Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Has the Election Been Stolen in Iran?

By Stephen Zunes, AlterNet. Posted June 13, 2009.


If it is true that Ahmadinejad's victory is fraudulent, it'll be a dream come true for those pushing a more confrontational approach with Iran.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

It is certainly not unprecedented for Western observers to miscalculate the outcome of an election in a country where pre-election polls are not as rigorous as Western countries, particularly when there is a clear bias towards a particular candidate.  At the same time, the predictions of knowledgeable Iranian observers from various countries and from across the political spectrum were nearly unanimous in the belief that the leading challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi would defeat incumbent president  Mahmoud Ahmadinejad decisively in yesterday’s presidential election, certainly in the runoff if not in the first round.  This also appeared to be the assumption among independent observers in Iran itself. 

So overwhelming were the signs of imminent Ahmadinejad defeat and so massive was the margin of his alleged victory, the only reasonable assumption was that there has been fraud on a massive scale.  What polls did exist showed Mousavi leading by a clear majority and Ahmadinejad well under 40%, a margin roughly similar to what most analysts had suggested based on anecdotal evidence.  Instead, the official results show Ahmadinejad winning by an overwhelming 63% of the vote. 

The unmistakable political trend in Iran in the past four years has been toward greater liberalism and moderation, particularly with the addition of millions of new younger voters who are overwhelmingly disenchanted with Ahmadinejad’s ultra-conservative social policies and failed economic policies.  The very idea that he would do substantially better than he did in the election four years ago, therefore, is ludicrous at face value.  Indeed, in municipal and other elections held over the past couple of years, Ahmadinejad’s preferred slates lost heavily to moderate conservatives and reformers. 

Ahmadinejad won a tight presidential race four years ago campaigning as an economic populist, gaining wide support among the poor for his calls for reducing inequality and fighting endemic corruption.  However, his administration has been at least as corrupt as his predecessors, his economic policies have resulted in high inflation and high unemployment, and he has been ruthless in suppressing labor unions, such as the bus drivers strike in Tehran.  As a result, his popularity has plummeted, making the idea of substantially greater popular support today particularly questionable.  

There are also more direct indications of fraud.

In past elections, there have been substantial variations in the vote of various candidates based on ethnicity and geography, but the official results show Ahmadinejad’s vote totals being relatively uniform across the country.  Mousavi, an Azeri from the province of Azerbaijan who has been quite popular there, did poorly, according to official results.  This is particularly striking since even minor candidates from that area had done disproportionately well in previous elections.  Similarly, Mehdi Karoubi, the other reformist candidate and an ethnic Lur, supposedly fared poorly in his home province of Luristan.  Nationally, Karoubi went from 17% in the 2005 election to less than 1% this year with no apparent reason for such a precipitous decline.  Meanwhile, the much-despised Mohsen Rezaie, the other hardline candidate, allegedly got twice as many votes. 


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: elections, iran, ahmadinejad, Mousavi

Stephen Zunes is a professor of Politics and chair of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of San Francisco and serves as a senior policy analyst for Foreign Policy in Focus.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
We have no room to talk, certainly
Posted by: kcdrew on Jun 13, 2009 4:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ever since 2000, at minimum, what room do we have to speak to stolen elections and/or disenfranchisement? We have none, certainly. Many thousands of African-Americans, at minimum, were shown to have lost their vote in Florida, and that's just the beginning. We all know how that one went. The people of power had to get both their own, handpicked State government representatives and then the Supreme Court, too, involved, to secure the election they wanted for themselves.

We ought to sit this election, in Iran, out. We're no better than any banana republic, to be sure.

