Iranians may be ready to vote Ahmadinejad out of power

By "article" do you mean "op-ed"? Because This very same publication offers up a host of contrary op-eds....such as this one

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/13/iran-middleeast1


why did you choose the previous one to endorse?

Again, asking for some demographics, do you have any? I find it hard to believe that the dominance of the rurals is so great to the extent where it is a tidal wave of crushing over any possible opposition - unless i see some evidence to the contrary I don't believe.

It did indeed, as did otheers - so how do you reconcile these findings of 30-20 with the result of 60-30...? That's a statistical anomaly.

Well, last time I checked, Moussavi was far from "pro western" and neither are his supporters.....he's less "anti-western" than some, but come on. I recognize your contrarianism, I've been the same myself, but seriously I don't see why you can question people for questioning something that is very obviously questionable to those who lived the same.

 

http://twitter.com/jimsciuttoABC

#iranelection Cellphones and text messaging still down here
about 6 hours ago from web
@dhersam no outside monitors. as they say, there's the rub
about 6 hours ago from web in reply to dhersam
#iranelection. More broadly, these results would make ahmadinejad the most popular iranian pres. ever. that stretches belief for some
about 6 hours ago from web
#iranelection, by the #s. the other reform candidate mehdi karoubi also confusingly lost his home state of lorestan
about 6 hours ago from web
#iranelection, by the numbers. what's confusing is how mousevi, an azeri, lost his home city tabriz, an azeri stronghold
about 6 hours ago from web
#iranelection, by the numbers. govt says ahmadinejad won 75% in rural areas, his usual base of support
about 6 hours ago from web

 

Why do you focus on the Western media challenging the election? Why not look at Iran itself? Mousafi has said he and his family have been arrested. There are riots all over Iran. Iran shut down all communications systems - internet, texting, etc. Members of the elections board said the election was illegitimate and that there should be a revote. None of this is normal for a legitimate election. None of this is western media's biases.

 

some really good analysis

http://www.juancole.com/2009/06/stealing-iranian-election.html

 

my father and grandmother were set to leave for tehran today but received phone calls from all sorts of family there saying not to come and that it wasn't safe right now.

kwame probably thinks the rioters are all westerners, though.

 

Not that I agree with the guy, but I don't see things as black as white as everyone. I'm sure there is some role the West is playing in this, its a great oppurtunity, why not take advantage? Just got to look at history to see it as a possibility.

 

I want to visit iran once again and visit mazandaran, my province. I hate it that that piece of crap Khamenei seperated Mazandaran and Golestan.

 

Kwame, Ahmadinajad isn't unpopular because of his foreign policy (most people probably dont even care that much about it), its his disastrous domestic policies that have ruined Iran. Iran now has the highest unemployment rate in the Middle East (30%) and one of the highest rates of inflation. (roughly 25%) Domestic oil infrastructure is falling apart as Iran has never invested in upgrading its drilling and oil export infrastructure. They've even resorted to importing oil to combat constant fuel shortages within the country. There are many other problems but that's just a small taste.

With all that being said, it is illogical that he is winning in large cities like Tehran that are most directly affected by these problems and where before the election he was polling poorly. He won majority votes in Masouvi's home state and Karroubi's home state, both of which he lost by large margins during the last election and where both opposition candidates were polling extremely well. Yes he has the support of rural voters because of large government subsidies that he pushed through for rural communities but Ahmadinajad won in virtually every economic and social bracket. His win was more of a landslide than the numbers indicate because he basically won a majority throughout the country whether you break it down by state, income, or any other social feature.

Not to mention most importantly, the head of the election commission already stated that this election was fraudulent. I agree its too early to cast final judgement, but all the signs point to this being rigged and there's enough evidence to at least acknowledge the plausibility of this being rigged rather than simply accusing everyone of being biased.

 

There hasnt really been any evidence of that at all though. I mean it could be possible but until there's some evidence then its a non-issue. On the other hand, the West has gone out of its way to distance itself from Mousavi and the events in Iran.

Time will tell, its only been 24 hours after all.

 

ROFLMAO......yep, it is all our fault.......

I hope they overthrow the Mullahs, and take back their country.

