News & Politics - Ahmadinejad leads in early Iran returns

Uh Blah · 06-12-2009, 02:11 PM

Ahmadinejad leads in early Iran returns - CNN.com

With almost 20 percent of ballots counted, Election Commission Chief Kamran Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad was leading with 69 percent of the vote.

Daneshjoo said Ahmadinejad's chief rival, reformist candidate Mir Hossain Moussavi, had 28 percent.

Both candidates were claiming victory.

Moussavi's campaign caught fire in recent days, triggering massive street rallies in Tehran. It was thought heavy voter turnout Friday could help him.

vc318 · 06-12-2009, 03:40 PM

Seems like this is going to be a close race. Either one could still win.

vc318 · 06-13-2009, 05:56 AM

Updated 20 minutes ago...

Ahmadinejad wins landslide in disputed election - CNN.com

Ahmadinejad wins landslide in disputed election

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has won a landslide election victory despite protests by his main challenger of "blatant violations."

Ahmadinejad won 62.63 percent of the vote while chief rival Mir Hossein Moussavi received 33.75 percent, the Iranian government said Saturday.

Before the final results were announced Moussavi addressed the people of Iran in a sharply worded letter. "I recommend to the authorities that before it is late to stop this process immediately, and to return to the path of the rule of law and the holding of the public trust through the votes of the people," he said.

Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, called the voters' turnout a show of Iran's "pride" and "honor."

Sadeq Mahsouli, the country's interior minister, on Saturday lauded the "unprecedented" turnout. He had said 70 percent of 46 million eligible voters had gone to the polls. Turnout could have been as 80 percent of eligible voters, Iran's poll chief said.

The Islamic Republic News Agency said Ahmadinejad will address the nation Saturday night.

Analysts had expected Moussavi, widely regarded as a reformist, to do well as his campaign caught fire in recent days, triggering massive street rallies in Tehran. Video Watch why each side is claiming victory »

Voting was supposed to end after 10 hours, but because of the massive turnout, officials initially said polling stations would remain open until everyone in line had a chance to vote. However, Moussavi alleged that doors were being closed with people still waiting outside.

Some private news agencies reported many Iranians were milling about on the streets late into the night. Mehr reported that the chief of police declared public gatherings of candidate supporters illegal.

I think the winner is pretty much confirmed but maybe when they're done counting up all the votes, it will be enough to warrant another run-off.

**s e r e n i t y** · 06-14-2009, 08:07 AM

This is coming from an Iranian living in Iran right now, this election is so rigged it'd be hilarious if we werent all mouring the loss of democracy here

vc318 · 06-14-2009, 06:01 PM

Rigged elections? I guess that's part of everyday life wherever you are.

**s e r e n i t y** · 06-15-2009, 02:32 AM

This isnt just a rumour, its something quite obvious here, loads of tell tale signs, they didnt even bother to make a clean job of it,

At one point after counting 5 more million votes, the results they announced, one of the candidates votes actually lowered 50,000 votes

Thats just one of the points, ... why even get us to vote? why even get people to count those votes? why waste our time? they didnt even count the votes, I mean they counted them but the sum was not the thing they announced they had the numbers and the percentages before they even started counting

Uh Blah · 06-15-2009, 10:03 AM

Hatred, chaos and savage beatings in Tehran - CNN.com

it's getting pretty ugly.

vc318 · 06-15-2009, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by broken|smile (View Post)

Thats just one of the points, ... why even get us to vote? why even get people to count those votes? why waste our time? they didnt even count the votes, I mean they counted them but the sum was not the thing they announced they had the numbers and the percentages before they even started counting

After all the negative things I've heard about this guy, I doubt an overwhelming love and support got him re-elected. Corruption and politics really do go hand in hand.

And the news keeps getting worse:

Protester killed, others hurt in Tehran - Iran- msnbc.com

TEHRAN, Iran - Gunfire from a compound used by pro-government militia killed one demonstrator Monday after hundreds of thousands of opponents of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad massed in central Tehran to cheer their pro-reform leader in his first public appearance since he lost elections that he alleges were marred by fraud.

