Voter fraud in Iran?

S

signalmankenneth

Verified User
It looks like a case of voter fraud in the election held in Iran! But we can relate to that too, the United States had two cases of voter fraud, in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections! And we paid a heavy price for it too, and will be for sometime to come!

AuthFeb2008.gif


http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/iranian-reformer-claims-widespread-vo
 
Forgetting for a moment about the comparison to our elections here, it is not a good thing for the United States that Ahmadinejad (apparently) won.

It certainly seems suspicious, and there have been some accusations that the Interior Ministry may have flipped the vote totals for the two candidates. I would really like to know if there is any possibility of this or if the Moussavi Green Tsunami was simply overstated.

I think, though, the extreme economic turmoil of Iran is enough for me to believe that Moussavi was likely the genuine victor of the election. In which case, I hope the Iranians finally do something about the situation they are in.

It would have been the ultimate example of an overreaction on the previous administration's part if Ahmadinejad would have been ousted by the Iranians.

You can't call him the New Hitler when he's standing in the unemployment line with the other 30% of his countrymen.
 
Nearly 10 years after the election debacle and we still have not straightened out our most important tool for at least partial democracy.

disgusting.
 
It's not clear whether or not there was any result-changing vote fraud. There were unquestionably irregularities that Mousavi pointed out when he declared victory before the first results were even in, but who knows how widespread it was.

If the reported vote totals are to be believed, Ahmadinejad won territory deep in what was thought to be Mousavi's stronghold, according to the BBC. This seems unlikely, but stranger things have happened in Iran. The government also blocked text messaging for a month leading up to the election, which had been a primary tool of the reformists in organizing voter drives.

Bottom Line: Who knows. There was almost certainly some level of fraud, but the result could have been at least partially due to the government severing one of the reformists' main lines of intercommunication. Also it's important to remember that the conservative-dominated Guardian Council must approve every candidate who runs in the presidential election, and it is unlikely that they would have approved one that could have easily defeated Khameini's chosen candidate of Ahmadinejad.
 
Adam Weinberg said:
Forgetting for a moment about the comparison to our elections here, it is not a good thing for the United States that Ahmadinejad (apparently) won.

It certainly seems suspicious, and there have been some accusations that the Interior Ministry may have flipped the vote totals for the two candidates. I would really like to know if there is any possibility of this or if the Moussavi Green Tsunami was simply overstated.

I think, though, the extreme economic turmoil of Iran is enough for me to believe that Moussavi was likely the genuine victor of the election. In which case, I hope the Iranians finally do something about the situation they are in.

It would have been the ultimate example of an overreaction on the previous administration's part if Ahmadinejad would have been ousted by the Iranians.

You can't call him the New Hitler when he's standing in the unemployment line with the other 30% of his countrymen.
Click to expand...
Is it? Or is it a one great big whoop de freaken do. Ahmedinejad is hardly more than a figure head. We both know where the true power in Iran lies and it's not in his office.
 
Acknowledging that the President of Iran has no international or military power, we in the United States have not conducted ourselves politically as if that is the case.

We formulate rhetoric around Ahmadinejad instead of acknowledging the fact you point out. He was a perfect figurehead for us to hate and for the Ayatollah to use as a more secular political mouthpiece.

Even if the President of Iran has little political power globally, he has in his office an investment of the aspirations of the people of the country (assuming the results are legitimate, and acknowledging that they are only permitted to vote for a small number of candidates the Guardians allow).

To choose a President more out of step with the desires of the Ayatollah is good for the prospect that Iran might liberalize (which many Iranians want) and that our relations might improve.
 
Epicurus said:
It's not clear whether or not there was any result-changing vote fraud. There were unquestionably irregularities that Mousavi pointed out when he declared victory before the first results were even in, but who knows how widespread it was.

If the reported vote totals are to be believed, Ahmadinejad won territory deep in what was thought to be Mousavi's stronghold, according to the BBC. This seems unlikely, but stranger things have happened in Iran. The government also blocked text messaging for a month leading up to the election, which had been a primary tool of the reformists in organizing voter drives.

Bottom Line: Who knows. There was almost certainly some level of fraud, but the result could have been at least partially due to the government severing one of the reformists' main lines of intercommunication. Also it's important to remember that the conservative-dominated Guardian Council must approve every candidate who runs in the presidential election, and it is unlikely that they would have approved one that could have easily defeated Khameini's chosen candidate of Ahmadinejad.
Click to expand...
Not going to happen in Iran with out a civil war. The Ayatollas and Mullahs now control to much of the wealth of the country which they pretty much have stolen and have in reality become an oligarchy. They won't give that up with out a fight. Not with out a serious bood letting, merciless, kill or be killed kinda fight. Progressive liberal reforms that were lead by popular revolts in 3rd world nations in the recent past, such as, Communist Poland and the Philippines under Marcos suceeded because they knew that the existing regimes would not survive a massacre of the populace. Have no doubts that the Ayatollas and Mullahs in Iran would have no compunction towards killing half their fellow citizens in order to protect their ill gotten gains.

