Read Story HereFraud, corruption, intimidation and discontent – words that sadly describe the outcome of yet another highly questionable election result from the country of Iran.
It’s hard to have a pulse over the past few days and not be aware of the latest turmoil gripping the nation, again the result of an election fiasco in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has apparently survived a challenge from reformer Mir Hossein Mousavi. The election totals beg of questions and have sparked protests from hundreds of thousands of Iranians.
This being Iran it’s hard to imagine an election process void of fraud and intimidation tactics just as it seems unlikely a peaceful and sensible intervention from the country’s government will do justice in quelling the current civil unrest.
Questions regarding the validity of numbers coming out of both pre-election polling and certified results range far wide. Jason Keyser of the Associated Press asked rather bluntly; “how do you count almost 40 million handwritten paper ballots in a matter of hours and declare a winner?” This is one of the many things that are being asked as the country of Iran continues to spiral out of control.
Nate Silver was recognized by Time Magazine as one of the world’s 100 most influential for his fabulous political research and analysis. Blog posting through his popular website fivethirtyeight.com Silver has been all over the results of Iran’s Presidential election. At first Silver did not seem particularly comfortable with joining the chorus line of jeering spectators claiming fraud. Then findings compliments of both dependable outside sources and his own numbers crunching placed him in a position where he too is now forced to question the validity of these election results
One of the early signs of possible election fraud stems from a comparison Silver made from data coming out of the Iranian province of Lorestan. In 2005 conservative candidates in a competitive field pulled in just 20% of the popular vote there but Ahmadinejad took over 70% of the vote in this year’s election. Oddly there was something of a counter outlier in the Tehran Province, where conservative candidates Ahmadinejad and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf “actually didn't do all that badly in 2005 but did relatively poorly on Friday” as illustrated by Silver.
Then Silver picked up on something that seemed a little "fishy". There is by law a three day window where candidates can contest election results before they are certified, and yet in spite of angry calls of fraud from Mousavi and his supporters the totals have been “certified, approved and released before the three day deadline.” Then the totals were suddenly removed or disappeared from English translation. This followed with research on the performance of others candidates like Mahdi Karroubi who pulled in just around 2% of the vote in his native and neighboring provinces of Lorestan and Khuzestan – two provinces he won outright in 2005. Head scratching figures.
It’s hard to have a pulse over the past few days and not be aware of the latest turmoil gripping the nation, again the result of an election fiasco in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has apparently survived a challenge from reformer Mir Hossein Mousavi. The election totals beg of questions and have sparked protests from hundreds of thousands of Iranians.
This being Iran it’s hard to imagine an election process void of fraud and intimidation tactics just as it seems unlikely a peaceful and sensible intervention from the country’s government will do justice in quelling the current civil unrest.
Questions regarding the validity of numbers coming out of both pre-election polling and certified results range far wide. Jason Keyser of the Associated Press asked rather bluntly; “how do you count almost 40 million handwritten paper ballots in a matter of hours and declare a winner?” This is one of the many things that are being asked as the country of Iran continues to spiral out of control.
Nate Silver was recognized by Time Magazine as one of the world’s 100 most influential for his fabulous political research and analysis. Blog posting through his popular website fivethirtyeight.com Silver has been all over the results of Iran’s Presidential election. At first Silver did not seem particularly comfortable with joining the chorus line of jeering spectators claiming fraud. Then findings compliments of both dependable outside sources and his own numbers crunching placed him in a position where he too is now forced to question the validity of these election results
One of the early signs of possible election fraud stems from a comparison Silver made from data coming out of the Iranian province of Lorestan. In 2005 conservative candidates in a competitive field pulled in just 20% of the popular vote there but Ahmadinejad took over 70% of the vote in this year’s election. Oddly there was something of a counter outlier in the Tehran Province, where conservative candidates Ahmadinejad and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf “actually didn't do all that badly in 2005 but did relatively poorly on Friday” as illustrated by Silver.
Then Silver picked up on something that seemed a little "fishy". There is by law a three day window where candidates can contest election results before they are certified, and yet in spite of angry calls of fraud from Mousavi and his supporters the totals have been “certified, approved and released before the three day deadline.” Then the totals were suddenly removed or disappeared from English translation. This followed with research on the performance of others candidates like Mahdi Karroubi who pulled in just around 2% of the vote in his native and neighboring provinces of Lorestan and Khuzestan – two provinces he won outright in 2005. Head scratching figures.