The outpouring in Azadi, or Freedom, Square for reformist leader Mir Hossein Mousavi followed a decision by Iran's most powerful figure for an investigation into the vote-rigging allegations.

Security forces watched quietly, with shields and batons at their sides.

But a group of demonstrators with fuel canisters set a small fire at a compound of a volunteer militia linked to Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guard as the crowd dispersed from the square.

As some tried to storm the building, people on the roof could be seen firing directly at the demonstrators at the northern edge of the square, away from the heart of the rally.

An Associated Press photographer saw one person fatally shot and several others who appeared to be seriously wounded.

The shooting was followed by reports from residents of three neighborhoods in northern Tehran who said shooting was heard there as well.

dayne · 06-15-2009, 02:30 PM

I think that it's plausible that Ahmadinejad won. Not a fan of this bafoon, but I'm just trying to be objective about the whole matter. He does enjoy massive support amongst the working class, poor, and rural Iranians that live outside North Tehran. These two articles that I found provide this contrasting view of the situation:

Ahmadinejad is who Iranians want | Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Quote:

Ahmadinejad is who Iranians wantIran's election result may not be fraudulent. Our polling suggests that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's victory is what voters wanted

Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty
guardian.co.uk, Monday 15 June 2009 20.00 BST
Article history
The election results in Iran may reflect the will of the Iranian people. Many experts are claiming that the margin of victory of incumbent President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was the result of fraud or manipulation, but our nationwide public opinion survey of Iranians three weeks before the vote showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin – greater than his actual apparent margin of victory in Friday's election.

While western news reports from Tehran in the days leading up to the voting portrayed an Iranian public enthusiastic about Ahmadinejad's principal opponent, Mir Hossein Mousavi, our scientific sampling from across all 30 of Iran's provinces showed Ahmadinejad well ahead.

Independent and uncensored nationwide surveys of Iran are rare. Typically, pre-election polls there are either conducted or monitored by the government and are notoriously untrustworthy. By contrast, the poll undertaken by our nonprofit organisations from 11 May to 20 May was the third in a series over the past two years. Conducted by telephone from a neighbouring country, field work was carried out in Farsi by a polling company whose work in the region for ABC News and the BBC has received an Emmy award. Our polling was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

The breadth of Ahmadinejad's support was apparent in our pre-election survey. During the campaign, for instance, Mousavi emphasised his identity as an Azeri, the second-largest ethnic group in Iran after Persians, to woo Azeri voters. Our survey indicated, though, that Azeris favoured Ahmadinejad by 2 to 1 over Mousavi.

Much commentary has portrayed Iranian youth and the internet as harbingers of change in this election. But our poll found that only a third of Iranians even have access to the internet, while 18-to-24-year-olds comprised the strongest voting bloc for Ahmadinejad of all age groups.

The only demographic groups in which our survey found Mousavi leading or competitive with Ahmadinejad were university students and graduates, and the highest-income Iranians. When our poll was taken, almost a third of Iranians were also still undecided. Yet the baseline distributions we found then mirror the results reported by the Iranian authorities, indicating the possibility that the vote is not the product of widespread fraud.

Some might argue that the professed support for Ahmadinejad we found simply reflected fearful respondents' reluctance to provide honest answers to pollsters. Yet the integrity of our results is confirmed by the politically risky responses Iranians were willing to give to a host of questions. For instance, nearly four in five Iranians – including most Ahmadinejad supporters – said they wanted to change the political system to give them the right to elect Iran's supreme leader, who is not currently subject to popular vote. Similarly, Iranians chose free elections and a free press as their most important priorities for their government, virtually tied with improving the national economy. These were hardly "politically correct" responses to voice publicly in a largely authoritarian society.