DD

 

Rapid regime change would be disastrous for the Iranian economy.

 

The one I cited was published much earlier so I hadn't seen the other one. He makes some good points, but I think the analysis in the other piece is much better and makes more sense.

Sure you have vocal urban elites, but I hope you can accept the premise that Iran in general is a conservative Muslim country.

According to this site about 38% of Iran's population is rural:

http://www.unescap.org/esid/psis/population/popin/profiles/iran/popin9.htm

This article says that 29%-33% of Iranians live below poverty line:

http://www.presstv.ir/pop/Print/?id=97282

I would imagine that the number of poor people are greater.

I'm sure there's some overlap in the two categories, but rural and lower class Iranians make up a majority of the population. It's also these people that are more conservative and religious. Thus, they would vote for Ahmadinejad (populist, conservative, and Islamist candidate).

Maybe my interpretation is different than yours, but the poll indicated that Ahmadinejad led Mousavi by a margin of either 2:1 or 2.4:1 (depending on how you want to look at it and factor in the +/- margin of error), which would be consistent with the final results that were announced.

Fair enough...I did say that Professor Cole made some good points. But questioning things is different than saying the entire election was rigged or fraudulent.

I focused on the media for reasons I've already stated. Mousavi was probably put under house arrest, because he was not speaking out against the rioting and violence, and tacitly encouraging it with some of his statements. What do you think about the rioting and violence? Is that acceptable? They probably shut down communications systems so that the people perpetrating the riots and violence could not coordinate their activities. There probably were some irregularities like in most elections, but that's different than saying the entire thing was a sham. To me it sounds like people are just upset that they lost, which is understandable. Their behavior, however, is not in my opinion. Hezbollah could've started a bloodbath and another civil war in Lebanon when the pro-West majority retained power (despite allegations of candidates and votes being bought off), but they accepted the results and decided to work within the system.

 

All your posts have the same theme, you are like a damn parrot, "overthrow the Mullahs" "overthrow the Mullahs" "overthrow the Mullahs"............."overthrow the Mullahs" "overthrow the Mullahs" "overthrow the Mullahs". We get you already. Geez.

Thank you for a mature answer, I agree, just bringing in some different percpective in here as everyone seems to have the same opinion... except for Kwame.

 

I respect you taking the time out and explaining things. I'm sure Iran has plenty of problems, but here's part of my response to SamFisher you may have missed:

Terror Free Tomorrow, certainly no friend of the Iranian government, did a poll in Iran before the election. It showed that Ahmadinejad was favored to win and that a plurality of Iranians supported his re-election bid. They also said that based on their polling data over 80% of Iranians would participate in the election. In the poll, Ahmadinejad led Mousavi by a margin of 2.4:1 overall and amongst Azeris (Mousavi's ethnic group) Ahmedinajad led 2:1. That ethnic group was considered a very strong source of support for the challenger. If Ahmadinejad had a 2 to 1 edge there, I can only imagine the type of support he had in the rest of the country. This would all be consistent with the final results that were announced

http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/u...port 0609.pdf

Would you be saying the same things if the results were reversed and Mousavi had won like this?

 

Vans have arrived to arrest students.

 

how I wish I was there, Ive always wanted to beat up a mullah, but alas.

 

Even that survey concluded that the odds were that of a runoff election and that Ahmadinajad had little chance of securing 50% of the vote. If Ahmadinajad won all 27% of the "undecided" vote in that poll, he still would have a smaller percentage of the vote than what he actually got. Additionally that survey indicated that a vast majority of the undecided column favored new reforms and weren't for the status quo.

Also, that survey doesnt break down how different regions voted. That's my biggest problem with the vote. Regions that historically had voted in a certain way, voted in a completely different manner in this election. Furthermore, the Iranian government, which has always released regional vote totals, refused to leaving us with weak exit poll information.