Mo Rage
www.moravings.blogspot.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That's unfair Posted by: EinMD
» Well Posted by: james108
» RE: Well Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Well Posted by: james108
» Well Said Posted by: EinMD
» RE: History Posted by: wagner
» RE: STOLEN; Blatantly obvious! Posted by: sasquuatch55
'when you point the finger
Posted by: weathered on Jun 13, 2009 5:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at something else, you've now got 3 fingers pointing back at you'

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bush's 'win' in 2000
Posted by: GatoPreto on Jun 13, 2009 5:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
turned out to be fraudulent. I have yet to see anything being done about that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: progressive-life
» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: jal64
» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: Quannah
» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: jal64
» RE: Bush's 'win' in 2000 Posted by: Quannah
» Bullshit Posted by: EinMD
» RE: Bullshit Posted by: jal64
"Fraudulent Victories"
Posted by: artie on Jun 13, 2009 6:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although Iran doesn't fit the following profile, imagine what we would immediately conclude were it the case that: Ahmadinejad was a son of a former Iranian president who, himself, was director of Iran's "intelligence community" and whose second son was a "political consul" of a prefectural region the vote count of which was allegedly dubious.
Why would we not draw such conclusions in the case of the US?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Fraudulent Victories" Posted by: login@bugmenot.com
Here is why neither the right or the left will admit that Iran's elections are better than ours
Posted by: peaceia85 on Jun 13, 2009 11:33 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. We are so arrogant, we think nobody outside of US and Europe (White ?) is capable of representative democracy. In fact Iran's democracy is much more representative than ours.
2. Our democracy is owned and paid for by large corporations and their lobbies. Iran has some of that, but insignificant compared to ours.
3. Yes. Iranians are a deeply religious (like most Americans). But Iranians are lot more enlightened and politically savvy than our "Palinists" and "Hillarists" "Obama is Muzlem" crowds.
3. Both the Neo-cons on the right and feminists and Israel supporters on the left will never admit the Iran's elections are legitimate. They want to go to war with Iran, period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The media black out a red flag
Posted by: lalala on Jun 14, 2009 1:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The media black out that was widely reported leading up to the election should have given the international community and the people of Iran an idea that this would happen. It just goes to show you how unpopular Ahmedinajhad is that they had to go to these lengths to keep him in office. Its disgusting but after seeing what Bush did I guess those theocrats saw how well it would work there.

It was so disturbing that before the election Ahmedinajad's military forces threatened to use violence if his election was contested. Its like they clearly knew. And so terrible that they made good on their threats against citizens and journalists alike.

Where is the UN? Shouldnt they be involved in some way?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The UN?? Posted by: jal64
Teaching the world democracy
Posted by: motamanx6 on Jun 14, 2009 1:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We seem to have a stolen election in Iran. See what happens when George W. Bush tries to teach the world about democracy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Do As We Say, Not As We Do Posted by: bcgirl125
Democracy only acceptable if it elects pro-western parties
Posted by: Bill_Dixon on Jun 14, 2009 2:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American/Israeli attacks on Ahmadinejad ensured that he was given a major boost in popularity, just as the pro-western parties in the 2005 Iraq election received only 10% of the vote as a result of backfiring American propaganda.

There is no history of corruption in the electoral commission, yet without the slightest evidence the mainstream western media are already suggesting the result was fraudulent. Unlike the US, Iran does not use electronic voting machines which can easily be manipulated.

