ILHAM ALIYEV TAKES LEAD OVER RIVALS
1. If elections were held tomorrow, whom of the below-mentioned politicians you vote for?
1. I.Aliyev – 51.7%
2. I.Gambar-12.8%
3. E.Mammadov- 8%
4. A.Karimli – 6.8%
5. Y.Oguz –6.6%
6. L.Shovkat –5.9%
7. S.Rustamkhanli –3.1%
8. I.Ismayilov –2.6%
9. A.Alizade –0.8%
10. T.Karimli –0.6%
11. H.Hasanguliyev –0.5%
12. A.Samadov –0.2%
13. H.Hajiyev –0.1%
14. I.Shirin –0.1%
15. Ch.Sadigov – 0.1%
16. E.Musayev –0.1%
Note: This ratio of Presidential contenders’ rating is explained from the logical standpoint of recent political events.
1. Ilham Aliyev’s appreciable superiority is a showing of public reaction to his appointment as Prime Minister. I.Aliyev’s active defense of Azerbaijan’s positions at the last CE session had its impact on rating. Besides, active support of his appointment as Prime Minister on behalf of the West and Russia has also played its role.
2. Decrease of rating of the head of Musavat Isa Gambar can be explained from the point of view of recent events, including lack of the expected support of the West, serious propaganda inside the country as well as faction among opposition.
3. Etibar Mammadov has not managed to make its real and efficient political move. Party of National Independence of Azerbaijan (PNIA) has not while promulgated its electoral platform, and it is unknown, how it feels during the elections. In addition, loss of Western support has also influenced the situation. Respondents continue to adhere to an uncertain position concerning E.Mammadov.
4. Ali Kerimli is loosing his image obtained in winter. Thoughts expressed in the Milli Majlis about him and absence of support during the recent events decreased his rating. A. Kerimli has not taken any independent serious political move.
5. Increase of Yunus Oguz’s rating is explained by his non-interference into intricate political processes, active representation of his electoral platform and underlining of his definite features during the campaign. In his ideological conception, Y. Oguz is guided by love towards the nation, peace and Turkism; promises stable economic development, which is taken in the society with understanding.
6. L. Shovkat increased activeness compared to spring time, started representation of her electoral platform.
7. Sabir Rustamkhanli is active in his political steps, besides, achieved a considerable achievements in propaganda.
8. I. Ismayilov confirmed his reference to the camp of “left” in Russia by his political moves.
9. A. Alizadeh appears at political arena very frequent, his electoral conception is unknown and social-democratic idea is not popular, that is why he takes the place at the end of the rating table.
10. T. Kerimli solved his fate, having linked himself to pro-Russia circles. Neither his political conception no electoral platform are known. The recent political maneuvers negatively influenced his political position.
11. H. Hasanguliyev has not revealed which special features, as a representative of “front”, will be reflected in his electoral platform. His concept ional ideas are not known either. For a voter, H. Hasanguliyev is a “closed object”.
12. For recent 6-7 months, A. Samedov has not appeared at political stage. It does not seem that he offers any electoral platform. That is why responders “cannot see him”.
13. H. Hajiyev has not put forward any conception or platform. His activeness in propaganda is imperceptible. One can say that a voter does not know H. Hajiyev.
14. I. Shirin lost his image of a Prosecutor General of Elchibey’s government and obtained image of a politician, having offered nothing in exchange. Responders “do not feel” him.
15. “Ch. Sadiqov has no other image but that of being the one to sign the agreement of Progress between PNIA and PPFA /R/. It is not known whether he has any political conceptions and platform.
16. Majority of responders does not know E. Musayev. There is no idea about his political position. That is why, it is not accidental that he is at the last stage of rating.
P. Do you consider that opposition may put forward a single nominee for the Presidential Elections.
a) Yes – 24,3 percent
b) No – 65,5 percent
c) Find difficulty to respond – 10,2 percent
Note: Compared to the results of previous poll it is seen that opposition has not managed to obtain trust among voters. The activities during a few weeks have not changed the opinion of responders about them. It means that people still feel the difference between word and action.
Center of Analytical Information and poll ‘Sel”
Other news in this section