I just dont find it very persuading when the Iranians are systematically denying any information to quell any doubt and then arresting people left and right. Also, the head of the electoral commission openly called out the voting process as a fraud. There's just too much that doesn't add up to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I agree with your initial post and your point does stand that we should give the benefit of the doubt to an electoral process when it happens. If someone called the Palestinian elections fraudulent then they were wrong. But in this case, there's way too much evidence at this point to just give the Iranians the benefit of the doubt anymore. They have to start showing evidence that these elections were fair and legitimate. This Iranian election is a unique situation and one that deserves to be analyzed separately and can't simply be connected to past elections.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090614/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_us_iran




US rejects victory claim by Iran's Ahmadinejad

NIAGARA FALLS, Ontario – The U.S. on Saturday refused to accept hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's claim of a landslide re-election victory in Iran and said it was looking into allegations of election fraud.

Any hopes by the Obama administration of gaining a result similar to Lebanon's recent election, won by a Western-backed moderate coalition, appeared to be in jeopardy.

"We are monitoring the situation as it unfolds in Iran, but we, like the rest of the world, are waiting and watching to see what the Iranian people decide," U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said at a news conference with Canada's foreign affairs minister, Lawrence Cannon.

Minutes after Clinton spoke, the White House released a two-sentence statement praising "the vigorous debate and enthusiasm that this election generated, particularly among young Iranians," but expressing concern about "reports of irregularities."

Despite the challenge from reformist Mir Hossein Mousavi to incumbent Ahmadinejad, many officials and experts thought a Mousavi victory would result in only incremental shifts toward the U.S.

Because real power in Tehran is still wielded by religious leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, some say an Ahmadinejad re-election may make it easier to build an international consensus against Iran.

Administration officials remained silent out of concern that any comments might influence the results. But they were privately hoping for a victory by the more moderate Mousavi.

President Barack Obama's previous overtures include his recent address in Cairo to the Muslim world as well as, earlier, a televised New Year's address to the Iranian people and a series of diplomatic contacts. Officials say Obama's attempts to reach out have gone largely unanswered.

Neither Clinton nor the White House mentioned Ahmadinejad or his chief rival Mousavi, by name, or acknowledged the incumbent's victory declaration.

Iranian authorities reported that Ahmadinejad was re-elected with 62.6 percent of the vote. He called on the public to respect the vote. But Mousavi, a former prime minister who has become the hero of a youth-driven movement seeking greater liberties and a gentler face for Iran abroad, rejected the results and accused authorities of rigging Friday's vote.

Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said Saturday that Ahmadinejad's claim of a victory puts the Obama administration in a tough position.

"I think it's going to make it incredibly difficult for the Obama administration to acquiesce on Iran's enrichment of uranium when there is a president in Tehran who continues to deny the Holocaust, and continues to be belligerent toward Israel," Sadjadpour said. "I don't see the probability of Ahmadinejad taking a more moderate or conciliatory approach his second time around. Similar to what President Bush said when he was re-elected in 2004, he said, 'I've earned political capital, and now I am going to use it.'"

In brief remarks in Canada, Clinton cited "the enthusiasm and the very vigorous debate and dialogue" in the run-up to the vote. "We obviously hope that the outcome reflects the genuine will and desire of the Iranian people," she said.

Disappointment in the results was summed up by the Anti-Defamation League, which noted Ahmadinejad's history of "extremist allegations and attacks" against Jews and Israel as well as the United States

"We are greatly disappointed by the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad," the ADL said in a statement. "We had hoped that a different outcome to this election would have sent a message to the international community that Ahmadinejad's incendiary behavior is not reflective of the beliefs and views of the Iranian people. Unfortunately, the result for Iran is likely to be another four years of extremism and isolation."

The election focused on what the office of the Iranian president can influence: boosting Iran's sinking economy, pressing for greater media and political freedoms, and being Iran's main envoy to the world.

Iran does not allow international election monitors. During the 2005 election, when Ahmadinejad won the presidency, there were some allegations of vote rigging from losers, but the claims were never investigated.

 

I was there a few months ago! Beautiful!

 

Ding ding ding!


To be honest, it's clearly rigged, but I think around 40% EASILY voted for Ahmedinejjad.

He has pushed his coutnry further into poverty. Then he has made loans for the poor people in rural areas easily accessible. He's a hero in some areas.

Don't underestimate his support. I think it's clearly rigged, but if Mousavi won, it was a very very narrow margin.