Forget the 85% turnout. As with Hamas, if the wrong party is elected it must be treated with contempt. This is the neocon doctrine of democracy followed by a large part of the mainstream western media.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Myopia
Posted by: Julian on Jun 14, 2009 4:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Are Americans so myopically US-centric that they can't contemplate an electoral swindle in Iran without defaulting to the electoral swindles in 2000 and 2004 in the USA? Yes Bush was installed against the actual votes of the people. Is that supposed to be pretext for shrugging off the people of another country in their legitimate dispute with criminals who rule their country without consent? The issue isn't Bush. It isn't Israel. It is between the people of Iran and those who rob them of democracy. Shouldn't the Iranian people who votge4d for change be supported, wholeheartedly? Without being held accountable for what Bush did, or the Zionists do? Another fake election is looming in Burma. Will the Burmese people also be denied solidarity by American "progressives" because the US electoral system is fraudulent? Sorry Iranians. Sorry Burmese. Sorry Fijians. You're on your own. You should have done something about Bush and the Zionists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Myopia Posted by: John Annis
» RE: Myopia Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
Cheney's 'Election Fraud' Inc Globe Trotting
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jun 14, 2009 4:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Between the warmongers 'Netan the Yahoo' and 'AhMe the Jihad' 'winning' these two past elections, you have to ask whether Cheney Inc had sent envoys out to 'help' in the election process.
Really if these two countries were to end this game of 'Sticks and Stones' what would happen to the Military Industrial Complex? What effect would it have on Halliburton, KBR and Blackwater's bottom line? shit they have all their resources in the region-salvating at the prosepects- would they have to kick up their satillite operations in S. America now? Now that wouldn't be very cost effective would it? That could take a huge bit out of the CEO's comp packages!
Why hasn't anyone bothered to ask WHO was on Cheney's Hit list? Isn't it interesting that had Bhouto not been assasinated she may have been able to get enough public support to squelch the Taliban insurgence?Then these fanatics have been granted free reign in the Swat Valley, only to create a situation 'requiring' more military intervention than before such a land grant? Set them up, knock them down and make hoards of cash in the process, Ah MIC?
'War is Hell' for those who actually fight it, but it's a gift that keeps giving if you are part of the MIC.
We alreaady know who lines 'Yahoos' pockets, but what about 'Ah Me'?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the real questions
Posted by: mwildfire on Jun 14, 2009 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm disappointed in a lot of the comments here--"don't point fingers" for example. Yes, we have had at least two stolen elections, and that should make us MORE eager to see the situation righted elsewhere, not incline us to sit quietly. Someone else says there was "not the slightest evidence" that the election s were stolen, at the end of an article that was nothing but evidence, quite convincing evidence in my opinion.
But, it should have answered the obvious questions: does Iran have exit polls? What mechanism do they use for voting--machines, paper ballots, etc? If there are paper ballots there should be a public recount.
I also want to point out how handy this is for the neocons. Just as Bush was a dream come true for the al Qaeda types, Ahmadinejad is too good to let go for the Zionists and neocons in the US--and they have not hesitated to twist things at home or abroad, to favor their interests in the past (including those two stolen elections). I wonder if there were any CIA agents helping out in Iran?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the real questions Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» Netanyahu Posted by: weathered
» RE: the real questions Posted by: munley
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
» RE: lection Posted by: pelican beak
» RE: lection Posted by: Quannah
The NeoCons WILL Be Screaming.....
Posted by: rgoalierob on Jun 14, 2009 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In hopes that it will drown out their fraudulence.
Our job is to scream back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stolen election? Imagine that
Posted by: sausage on Jun 14, 2009 6:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ahmadinejad is to Iranian politics what George W. Bush is to the United States.

Jesus, Mohammad, Moses, makes no difference. Religious conservatives fear the ballot box unless the outcome's in their favor.

What is happening in Iran is blowback caused by the U.S.'s Cold War policy of backing religious fundamentalists as a bulwark against communism. It's clear that the U.S. should have cozied up to the commies.

