voter coercion and/or vote buying 4.1.6. Abuse of public resources and public office for campaigning purposes 4.1.7. Other irregularities 4.2. Work of the election administration 4.2.1. BiH Central Election Commission (1) 4.2.2. Local Election Commissions (143) 4.3. Media, civil society and the citizens 4.3.1. Media reporting 4.3.2. Civil Society and the citizens 5. About the Coalition “Pod lupom” The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the Coalition “Pod lupom” and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the Coalition “Pod lupom” and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USAID or the United States Government. 2 1. Report Summary About the 2018 General Elections - The 2018 General Elections are scheduled for Sunday, 7th October 2018 and are called for 6 levels, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Copenhagen Associate Professor in Political Science
    Declining Danish EU skepticism Kosiara-Pedersen, Karina Published in: Euroflections. Leading academics on the European elections 2019 Publication date: 2019 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Kosiara-Pedersen, K. (2019). Declining Danish EU skepticism. In N. Bolin, K. Falasca, M. Grusell, & L. Nord (Eds.), Euroflections. Leading academics on the European elections 2019 (pp. 75). Mittuniversitetet. Download date: 25. sep.. 2021 Editors: Niklas Bolin Kajsa Falasca Marie Grusell Lars Nord Leading academics on the European elections 2019 1 DEMICOM-report nr 40 Read the electronic version of Euroflections at www.euroflections.se Editors Niklas Bolin Kajsa Falasca Marie Grusell Lars Nord Publisher Mittuniversitetet, Demicom, Sundsvall, Sverige Holmgatan 10 851 70 Sundsvall Contact 010-142 80 00 [email protected] www.facebook.com/mittuniversitetet www.twitter.com/mittuni www.instagram.com/mittuniversitetet Design and layout Accidens Kommunikation ISBN: 978-91-88527-70-7 This is Euroflections Euroflections is an academic report on the European elections 2019. With Euroflections we want to provide the public with interesting reflections on the election campaigns and their main actors, namely the voters, the parties and the media. In total, more than 70 experts in political science and political communication representing almost every EU country offer insightful analyses of campaign developments and electoral outcomes. Some contributions are one-country studies, while others are written from comparative or thematic perspectives. Euroflections is intended to fill a gap in European elections reporting and research. The report is not as fast as news media analyses and social media comments published immediately when the electoral outcome is known.
    [Show full text]
  • Bosnia-Herzegovina Political Briefing: BIH`S Troyka Agreement - Ambitious Or Premature Plan to Exit from 10 Months-Long Government Crisis? Ivica Bakota
    ISSN: 2560-1601 Vol. 21, No. 1 (BH) Sept 2019 Bosnia-Herzegovina political briefing: BIH`s Troyka Agreement - ambitious or premature plan to exit from 10 months-long government crisis? Ivica Bakota 1052 Budapest Petőfi Sándor utca 11. +36 1 5858 690 Kiadó: Kína-KKE Intézet Nonprofit Kft. [email protected] Szerkesztésért felelős személy: Chen Xin Kiadásért felelős személy: Huang Ping china-cee.eu 2017/01 BIH`s Troyka Agreement - ambitious or premature plan to exit from 10 months-long government crisis? Introduction On August 5, the leaders of three dominant ethno-political parties (Troyka) in rather unexpected turn signed a coalition agreement that would put an end to 10 month-long crisis in forming the central government. Bakir Izetbegovic, leader of the Democratic Action Party (SDA), Milorad Dodik, Serb Member of Presidency and Chairman of the Union of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD), and Dragan Covic, leader of the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ BIH) seemed to have finally reached an agreement on the formation of the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, troubleshooting deadlock in the BIH Parliamentary Assembly and forming the Federal government. The Troyka Agreement was supported by the Head of Delegation of the European Union, Lars G. Wigemark and very ambitiously included a clause to form a government within a month time period from signing the agreement. As a main initiator, SNSD Chairman Milorad Dodik according to ethnic rotation key will nominate the Chairman of the Council of Ministers (COM Chairman) and also outline the distribution of the ministerial posts. Without big surprises, Zoran Tegeltija, SNSD member and RS government member, remains the sole candidate for COM Chairman, and 3 x 3 - 1 ministry allocation scheme (three ministries for each three party/ethnicities minus one ministry to “other” ethnicities) was also preliminary agreed.