Indeed, and consistently among all three of our surveys over the past two years, more than 70% of Iranians also expressed support for providing full access to weapons inspectors and a guarantee that Iran will not develop or possess nuclear weapons, in return for outside aid and investment. And 77% of Iranians favoured normal relations and trade with the United States, another result consistent with our previous findings.

Iranians view their support for a more democratic system, with normal relations with the United States, as consonant with their support for Ahmadinejad. They do not want him to continue his hard-line policies. Rather, Iranians apparently see Ahmadinejad as their toughest negotiator, the person best positioned to bring home a favourable deal – rather like a Persian Nixon going to China.

Allegations of fraud and electoral manipulation will serve to further isolate Iran and are likely to increase its belligerence and intransigence against the outside world. Before other countries, including the United States, jump to the conclusion that the Iranian presidential elections were fraudulent, with the grave consequences such charges could bring, they should consider all independent information. The fact may simply be that the re-election of President Ahmadinejad is what the Iranian people wanted.

This article originally appeared in the Washington Post.

Ahmadinejad Won. Get Over It | The New America Foundation

Quote:

Ahmadinejad Won. Get Over It
By Flynt Leverett, New America Foundation
with Hillary Mann Leverett
Politico | June 15, 2009

Without any evidence, many U.S. politicians and “Iran experts” have dismissed Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s reelection Friday, with 62.6 percent of the vote, as fraud.

They ignore the fact that Ahmadinejad’s 62.6 percent of the vote in this year’s election is essentially the same as the 61.69 percent he received in the final count of the 2005 presidential election, when he trounced former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. The “Iran experts’” shock at Friday’s results is entirely self-generated, based on their preferred assumptions and wishful thinking.

Although Iran’s elections are not free by Western standards, the Islamic Republic has a 30-year history of highly contested and competitive elections at the presidential, parliamentary, and local levels.

Manipulation has always been there, as it is in many other countries. But upsets occur – as, most notably, with Mohammed Khatami’s surprise victory in the 1997 presidential election. Moreover, “blowouts” also occur – as in Khatami’s re-election in 2001, Ahmadinejad’s first victory in 2005, and, we would argue, this year.

Like much of the Western media, most American “Iran experts” overstated Mir Hossein Mousavi’s “surge” over the campaign’s final weeks. More importantly, they were oblivious – as in 2005 – to Ahmadinejad’s effectiveness as a populist politician and campaigner. American “Iran experts” missed how Ahmadinejad was perceived by most Iranians as having won the nationally televised debates with his three opponents – especially his debate with Mousavi.

Before the debates, both Mousavi and Ahmadinejad campaign aides indicated privately that they perceived a surge of support for Mousavi; after the debates, the same aides concluded that Ahmadinejad’s provocatively impressive performance and Mousavi’s desultory one had boosted the incumbent’s standing. Ahmadinejad’s charge that Mousavi was supported by Rafsanjani’s sons – widely perceived in Iranian society as corrupt figures – seemed to play well with voters.

Similarly, Ahmadinejad’s criticism that Mousavi’s reformist supporters, including former President Khatami, had been willing to suspend Iran’s uranium enrichment program and had won nothing from the West for doing so tapped into popular support for the program – and had the added advantage of being true.

More fundamentally, American “Iran experts” consistently underestimated Ahmadinejad’s base of support. Polling in Iran is notoriously difficult; most polls there are less than fully professional, and hence produce results of questionable validity. But the one poll conducted before Friday’s election by a Western organization that was transparent about its methodology – a telephone poll carried out by the Washington-based Terror-Free Tomorrow (TFT) during May 11-20 – found Ahmadinejad running 20 points ahead of Mousavi. This poll was conducted before the televised debates in which, as noted above, Ahmadinejad was perceived to have done well while Mousavi did poorly.

American “Iran experts” assumed that “disastrous” economic conditions in Iran would undermine Ahmadinejad’s reelection prospects. But the IMF projects that Iran’s economy will actually grow modestly this year (when the economies of most Gulf Arab states are in recession). A significant number of Iranians – including the religiously pious, lower income groups, civil servants, and pensioners – appear to believe that Ahmadinejad’s policies have benefited them.

