Provincial Election Returns
Nate Silver was provided with an English translation of the official report of provincial election results by Daniel Berman and other graduate students at the U of St. Andrews.
I continue to find these figures unlikely. There is very little variation in Ahmadinejad's numbers across provinces, except in two cases. In past elections the numbers have been all over the place. And that he took Isfahan province, with its big urban center, by 69% would, well, require explanation. Although this press release is now admitting that Ahmadinejad lost in largely Sunni Sistan & Baluchistan, where he is hated, on Saturday the government was leaking that he had won there. My guess is that by Sunday night they had been roundly told that announcing such an outcome made them look ridiculous, so they toned it down.
That Karoubi got 5% of the vote in his home province is also suspicious.
h/t Chris Good
End/ (Not Continued)
posted by Juan Cole @ 6/15/2009 05:19:00 PM
|
Facebook
8 Comments:
Among my family members, relatives, and friends are supporters of Mousavi and Ahmadinejad. Personally, I support the reformists and voted for them, although I believe they genuinely lost the elections.
What is striking is that before the elections, each side was absolutely certain that over 80% of the population supported its candidate.
This is typical of my experience in the last 30 years. For example, if you ask an Iranian opponent of the Islamic Republic what the Iranian people think, he'll typically say, "Oh, over 90% are against the regime." If you ask a supporter the same question, he'll say, "Over 90% support the system." Each side says that the nation as a whole is on his side.
What is more, people say these things with absolute conviction. When I try to cite evidence that maybe they should not be so certain about such claims, they react with disbelief and outrage. They wonder how I can raise doubts about what "everybody knows" and what is "as plain as daylight."
Mousavi and his supporters are utterly convinced that the vast majority of voters voted for him. They're absolutely sincere in their conviction. They consider the results of the elections utterly absurd and inconceivable.
The only thing that sustains this conviction is the large pro-Mousavi rallies in Tehran. These rallies convinced them that the people supported him. But then Ahmadinejad had his own rallies.
Now, combine this unshakable certitude that your views are the views of "the people" with a propensity for conspiracy theories, and it becomes as "clear as daylight" to you that the elections must have been rigged.
The fact that there is not a shred of evidence (yet) that the elections were stolen is irrelevant.
As someone who often finds George Friedman's analysis persuasive, I'd be interested in your comment on his posting today -- http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20090615_western_misconceptions_meet_iranian_reality -- that it's unlikely the election was in fact stolen, but that we have been getting a skewed perception of the majority of the populace's sentiments.
Why dose not Mousavi call for a re-count?
I am hoping that proof of fraud appears. Otherwise, having the entire Western establishment falsely claiming massive system-wide fraud in an Iranian election will only further the resolve of the hardliners. It is a dangerous game being played inside Iran and out.
Excuse me for not being impressed with the supposed proof being cited by serious people like our host. First off, the fix would have to be too big, too complex. The Iranian electoral system is no great example but it does have some basic checks and balances. Most importantly, you've got 130,000 people, including Mousavi's, watching each and every vote tally locally. Mousavi should have had a person in every voting location. To my knowledge, we have not heard from any of them suggesting widespread fraud with the numbers recorded in their districts. Nothing that would get anywhere near the 11 million vote spread we are talking about.
The original "proof" allegedly found in the straight "linear progression" of the results has been exposed as faulty (the Obama-McCain showed the same pattern). The idea that young people don't like Ahmeadinejad is pure bull (they are his #1 fan base, according to polling - WaPo), as is the notion that he is not popular in every province. Again, highly respected polling disproved that. Trouble is, all the media cares about is people with twitter and facebook accounts.
Khamenei would obviously have to be in on this, if massive fraud is to be believed. But why? The current situation is far more dangerous to regime stability than a Mousavi victory. Let's remember that Mousavi was not exactly a counter-revolutionary secularist. So why?
What do you think of Ballen and Doherty's OpEd?
--Charles of MercuryRising
www.phoenixwoman.wordpress.com
Prof. Cole, why do not remember that the "reformist" (i.e. USA favorite) candidat clamed his victory BEFORE any results? Was it NOT fishy? Or is he above ANY suspicions?
In short, if one does not like something, it is not an argument. I do not like results of Israel elections, but I know that in such state one could not expect anything other.
Hello Juan and All,
"In past elections the numbers have been all over the place." Yes, but the history of elections is short. With such heady current issues, why think that there has been some pattern established upon which one may base final judgment? I do acknowledge though that you, Juan, have not yet chiseled anything in granite in your post. Pre-election and independent polling done by mainstream-American pollsters showed Ahmadinejad with the lead.
http://www.realliberalchristianchurch.org/?p=3189
I posted that before I knew about the Interior Ministry's legal control of the process and ballots, etc. I also realize you have other sources and access. What I haven't done, for lack of time, is to compare that polling region-by-region and city-by-city to the "official" results. I assume someone is doing just that and that the results will be forthcoming.
There was a large "undecided" (or unwilling to reveal) going into the election. That's important to keep in mind no matter what.
If they did fudge the ballot numbers, it was a stupid thing to do. Regardless, everyone should reserve final judgment until there is more evidence even if real evidence is not possible to ascertain what with the way the Interior Ministry controls elections. I believe you are doing that (reserving final judgment).
Are the Muslim leaders adhering to the Islamic requirement not to cheat?
Is the Interior Ministry a rogue element vis-à-vis the theocratic leadership?
Peace,
Tom Usher
Let me play devil's advocate for a moment. Karoubi got a small percent of the vote, but wasn't he a distant third? Would it be fair to compare him to Dennis Kucinich, who also runs for President but doesn't make it very far?
Post a Comment
<< Home