    [Show full text]
  • Political Parties and Welfare Associations
    Department of Sociology Umeå University Political parties and welfare associations by Ingrid Grosse Doctoral theses at the Department of Sociology Umeå University No 50 2007 Department of Sociology Umeå University Thesis 2007 Printed by Print & Media December 2007 Cover design: Gabriella Dekombis © Ingrid Grosse ISSN 1104-2508 ISBN 978-91-7264-478-6 Grosse, Ingrid. Political parties and welfare associations. Doctoral Dissertation in Sociology at the Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå University, 2007. ISBN 978-91-7264-478-6 ISSN 1104-2508 ABSTRACT Scandinavian countries are usually assumed to be less disposed than other countries to involve associations as welfare producers. They are assumed to be so disinclined due to their strong statutory welfare involvement, which “crowds-out” associational welfare production; their ethnic, cultural and religious homogeneity, which leads to a lack of minority interests in associational welfare production; and to their strong working-class organisations, which are supposed to prefer statutory welfare solutions. These assumptions are questioned here, because they cannot account for salient associational welfare production in the welfare areas of housing and child-care in two Scandinavian countries, Sweden and Norway. In order to approach an explanation for the phenomena of associational welfare production in Sweden and Norway, some refinements of current theories are suggested. First, it is argued that welfare associations usually depend on statutory support in order to produce welfare on a salient level. Second, it is supposed that any form of particularistic interest in welfare production, not only ethnic, cultural or religious minority interests, can lead to associational welfare. With respect to these assumptions, this thesis supposes that political parties are organisations that, on one hand, influence statutory decisions regarding associational welfare production, and, on the other hand, pursue particularistic interests in associational welfare production.
    [Show full text]
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina Analytical Report
    Bosnia and Herzegovina Analytical Report August 2020 Table of contents Russian Influence Raises Concerns in BiH 3 1.0 Summary 3 2.0 Key Political Developments 5 2.1 Russia Uses Dodik to Tie Future of BiH and Kosovo 5 2.2 Adoption of BiH Budget Clears the Way For Local Elections 7 2.3 Bosniak Political Scene: Battle of Two Hospitals 8 3.0 Socio-Economic Developments 11 3.1 Overview 11 3.2 Latest Statistical Data 14 Foreign trade 15 Foreign Exchange Reserves 16 Banking sector 17 Inflation (CPI) 18 Industrial production 18 Employment and Unemployment 19 Wages 20 Pensions 21 Footnotes 22 2 Russian Influence Raises Concerns in BiH 1.0 Summary Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) has witnessed some positive as well as negative developments over the last few months. On the one hand, BiH has found itself caught up in deepening geopolitical competition, which has been affecting the Balkans in recent months, and now seems to be getting dragged into a possible newly-created rift between Belgrade and Moscow. With his latest statements, Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik has tried to link the fates of BiH and Kosovo, threatening to push for full independence for the Republika Srpska (RS) entity if the same is granted to Kosovo. This has triggered new tensions and rebukes, mainly from Bosniak politicians and media, who repeatedly stressed that any new move for a breakup of BiH could lead to new violence, just like it did in 1991. Preoccupied with their own internal issues and focused on the restart of the EU-led dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, EU and US diplomats have so far mainly ignored this tense public discourse.