And, while many Iranians complain about inflation, the TFT poll found that most Iranian voters do not hold Ahmadinejad responsible. The “Iran experts” further argue that the high turnout on June 12 – 82 percent of the electorate – had to favor Mousavi. But this line of analysis reflects nothing more than assumptions.

Some “Iran experts” argue that Mousavi’s Azeri background and “Azeri accent” mean that he was guaranteed to win Iran’s Azeri-majority provinces; since Ahmadinejad did better than Mousavi in these areas, fraud is the only possible explanation.

But Ahmadinejad himself speaks Azeri quite fluently as a consequence of his eight years serving as a popular and successful official in two Azeri-majority provinces; during the campaign, he artfully quoted Azeri and Turkish poetry – in the original – in messages designed to appeal to Iran’s Azeri community. (And, we should not forget that the Supreme Leader is Azeri.) The notion that Mousavi was somehow assured of victory in Azeri-majority provinces is simply not grounded in reality.

With regard to electoral irregularities, the specific criticisms made by Mousavi – such as running out of ballot paper in some precincts and not keeping polls open long enough (even though polls stayed open for at least three hours after the announced closing time) – could not, in themselves, have tipped the outcome so clearly in Ahmadinejad’s favor.

Moreover, these irregularities do not, in themselves, amount to electoral fraud even by American legal standards. And, compared to the U.S. presidential election in Florida in 2000, the flaws in Iran’s electoral process seem less significant.

In the wake of Friday’s election, some “Iran experts” – perhaps feeling burned by their misreading of contemporary political dynamics in the Islamic Republic – argue that we are witnessing a “conservative coup d’état”, aimed at a complete take over of the Iranian state.

But one could more plausibly suggest that, if a “coup” is being attempted, it has been mounted by the losers in Friday’s election. It was Mousavi, after all, who declared victory on Friday even before Iran’s polls closed. And, three days before the election, Mousavi supporter Rafsanjani published a letter criticizing the Leader’s failure to rein in Ahmadinejad’s resort to “such ugly and sin-infected phenomena as insults, lies, and false allegations”. Many Iranians took this letter as an indication that the Mousavi camp was concerned their candidate had fallen behind in the campaign’s closing days.

In light of these developments, many politicians and “Iran experts” argue that the Obama Administration cannot now engage the “illegitimate” Ahmadinejad regime. Certainly, the Administration should not appear to be trying to “play” in the current controversy in Iran about the election. In this regard, President Obama’s comments on Friday, a few hours before the polls closed in Iran, that “just as has been true in Lebanon, what can be true in Iran as well is that you’re seeing people looking at new possibilities” was extremely maladroit.

Among other things, from Tehran’s perspective this observation undercut the credibility of Obama’s acknowledgement, in his Cairo speech earlier this month, of U.S. complicity in overthrowing a democratically elected Iranian government and restoring the Shah in 1953.

The Obama Administration should vigorously rebut any argument against engaging Tehran following Friday’s vote. More broadly, Ahmadinejad’s victory may force President Obama and his senior advisers to come to terms with the deficiencies and internal contradictions in their approach to Iran. Before the Iranian election, the Obama Administration had fallen for the same illusion as many of its predecessors – the illusion that Iranian politics is primarily about personalities and finding the right personality to deal with. That is not how Iranian politics works.

The Islamic Republic is a system with multiple power centers; within that system, there is a strong and enduring consensus about core issues of national security and foreign policy, including Iran’s nuclear program and relations with the United States. Any of the four candidates in Friday’s election would have continued the nuclear program as Iran’s president; none would agree to its suspension.

Any of the four candidates would be interested in a diplomatic opening with the United States, but that opening would need to be comprehensive, respectful of Iran’s legitimate national security interests and regional importance, accepting of Iran’s right to develop and benefit from the full range of civil nuclear technology – including pursuit of the nuclear fuel cycle – and aimed at genuine rapprochement.