The Iranian regime will eventually collapse from internal rot but mark my word, when it happens it will be violent as hell.
 
Watermark said:
The Iranians only have rebellion to turn to now.
Click to expand...
That would be a bad move. The Ayatollahs and Mullahs would massacre them and the west doesn't have the ware with all to protect them. The western nations could not bring the required political and socio-economic or public opinion outrage to bear in an effective or meaningful manner as they did in places such as Poland and the Philippines. Meaning, essentially, they would get away with it. No! Rebellion would be a real unhealthy idea for Iranians at this time.
 
Mottleydude said:
Not going to happen in Iran with out a civil war. The Ayatollas and Mullahs now control to much of the wealth of the country which they pretty much have stolen and have in reality become an oligarchy. They won't give that up with out a fight. Not with out a serious bood letting, merciless, kill or be killed kinda fight. Progressive liberal reforms that were lead by popular revolts in 3rd world nations in the recent past, such as, Communist Poland and the Philippines under Marcos suceeded because they knew that the existing regimes would not survive a massacre of the populace. Have no doubts that the Ayatollas and Mullahs in Iran would have no compunction towards killing half their fellow citizens in order to protect their ill gotten gains.

The Iranian regime will eventually collapse from internal rot but mark my word, when it happens it will be violent as hell.
Click to expand...

What's not going to happen? Your response seems to be directed toward some assertion I didn't make.
 
Mottleydude said:
That would be a bad move. The Ayatollahs and Mullahs would massacre them and the west doesn't have the ware with all to protect them. The western nations could not bring the required political and socio-economic or public opinion outrage to bear in an effective or meaningful manner as they did in places such as Poland and the Philippines. Meaning, essentially, they would get away with it. No! Rebellion would be a real unhealthy idea for Iranians at this time.
Click to expand...

If not now, then when? They're political system is insane. They are completely and totally entrenched in a perpetual dictatorship that only shows the merest resemblance to a democracy. There is no other choice.
 
Adam Weinberg said:
Forgetting for a moment about the comparison to our elections here, it is not a good thing for the United States that Ahmadinejad (apparently) won.

It certainly seems suspicious, and there have been some accusations that the Interior Ministry may have flipped the vote totals for the two candidates. I would really like to know if there is any possibility of this or if the Moussavi Green Tsunami was simply overstated.

I think, though, the extreme economic turmoil of Iran is enough for me to believe that Moussavi was likely the genuine victor of the election. In which case, I hope the Iranians finally do something about the situation they are in.

It would have been the ultimate example of an overreaction on the previous administration's part if Ahmadinejad would have been ousted by the Iranians.

You can't call him the New Hitler when he's standing in the unemployment line with the other 30% of his countrymen.
Click to expand...

From how the returns came in (millions at a time instead of the expected dribs and drabs) the estimate is that 10 million votes for the reformist were switched to Little Hitler.

Since they love and respect Jimmy Carter over there we should send him to check out the results for us. :)
 
They are estimating it? Who is?

We can't know if there was fraud for sure or not. All I can say is that the results defied expectations. No one thought that it was impossible for Ahm to get re-elected, it's just ridiculous that he could do it by such a large margin. In the last elections first round, Ahm got 20%. Now he gets 63%. A candidate that got 17% in the last election got 1% in this one. The votes for the reformist candidate on his own turf were depressed unexpectedly. It smells terrible, is all I can say.
 
Watermark said:
They are estimating it? Who is?

...
Click to expand...

There are no independent election monitors in Iran. Mousavi's claims, however, point to some noticeable breaks with past election counting.

The tallies from previous elections -- time-consuming paper ballots -- began to trickle in hours after polls closed. This time, huge chunks of results -- millions at a time -- poured in almost immediately from a huge turnout of about 85 percent of Iran's 46.2 million voters. The final outcome: 62.6 percent of the vote to Ahmadinejad and 33.75 for Mousavi, a former prime minister from the 1980s.
...
"The majority of Iranians are certain that the fraud is widespread," said Saeed Leilaz, an analyst based in Tehran. "It's like taking 10 million votes away from Mousavi and giving them to Ahmadinejad."
Click to expand...
http://www2.journalnow.com/content/2009/jun/14/protesters-riot-over-election-in-iran/
 
Yeah, the high turnout is a definite thing that's easy to cast suspicion on. I find it unlikely that the Iranian public would all of the sudden get all jumpy over the two limited choices the guardian council gave them.
 
Watermark said:
Yeah, the high turnout is a definite thing that's easy to cast suspicion on. I find it unlikely that the Iranian public would all of the sudden get all jumpy over the two limited choices the guardian council gave them.
Click to expand...

Yeah a lot like the USA.
 
The US has NO, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA moral authority to point fingers at ANY other country in regards to their elections.

Our third world election system has more holes and back doors to it than a two-dollar whore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top