Even if we manage to organize a guaranteed impartial vote count, which can be achieved by granting complete independence to the Central Election Commission—essentially creating a separate “electoral” branch of government with its own funding system and implementing various electronic systems with cryptography—we will still not be able to answer other, equally intriguing questions:
— Can one person be trusted with the authority to govern a country of 46 million?
— Are “democratic elections” capable of leading to a satisfactory outcome at all?
Is it correct to count votes “binary” rather than “ranking”?
Is a “supreme leader” elected by “universal suffrage” really necessary if each citizen’s sphere of interest is limited to the community they live in?
Is it correct that participation in elections is voluntary?
“Is it true that there is no voter turnout threshold?”
Is it correct that there is no threshold where the number of votes “against all” automatically leads to new elections with guaranteed different candidates?
Is the idea of “one person — one vote” correct if, in essence, we are talking about electing a “corporation president” by its shareholders = taxpayers?
Is it correct that a “leader” is elected for a term that is practically irrevocable, and perhaps the “Tranay” system is a good one?
Is it correct that a pilot responsible for 100 passengers is constantly taking exams and tests, including medical ones, while a politician responsible for 46 million people can be “any yahoo,” completely unaware of how government finances work, not to mention lacking necessary knowledge in other areas?
Is it correct that the authorities monopolize their right to information and do not allow everyone the right to dig through their documents, while at the same time reserving that right for themselves in relation to citizens through various laws?
Is the idea of voting correct, rather than, for example, a long process of reaching consensus?
— Is it correct…?