Silver discussed prior to the Friday election that the historical trend in Iran is that of the higher the turnout the lower the win percentage. Such findings would contradict Ahmadinejad’s easy victory in what was expected to be a highly competitive election with huge turnout.
From numbers crunching election results to polling.
From numbers crunching election results to polling.
As is known in the western world, pre-election polling serves many purposes, one of them as a useful tool of scrutiny. Even in a sophisticated democratic culture like that of the United States polling at times misleads and misrepresents however, just as election results often come into question. Imagine then the difficult task presented to anyone trying to accurately poll the citizens of Iran.
In late May Ken Ballen and Patrick Doherty of the non-profit group Terror Free Tomorrow polled 1,001 Iranians on their preferences regarding candidates and issues. This was no easy chore and their diligence ought to be applauded especially as the only real cop on the beat. The results of this poll were released last week and they suggested a favorable outcome for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranian President took in 34% support against just 14% for his chief opponent Moussavi, with a strikingly high 27% of voters suggesting they were still undecided.
Just as he finds much to question with the Election Day results however Nate Silver is not satisfied with the findings of this "TFT" poll. The 27% of “undecideds” just weeks before a highly publicized election strikes him as odd, perhaps bordering on impossible. Silver notes the “15.1% of those respondents who refused to disclose who they were voting for” as justification for scrutiny of Ballen and Doherty’s numbers as well as hinting at the plausibility that voter intimidation played a key role in the results conveyed in this poll as well as the election itself.
When crossing numbers of candidate preference with those of social issues the poll eludes to a reformist stance being held by many if not most Iranians. Would it not seem odd that so many of those supposed undecided voters, many of them pro-west, pro-trade, pro-free press among other progressive stances would break so heavily for a conservative hard-liner such as Ahmadinejad? As Silver surmises the Terror Free Tomorrow poll could actually have been correct in detailing the politics of intimidation that continue to grip Iran’s citizenry.
Sure enough a statement made by the poll researchers in a CNN article posted last Monday seems to contradict the eventual results in which Ahmadinejad was purportedly reelected with nearly 63% of the vote.
Just as he finds much to question with the Election Day results however Nate Silver is not satisfied with the findings of this "TFT" poll. The 27% of “undecideds” just weeks before a highly publicized election strikes him as odd, perhaps bordering on impossible. Silver notes the “15.1% of those respondents who refused to disclose who they were voting for” as justification for scrutiny of Ballen and Doherty’s numbers as well as hinting at the plausibility that voter intimidation played a key role in the results conveyed in this poll as well as the election itself.
When crossing numbers of candidate preference with those of social issues the poll eludes to a reformist stance being held by many if not most Iranians. Would it not seem odd that so many of those supposed undecided voters, many of them pro-west, pro-trade, pro-free press among other progressive stances would break so heavily for a conservative hard-liner such as Ahmadinejad? As Silver surmises the Terror Free Tomorrow poll could actually have been correct in detailing the politics of intimidation that continue to grip Iran’s citizenry.
Sure enough a statement made by the poll researchers in a CNN article posted last Monday seems to contradict the eventual results in which Ahmadinejad was purportedly reelected with nearly 63% of the vote.
Though our poll results show President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the lead, it
appears that that none of the presidential candidates will pass the 50 percent
threshold needed to automatically win; a second-round runoff between the two
highest finishers - as things stand, Ahmadinejad and Mir Hussein Moussavi - is
likely.” – Ken Ballen, Amjad Atallah / Special to CNN
The numbers could also be correct or flawed in a more standard and legitimate sense. In any event polling and analysis on the issue provide little more than a mixed bag of a data. Still this data cannot be ignored. If there is a massive conspiracy being orchestrated by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s political supporters, or perhaps the Supreme Leader himself it is not likely to be uncovered quickly or easily.
The outside world will likely view this as another frustrating setback in a continuous wave of strained relations with the country. The citizens of Iran meanwhile seem stuck treading the rocky waters of yet another election.
The outside world will likely view this as another frustrating setback in a continuous wave of strained relations with the country. The citizens of Iran meanwhile seem stuck treading the rocky waters of yet another election.
No comments:
Post a Comment