At least communists are, or can be, reasonable, rational human beings, open to rational, reasonable dialogue. That is impossible with religious fundamentalists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Before
Posted by: JSquercia on Jun 14, 2009 7:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before we go ballistic over the election results let's remember two things . FIRST and MOST important the real ruler in Iran is the Grand Ayatollah Khamenie and HE has declared Atomic Weapons are NOT allowed based on the Koran . SECOND if the young people are disenfranchised it is entirely possible that THEY will REFUSE to accept the results and take to the streets in protest
A word of advice IF they do engage in protest demonstrations the WEST should SHUT the HELL UP
when commenting on them . While they may oppose Ahmadinejad they will not take kindly to Western criticism of their country and so such support could well be counterproductive .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here come da "Supremes"!
Posted by: Zaratamara on Jun 14, 2009 7:42 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey welcome to the New World Order, eh?
And what can WE really say to them?
Oh, don't worry, we had that too, and had to "Get over it" with 8 years of Neocon insanity.
What can they really say?
Already we noticed the MSM wordsmithing around this: First the outrage that now it appears the "Supreme Ayatolla" had decided the election for Ahmadinejebad. ... my first reaction: "Yeah, YOUR "Supreme" Ayatolla and OUR "Supreme" Court! ".....the next report on this used the word "Grand" instead of "Supreme"...gee, ya think maybe they suddenly got worried people might actually remember some recent history and see the Irony!?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just like 2000 & 2004
Posted by: oldhippy39 on Jun 14, 2009 7:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everybody whose IQ is above their body temp has
to know that both the 2000 and 2004 elections
were flat out stolen. What did we as an electorate do about it? Not one damn thing!!
We just went on about our business.Punched the
time clock, went to the office, maxed out the credit card and lusted after the neighbor's wife. The French have the right idea. They will take to the street on a moments notice. The demands of the people are usually met, or a compromise is reached.
One of two things will happen in Iran. 1. The students will take to the streets, and the Alliahtola will say enough is enough and call for new elections, or Iran will be ripped apart
by a civil war, that will make the U.S. civil
war look like a Sunday School Picnic.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A good result for the military industrial complex
Posted by: kungfoofighterx on Jun 14, 2009 8:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This result should keep the arms industry happy. It also will help the ratings of Fox news (newscorp) and keep the talking heads jabbering away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Am not surprised at all with
Posted by: bettyn on Jun 14, 2009 9:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the outcome of this election. If it could happen in our so-called "representative democracy", it can sure happen in a closed, theocratic state like Iran. (Always works when you stir up the rural religious kooks, doesn't it? Makes any election close enough to STEAL, anywhere.) In addition, I don't doubt for one minute that some of the same SLUGS who perpetrated OUR travesties of 2000 and 2004 aren't somehow involved in this Iranian tragedy.(We've meddled shamelessly in their affairs before, so why should it be any different this time?) You can bet the hardliners in Tel Aviv are beside themselves with joy over this result. Now they can proceed unabated with their plans for a military attack (possibly nuclear)on Iran's atomic facilities. (Bring on Armageddon! Geebus is coming!)

In addition, our rightwing nut gasbags will now bloviate and pontificate endlessly on how Obama's overtures to the Muslim world have failed catastrophically. Their goal is to make our current President look like a weak, toothless appeaser just like they did Jimmy Carter. (All so they can get another Bush into the White House, hopefully by 2012.)

There are more subplots to the outcome of this Iranian election than we can probably imagine. No matter what some will say about "conspiracy theories", you can bet the MIC are STILL in charge, both here and around the world. The 'status quo" remains the same, as always. Ordinary people everywhere just don't count for shit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Secret and honest election? Not possible
Posted by: billwald on Jun 14, 2009 9:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
unless all the voters are in the same room. Any election involving millions of voters can be fixed. Maybe that was one reason for the electoral college. We were never intended to have a popular vote for president.

I propose that all county voter lists be published on the web and all ballots with names and address be published on the web in a spread sheet format. Then every person can write his own program, make his own talley, and check for dead neighbors voting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American electoral fraud process successfully exported-News at 11!
Posted by: socrates2 on Jun 14, 2009 10:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Florida-stan, Diebold-stan.
All of the above comments have stolen my thunder...
At least they accomplished this theft in an intellectually honest fashion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

lulz - Democracy? What's that?
Posted by: EinMD on Jun 14, 2009 10:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe they can get their supreme court equivalent to tell them to 'Get over it'.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

US Media Campaign to Discredit Iranian Election
Posted by: gkuhl3 on Jun 14, 2009 12:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
US Media Campaign to Discredit Iranian Election

By Charting Stock

Was the Iranian election a fraud? That's what our great western media sources want us to believe. While scanning through the coverage, I could not find one mainstream news article which covered the election results in an objective, unbiased manner.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22827.htm

US Media Campaign to Discredit Iranian Election

By Charting Stock
See also:- Lights turned off on media after elections: The AFP news agency reported that Iran’s wireless telephone network was shut down at 5:30pm GMT (10:00pm in Tehran), just as incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was making a television appearance to congratulate himself on a "great victory".

See also:- Landslide or Fraud? The Debate Online Over Iran’s Election Results: We will bring you updates throughout the day and encourage Iranian readers to share their thoughts and experiences with us.