Such an approach would also, in our judgment, be manifestly in the interests of the United States and its allies throughout the Middle East. It is time for the Obama Administration to get serious about pursuing this approach – with an Iranian administration headed by the reelected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Copyright 2009, Politico

Don't Assume Ahmadinejad Really Lost - TIME

Quote:

Don't Assume Ahmadinejad Really Lost
By Robert Baer Tuesday, Jun. 16, 2009

There is no denying that the news clips from Tehran are dramatic, unprecedented in violence and size since the mullahs came to power in 1979. They're possibly even augurs of real change. But can we trust them? Most of the demonstrations and rioting I've seen in the news are taking place in north Tehran, around Tehran University and in public places like Azadi Square. These are, for the most part, areas where the educated and well-off live — Iran's liberal middle class. These are also the same neighborhoods that little doubt voted for Mir-Hossein Mousavi, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's rival, who now claims that the election was stolen. But I have yet to see any pictures from south Tehran, where the poor live. Or from other Iranian slums.

Some facts about Iran's election will hopefully emerge in the coming weeks, with perhaps even credible evidence that the election was rigged. But until then, we need to add a caveat to everything we hear and see coming out of Tehran. For too many years now, the Western media have looked at Iran through the narrow prism of Iran's liberal middle class — an intelligentsia that is addicted to the Internet and American music and is more ready to talk to the Western press, including people with money to buy tickets to Paris or Los Angeles. Reading Lolita in Tehran is a terrific book, but does it represent the real Iran?

Before we settle on the narrative that there has been a hard-line takeover in Iran, an illegitimate coup d'état, we need to seriously consider the possibility that there has been a popular hard-line takeover, an electoral mandate for Ahmadinejad and his policies. One of the only reliable, Western polls conducted in the run-up to the vote gave the election to Ahmadinejad — by higher percentages than the 63% he actually received. The poll even predicted that Mousavi would lose in his hometown of Tabriz, a result that many skeptics have viewed as clear evidence of fraud. The poll was taken all across Iran, not just the well-heeled parts of Tehran. Still, the poll should be read with a caveat as well, since some 50% of the respondents were either undecided or wouldn't answer.

No doubt, Iran will come out of last Friday's election a different country. But it would serve us well to put aside our prism that has led us to misunderstand Iran for so many years, an anticipation that there would be a liberal counter-revolution in the country. Mousavi is far from the liberal democrat that many in the West would like to believe he is. The truth is, Ahmadinejad may be the President the Iranians want, and we may have to live with an Iran to Iranians' liking and not to ours.

The absolute worst things we could do at this point would be to declare Iran's election fraudulent, refuse to talk to the regime and pile on more sanctions. Hostility will only strengthen Ahmadinejad and encourage the hard-liners and secret police. We should never forget that Iran's spiritual leader, Ayatullah Khameinei, along with Ahmadinejad, have the full, if undeclared, backing of both the Revolutionary Guards and the army, and they are not afraid to use those resources to back up their mandate.

Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is TIME.com's intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and, most recently, The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower.

Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, is TIME.com's intelligence columnist and the author of See No Evil and, most recently, The Devil We Know: Dealing with the New Iranian Superpower.

**sunnykerr** · 06-15-2009, 06:31 PM

I've heard a lot about the allegations of this being a rigged election.

It's interesting, because both sides seem fairly convincing. Ahmadinejad's camp could easily have messed with the results. The idea that corruption wasn't a valid is ludicrous.

And, yet, going in, all the experts were saying that the oppostion was solid, but by no means guaranteed to carry the majority.

So, there you have it. I have no clue!

Miss Kelsey Rose · 06-15-2009, 07:29 PM

Those poor, innocent people...

I hope everything gets sorted out before more lives are lost. They are in my thoughts.

vc318 · 06-16-2009, 06:45 AM

I think the protesters have finally been heard:

Iran to recount disputed election votes - CNN.com

TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Thousands of supporters of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad crowded the streets of Tehran on Tuesday, amid a dispute over his re-election victory.