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Microtargeting Political Party Innovation Primer 1 Digital Microtargeting
    Digital Microtargeting Political Party Innovation Primer 1 Digital Microtargeting Political Party Innovation Primer 1 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance © 2018 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interests. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The electronic version of this publication is available under a Creative Commons Attribute- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the publication as well as to remix and adapt it, provided it is only for non-commercial purposes, that you appropriately attribute the publication, and that you distribute it under an identical licence. For more information visit the Creative Commons website: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. International IDEA Strömsborg SE–103 34 Stockholm Sweden Telephone: +46 8 698 37 00 Email: [email protected] Website: <http://www.idea.int> Design and layout: International IDEA Cover illustration: © 123RF, <http://www.123rf.com> ISBN: 978-91-7671-176-7 Created with Booktype: <https://www.booktype.pro> International IDEA Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 6 2. What is the issue? The rationale of digital microtargeting ................................ 7 3. Perspectives on digital
    [Show full text]
  • Europe on the Borderline © Photographer© Join Us for Progressive Thoughts on the 3Rd
    N°02 /2011 | QUARTERLY MAGAZINE Europe on the borderline © Photographer© Join us for progressive thoughts on the 3rd EUSONET I ended up on a “death list” put The late Stieg Larsson’s column together by a Swedish Nazi group. I later from 2003 proves that we were warned got hold of a copy. It states that I’m an about the growth of rightwing extremism anti-racist (true); it has the address of (page 25). We are proud to have been my parents’ house (now sold), and our given permission to posthumously pub- landline phone number (still used by my lish a text that highlights the closeness mum). But the scary calls, made at night between Larsson’s work as a journalist, at the weekends when the Nazis had had and an underlying political message of one beer too many, stopped long ago. his Millennium trilogy. EDITORIAL “Uuuh, you must mean my son. I’m This magazine aims to become a ref- voting for the liberals.” That was my dad’s erence point for progressive politicians, answer to the accusation of being a red so it should not be a surprise that we bastard – which was a mixture of being asked Norway’s Prime Minister Jens sleepy and very probably feeling a little Stoltenberg to address our readers. His “We’re going to kill you, you red bastard.” scared. If so, the 22 July 2011 showed message reflects profoundly the impres- My dad was the first to get to the phone that my late father was scared of the vio- sive way in which he handled a national when it surprisingly rang in the small lent extreme right for a reason.
    [Show full text]
  • Codebook Indiveu – Party Preferences
    Codebook InDivEU – party preferences European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies December 2020 Introduction The “InDivEU – party preferences” dataset provides data on the positions of more than 400 parties from 28 countries1 on questions of (differentiated) European integration. The dataset comprises a selection of party positions taken from two existing datasets: (1) The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File The EU Profiler/euandi Trend File contains party positions for three rounds of European Parliament elections (2009, 2014, and 2019). Party positions were determined in an iterative process of party self-placement and expert judgement. For more information: https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/65944 (2) The Chapel Hill Expert Survey The Chapel Hill Expert Survey contains party positions for the national elections most closely corresponding the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014, 2019. Party positions were determined by expert judgement. For more information: https://www.chesdata.eu/ Three additional party positions, related to DI-specific questions, are included in the dataset. These positions were determined by experts involved in the 2019 edition of euandi after the elections took place. The inclusion of party positions in the “InDivEU – party preferences” is limited to the following issues: - General questions about the EU - Questions about EU policy - Questions about differentiated integration - Questions about party ideology 1 This includes all 27 member states of the European Union in 2020, plus the United Kingdom. How to Cite When using the ‘InDivEU – Party Preferences’ dataset, please cite all of the following three articles: 1. Reiljan, Andres, Frederico Ferreira da Silva, Lorenzo Cicchi, Diego Garzia, Alexander H.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • Lithuania's New Parliament: Tackling Emigration Will Be a Key Priority For