June 13, 2009 "Charting Stocks" -- -Was the Iranian election a fraud? That’s what our great western media sources want us to believe. While scanning through the coverage, I could not find one mainstream news article which covered the election results in an objective, unbiased manner. Either prominently displayed in the title or first paragraph, each of the articles suggest the election was a fraud. The obvious question arises - If their electoral system can’t be trusted, why were they watching the results so “closely” in the first place? I’d probably find better things to do then obsess over the results of a rigged game, but hey that’s just me.

It’s worth noting that Iran, unlike the US, does not use electronic voting machines which are easily tampered with. They actually have paper ballots. It’s also important to point out the health of their electoral process. They had an 85% turnout! We, “the champions of democracy” turnout only a fraction of that percentage for our presidential elections. In fact 2 out of 3 American citizens find something better to do during election day.

Reuters Iran’s election result staggers analysts

Hard-liner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad defeated moderate challenger Mirhossein Mousavi by a surprisingly wide margin in Iran’s presidential election, official results showed on Saturday. Mousavi derided the tally as a “dangerous charade.’

Fox News: U.S. Monitoring Iran’s Election Results

U.S. officials are casting doubt over the results of Iran’s election, in which the government declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner Saturday…U.S. analysts find it “not credible [Notice the usual UN-NAMED "US Officials and Analysts]

MSNBC: Violence flares as Ahmadinejad wins Iran vote

Riot police battled with protesters Saturday as officials announced that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won a landslide election victory. His opponent denounced the results as ‘treason’….Ahmadinejad had the apparent backing of the ruling theocracy.

CNN: Ahmadinejad wins landslide in disputed election

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been declared the big winner in the country’s election, but his chief rival and supporters in the Tehran streets are crying foul.

NY Times: Ahmadinejad Is Declared Victor in Iran

The Iranian government declared an outright election victory for President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday morning, and riot police officers fought with supporters of the opposition candidate, Mir Hussein Moussavi, who insisted that the election had been stolen.

Time Magazine: Protests Greet Ahmadinejad Win in Iran: ‘It’s Not Possible!
Iran’s Interior Minister announced Saturday that incumbent president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had won 63.29% of the vote....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» We should know by now Posted by: james108
syed salamah ali mahdi
Posted by: salamah on Jun 14, 2009 12:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, the Western 'observers' were not expecting etc etc? Who are the observers? What were they observing? From where were they observing? From the posh airconditioned Neo-Con/Zionist think tanks, study houses and disinformation spreading M$M! Have a heart! It seems Israel will now force the US to 'undo' the election results in Iran, just like they did in Algeria and Palestine when the Islamists won the elections in Algeria and Hamas in Palestine. For what? To make Israel "secure" on Israel's terms/understanding of "security" where Israel keeps shifting the goal post of Peace. During 1993 to 1996 when Bibi was Prime Minister, there was no Hamas. Why then did he not make Peace with the Palestinians? When the US removed an elected President, Mossadegh, and re-instated a tyrant Emperor, the Shah of Iran. There was no Khomeini, no Islamic Republic and no threat to Israel. How long are the Israelis and because of the Israelis the American governments, keep on expanding their empires? And, at what price? How many more Hamas' and Hizbollahs are to emerge before Israel and the US come to their senses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we could try to set a good example
Posted by: DrXyzzy on Jun 14, 2009 2:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Might be time to revisit MCM's 12-step program for election reform (video):