Iran's election authority has agreed to recount some votes in the disputed presidential election, but opposition leader Mir Hossein Moussavi rejected the idea, asking instead for fresh elections.

Moussavi's supporters also plan to hold a rally on Tuesday at Vali Asr Square in central Tehran, a day after a massive demonstration in which seven people were killed, according to Iranian government-funded Press TV.

But Moussavi asked his supporters to forego Tuesday's demonstration to avoid a potential clash with Ahmadinejad's backers, an official with his camp said. Iran's government is forbidding foreign media from covering the rallies.

The Ministry of Culture said Tuesday that foreign journalists -- including CNN -- will not be allowed to cover any events in Tehran outside of their offices.

Ahmadinejad's supporters also took to the streets en masse on Sunday to celebrate the official results which showed he secured more than 62 percent of the vote.

Moussavi has contested the results. His supporters have taken to the streets every day, often clashing with police and Ahmadinejad's backers.

Earlier Tuesday, Iran's Guardian Council -- which is made up of top clerics and judges -- said it will recount votes that the opposition questioned in Friday's race.

A spokesman for the council told the official Islamic Republic News Agency that council members met with the three opposition candidates -- Moussavi, Mehdi Karrubi and Mohsen Rezaie -- and asked them to specify the areas where they wanted a recount.

But Moussavi, whose supporters have alleged ballot fraud, wants Iran to hold fresh elections, the official close to his camp said.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said a recount would provide another opportunity for the government to manipulate the results.

He said the council ordered the printing of 53 million ballots for the elections, but only 39 million were used. Fourteen million ballots were missing.

The Guardian Council's surprise announcement follows an apparent U-turn by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who Monday backed down from an earlier endorsement of Ahmadinejad's claimed victory.

Ahmadinejad won Friday's race, surprising many experts who had expected Moussavi to put up a much stronger fight.

Moussavi, a former prime minister looked on as a reformist, enjoys tremendous support among the youth, who make up almost 60 percent of Iran's population of 70 million.

He tapped into their dissatisfaction with the faltering economy under Ahmadinejad and with an unemployment rate that tops 30 percent by some accounts. Video Watch how cyberspace is used by opposition »

But Kaveh Afrasiabi, a political scientist who supports Ahmadinejad, said the incumbent's widespread support in rural areas and small towns was the reason for his win with more than 62 percent of the vote.

Since Moussavi contested the results, his supporters have taken to the streets every day, often clashing with police and Ahmadinejad's backers.

Seven people were killed on Monday night in the capital, Tehran, after they allegedly attacked a military post near Azadi -- or Freedom -- Square, government-funded Press TV said.

The site was the same one where Moussavi had earlier in the day appealed to his supporters -- a crowd of at least 10,000. Video Watch crowds call for change »

Moussavi's presence was his first public appearance since the election. There, he called on authorities to stop attacks on his supporters and urged his followers to continue demonstrating peacefully.

"You are not breaking glass," he said. "You are breaking tyranny."

There's still more to the article if you wish to read it - just click the link. I just hope the real answer comes out but in these sort of things, they rarely do.

**sunnykerr** · 06-16-2009, 04:42 PM

It's interesting that the voters are, more and more, people who don't even know what the country was like before 1979.

vc318 · 06-16-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunnykerr (View Post)

It's interesting that the voters are, more and more, people who don't even know what the country was like before 1979.

I guess in a way that's good. Maybe they're fed up and want a change.

**sunnykerr** · 06-16-2009, 05:04 PM

Oh, it can definitely be a good thing. This isn't a generation that had to give up much. Mind you, I can't imagine they didn't lose members of their families before they were born or when they were very young... but that's not in their memory.

The other part of it, though, is that they didn't see that suffering. So, in a way, it may also lead them to be entirely satisfied with the status quo.


Fan Forum > General Discussion > News & Politics > Ahmadinejad leads in early Iran returns