    Lithuania’s new parliament: Tackling emigration will be a key priority for the country’s new MPs blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2016/11/14/lithuanias-new-parliament-tackling-emigration-will-be-a-key-priority-for-the-countrys-new-mps/ 14/11/2016 Members of the Lithuanian parliament are being sworn in today following elections in October. Ingrida Unikaitė-Jakuntavičienė presents an analysis of the election result, which saw the Lithuanian Peasant and Greens Union make surprising gains to become the country’s largest party. She writes that addressing high levels of emigration among young Lithuanians will be one of the main aims for the party’s members as they enter parliament. On 14 November, the newly elected Lithuanian Parliament ( Seimas) holds its first parliamentary session, where members are sworn in and the Chairman of the Parliament is elected. The 141 members were elected in two rounds of elections on 9 and 23 October, with 71 of them being elected in single- member constituencies by majority vote and the remaining 70 in a nationwide constituency based on proportional representation. Polling from July to September indicated that the governing Social Democratic Party of Lithuania (LSDP) enjoyed a lead with around 16 percent of support, while the other two largest parties were closely behind and had a roughly equal chance of finishing second: the Homeland Union (from 10 to 14 percent) and the Lithuanian Peasant and Greens Union ( from 12 to 14 percent). But the election itself produced an altogether different result. In the first round, the Homeland Union, who articulate a broadly conservative platform, led with 21.7 percent of the proportional representation vote share and 20 seats, leaving the Lithuanian Peasant and Greens Union just behind in second place (21.5 percent, 19 seats) and the Social Democratic Party of Lithuania in a distant third place (14.4 percent, 13 seats).
    [Show full text]
  • PNABZ770.Pdf
    I • • I • I • • • • COMPENDIUM OF STATEMENTS FROM POLITICAL PARTIES ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM AND PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS • OF NOVEMBER 12, 1995 REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN • • COMPENDIUM OF STATEMENTS FROM POLITICAL PARTIES ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM AND PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS OF NOVEMBER 12, 1995 REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN December 15, 1995 • • • • • (THE BALLOT) A3aPBAJ'i.AH PECIIYBJIBKACLI MHJIJIII MaltlJIHCHHa CE'IKwi9P.n;a '"tJ'.ox~TJibl ~H .nfuaciI Y3Pa ·cacBEPM:a yqm - ·. .. CEqKH 6YJIJIETEHH ··12· BOja6p 1995-Q HJI ~PSA.NAH lE.\\OKPATHK OCTBfJIAJI UAPTHJACbl 1aJU1<1>5A CblPACbl HJla) A..'gp6AJ~AH .lf.'i110KPAT CAhR6KAP JIAP flAPTHJACbl ~3aP6AJ'ofAH ,\\HJIJIH l168JldT'IHJl.HK IlAPTHJACbl n..1.1P6AJ'UH MHJUIH HCTHrJIAJI DAPTHJACbl ~~P6AJ't\H HAMHffd A.. 'IJARC• DAPTHJACbl ~~ .~~AJ'IAH XAJJf 'ld6hdCH DAPTHJACbl JJll g'Jdff DAPTHJAChl • Bl AJaP&AJ'IAH DAPTHJACli . ·-. .. .. caCBEP1'"a ~AMA.HY.5H.P.il31f 'IOX CHJA.CJI. llAPTHJAHblH (elt.l:.V.11' nU'f11JiUIAP 1iJIOK>'H¥ff;) • • i\llbl Hbfff CAXiiJA°R.lllllflil 6YJIJl'ETEH· E'T116APClitJ.. CAJblJI blP • • National Democratic Institute For International Affairs conducting nonpartisan international programs to help promote, maintain and strengthen democratic institutions 1717 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Fifth Floor Washington, DC 20036 (202) 328-3136 FAX (202) 939-3166 E-MAIL: [email protected] Chairman Paul G. Kirk, Jr. The National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI) is a Vice Chair Rachelle Horowitz nongovernmental and nonprofit organization conducting nonpartisan international Secretary programs to promote and strengthen democratic institutions around the world. Kenneth F. Melley Working with political parties, civic organizations and parliaments, NDI has Treasurer Hartina Flournoy sponsored political development projects in more than 60 countries.
    [Show full text]