1. Repeal the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).
2. Replace all electronic voting with hand-counted paper ballots (HCPB).
3. Get rid of computerized voter rolls.
4. Keep all private vendors out of the election process.
5. Make it illegal for the TV networks to declare who won before the vote-count is complete.
6. Set up an exit polling system, publicly supported, to keep the vote-counts honest.
7. Get rid of voter registration rules, by having every citizen be duly registered on his/her 18th birthday.
8. Ban all state requirements for state-issued ID's at the polls.
9. Put all polling places under video surveillance, to spot voter fraud, monitor election personnel, and track the turnout.
10. Have Election Day declared a federal holiday, requiring all employers to allow their workers time to vote.
11. Make it illegal for Secretaries of State to co-chair political campaigns (or otherwise assist or favor them).
12. Make election fraud a major felony, with life imprisonment--and disenfranchisement--for all repeat offenders.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Where is the fundamental difference?
Posted by: Baenz on Jun 14, 2009 3:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Iran Elections:
Roughly 40 Mio people voted of which approx. 25 Mio gave their voice to Dr. Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. Dr. Mussawi lost. Now he cries "foul" and insists that the elections were rigged. Ahmedinejad's offer to come forward with at least 1 (one!) evidence and to bring the case to the authorities to investigate properly has been ignored by the good Doctor. Instead, street riots errupt and one can only guess who is stirring that soup!

The Mass Media are full of the story and many cry in tune with Dr. Mussawi.

~*~*~*~

Take the Lebanon elections to compare:
The "14th of March Group" with Seniora and Hariri (the pimp) won 71 seats and the opposition got 57 seats. Seniora, Hariri and their thugs paid every Lebanese living outside the country a) a round trip ticket; b) accommodation if needed and c) US$ 2,000 - as long as they voted for them. The Lebanese inside got their share of "convincing massage" with greenbacks and threats too.

The Mass Media is full of praises how this "democracy" works and the will of the people got respected and the christian-muslim alliance between Michel Aoun and Hassan Nasrallah lost. Nobody cries foul and the few ones who dare are ignored.

~*~*~*~

Take the Egyptian elections (2005) to compare:
A list of "choices" (the oldest one being the 90 year old "Mr. Tarboush" who meantime passed away and voted for Hosni Mubarak!!!) - one of the candidates (Ayman Nour) arrested - and a turnout of voters of less than 4 percent!. Government figures put the turnout at 23 % ... Many of the ballot boxes were brought FULL to the voting centers and bus loads of government employees were driven from one center to the next and "motivated" to fill-in a number of ballots. They wanted to keep their jobs and meager income so they voted their heart out.

Hosni Mubarak was re-elected by approx. 3,2 % of the legitimate voters!!

The West praised the outcome and another dictator who is subserviant to the US and Israel is kept in place and the people and their will is further oppressed and ignored. Great!

Now - who doesn't understand what?????

With disgusted regards
B.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fisk
Posted by: abdo46 on Jun 14, 2009 9:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/

Robert Fisk: Iran erupts as voters back 'the Democrator'

A smash in the face, a kick in the balls – that's how police deal with protesters after Iran's poll kept the hardliners in power

Sunday, 14 June 2009.
Read Robert Fisk's article, the independent of London he was in Iran during the election and his reporting is accurate and backed by deep understanding and direct relation with the people and policy maker in the middle east.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IS IRAN A THEOCRACY OR A DEMOCRACY? THE KEY STATEMENT HERE WAS WHEN THE KHAMENEI
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Jun 14, 2009 10:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
was asked to "approve the results immediately" instead of waiting the customary 3 days. Firstly, does anyone ask the Khamenei anything? He tells. He does not ask. That in itself is fishy.

You were supposed to get the message when the Khamenei jumped the gun and approved the results. If a fix was in there is no doubt he was behind it. Who in Iran has the ultimate power? Is it the church or the state? I shouldn't think you would be having trouble with that.

Ultimately the prime minister answers to the Imams. They do not answer to him. They do not want someone who will not take orders. What the ordinary voter wants is irrelevant.

It appears that the power of the church is declining. Normally they would just have the Imams include how to vote in the sermon that is included with prayers. This tactic may have been seen as failing.

If my suppositions should be true, Iran has a problem. Their problem lies with their theocrats. Ours lie with our plutocrats allying themselves with our theocrats.

In the United States the most powerful evangelical church asked its individual churches to direct their ministers to direct the parishioners to vote for John McCain. On the Monday between the Sunday of church and the Tuesday election I had a conversation with a disgruntled member of the church. I asked him what he did. He said he got up and walked out. I asked how many walked out with him? He said none. McCain promptly proceded to carry every single county in the state. Did this church carry the state for McCain? Yes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement