Low Turnout Seen In Iranian Election

Pro-Ahmadinejad Hardliners Expected To Dominate Vote As Many Reformists Are Disqualified

(CBS/AP)  Voters at a Teheran mosque Friday morning were the stars of Iran's democratic show for the world's media.

But as soon as CBS News correspondent Elizabeth Palmer asked one man why authorities had banned all the reform candidates, a plainclothes policeman appeared, and tried to censor his answer.

He needn't have bothered: "We love our leader," the man said.

He is one of the regime's diehard loyalists, who wouldn't dream of criticizing - or casting a vote for anyone else.

Critics see the overall low turnout as a sign of frustration with a vote that hardliners allied with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are expected to dominate.

Lineups did develop at a few spots in the capital, but they were at major mosques where most voters were expected to back pro-Ahmadinejad candidates.

But at dozens of polling stations in schools, universities and other mosques around the city, voters dribbled in slowly.

Most supported reformists, bringing in newspaper lists of reformist candidates for Tehran's 30 seats.

Iran's reformist movement, which seeks democratic changes at home and better ties with the West, has largely been sidelined in the race after most of its candidates were barred from running by Iran's clerical leadership.

With reformists crippled, the race is instead a test of Ahmadinejad's support among conservatives, some of whom have been disillusioned with the president since he came to office in 2005. Ahmadinejad could face a challenge from moderate conservatives in presidential elections next year.

Palmer reports the election is really a contest "between the hard-liners, and the not-quite-so-hard-liners," leaving thousands of young Iranians who do crave real change disillusioned and disinterested in the vote.

The Guardian Council - an unelected body of clerics and jurists - disqualified around 1,700 candidates, mostly reformists, on the grounds they were insufficiently loyal to Islam or Iran's 1979 revolution. The reformist candidates who remain are mostly little-known to the public.

Critics say Ahmadinejad has fumbled efforts to fix the economy of this oil-rich nation - hit by high inflation and unemployment and fuel shortages. They blame his fiery manner for worsening the standoff with the West, bringing on U.N. sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.

The key question will be the performance of Ahmadinejad's conservative critics, a year ahead of presidential elections when he could face a challenge by moderate conservative candidates, many of whom call themselves "modernizers", reports Palmer.

A strong showing Friday by the Inclusive Coalition of Principlists - a slate of candidates that includes conservative critics of the president - would be a sign of Ahmadinejad's waning support.

The list allegedly has the support of Tehran's popular mayor, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, a conservative who is often cited as a possible rival to Ahmadinejad in the 2009 election.

Another key candidate in Friday's race is Ali Larijani, who stepped down as Iran's top nuclear negotiator because of differences with Ahmadinejad. Larijani, who is Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's personal representative on the Supreme National Security Council, is running for parliament from the city of Qom and has sometimes also been cited as a possible presidential candidate in 2009.

Palmer says Larijani, seen at left, has indicated a desire to try and mend the virtually non-existent diplomatic relationship with the West, including the United States government, should he come to power.

At a number of polling stations at mosques in southern Tehran, there were lines of 50 to 60 people soon after voting began Friday morning, with a steady flow of people coming in throughout the following hours.

Many filled their ballots by picking names from print-outs of the United Front of Principlists, a slate dominated by Ahmadinejad allies.

Mustafa Rajabi, a 33-year-old government worker, said he voted for backers of the president. "This is my duty to keep the country stable," he said, standing with his wife, who wore a black chador robe draped over her head and body, and their two children, too young to vote.

Polling stations are set up in mosques, schools and universities. Mosques are seen as more likely to draw conservative voters, schools and universities more moderate voters - though such distinctions are not clear cut since many people vote at whatever station is closer. Voters can cast ballots at whatever station they choose in their city.

In contrast, polls in several schools of northern Tehran and at Khajeh Nasir University were all but empty early Friday, with 5 or 6 people in each.

"Many students and activists have been under pressure because of their political activities," said Reza Kolahroudi, a 22-year-student who showed up to vote for reformists. "I hope reformists can change the current situation."

Some 4,500 candidates nationwide are running for parliament's 290 seats in Friday's vote. But reformists say they don't have candidates in around 200 of the races.

Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has backed conservatives, saying earlier this week that Iranians should elect anti-U.S. candidates "whose loyalties are to Islam and justice."

The disqualifications have divided reform supporters, some of whom have decided to boycott the vote. But reform leaders are pressing them to go to the polls, hoping to at least build a strong minority bloc, rather than the handful of seats they now have.

Former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a powerful member of the clerical leadership seen as a top rival of Ahmadinejad, tried to convince the boycotters to vote.

"To be reluctant and say why we should participate in the election is a kind of self-destruction," said Rafsanjani, a conservative who has grown closer to reformists. "This will lead to the absence of their favorite candidates in the council," he said, according to the state news agency IRNA.

Turnout among the estimated 44 million eligible voters is a key issue. In 2004 elections, which were swept by hard-liners after most reform candidates were barred from the race, turnout was around 51 percent. In previous votes won by reformists, it was closer to 80 percent. Reformists say they have the support of a silent majority that, if it votes, swings elections to them.

Outside mosques, young boys were urging any reluctant passers-by to come in and vote for conservatives.

Many people were more concerned with shopping, packing malls and shops on main street to prepare for the Iranian New Year, Nowruz, which takes place next week. Sherine Faraji said she might vote in the afternoon after shopping.

"If I get to the polls, I'll vote for reformists. They don't bother women," said Faraji, who wore a tight-fitting jacket and a colorful headscarf that showed much of her hair. Conservatives seek to enforce a stricter female dress code covering the entire hair and hiding the body from head to toe.

Reformists held parliament from 2000 to 2004. During that time, they loosened Islamic social restrictions. But hard-liners, who control the unelected clerical bodies whose powers trump the parliament and president, prevented deep political change.

If reformers fail to win a significant parliament minority in Friday's vote, it will illustrate the endurance of conservatives' lock on power, with the clerical leadership able to thwart any reformist comeback.

[libsrweak]

Why, because I can''''t even hold a sign against any major matter unless I am ready to go to jail.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by DHAMODOT at 12:27 PM : Mar 16, 2008
+ report abuse


***********

maybe you are just an idiot who cannot create and hold a sign OR YOU ARE JUST A SIMPLE LAZY INSTIGATOR..

you can protest as long as your protest in non-violent and does nto disrupt..meaning NO it is not democratic to bomb the white hous e as a form of protesting..YOU ARE A SUCH A MORON..

[dhamodot]

And in USA, do we vote for Supreme Court Judges? Many ministers, White House Speaker, etc are appointed by a jerk who end up being the president. I can be wrong to a degree, but I know that not everything is controled by the people. This country is NOT a good example of Democracy and Freedom. Why, because I can''t even hold a sign against any major matter unless I am ready to go to jail.

[zootallures2]

But hard-liners, who control the unelected clerical bodies...

And in the US you elect the Judicial branch? Since when? You vote for the supreme court judges?

[zootallures2]

US and A is the one with low voter turn outs and rigged elections.

Where is the propaganda story of the "pulverized" building hit by a crane? Don''t mention it was all brick and there was no pyroclastic clouds. Don''t mention the crane was steel and the building was not. Or that aluminum is even softer than bricks. Or that a brick building is shatterd by a tornado while steel and concrete buildings and over passes is uneffected.

[zootallures2]

Oh, like the western media would report high voter turn out and fair elections that showed strong approval of Ahmadinejad. Yea, Iran wants to reform and be like the US, who supported Saddam, gave him chemical weapons, over-threw their elected leader to put in the Shah, and shot down one of their civilian passenger planes.

[tbweb]

I mean look if Obama, Clinton did not prosternate before AIPAC and pledge for Israel security, they would not be dreaming...

Posted by grazinggoat at 04:13 PM : Mar 14, 2008,,,

The strong link between the U.S. and Israel has less to do with AIPAC and the Israeli Lobby and more to do with Christianity, Religion, the Holy Bible, Jesus and Israels Biblical History, the Israeli link and glue to the U.S. is all about Religion but no one dare "officially" claim that!

[ajmarine1]

AJMarine .. what does have to do with elections in Iran?

Or do you simply spam that anywhere you see something vaguely political?

Posted by cyberus at 08:33 PM : Mar 14, 2008


No one was here when I did that post.

I just threw it in as food for thought.



"McCain has to acknowledge that our current level of involvement is unsustainable, while Obama has to acknowledge that the situation is improving. Both must show a willingness to plan according to the realities, or this still could be the issue that decides the election."



My point being, whoever gets into the White House will have some adjustments to make in there stated policies on Iraq and Iran.

[cyberus-2009]

AJMarine .. what does have to do with elections in Iran?

Or do you simply spam that anywhere you see something vaguely political?

[jwind11]

fredgrad2000,,,, Go back to school

Posted by j-whitman at 04:24 PM : Mar 14, 2008

at least he can spell moron

[ajmarine1]

I think the candidate who is seen as the most willing to be flexible about our future solutions in Iraq is the one who will ultimately win this issue. If the public starts to see McCain in the same way they see Bush (as a stubborn man unwilling to move away from losing strategies) then he is dead in the water. Likewise, if they see Obama as someone who stubbornly sticks with his story that the war is lost in spite of all of the growing evidence that things are improving, then it could reinforce the underlying problem of some seeing him as naive due to inexperience. McCain has to acknowledge that our current level of involvement is unsustainable, while Obama has to acknowledge that the situation is improving. Both must show a willingness to plan according to the realities, or this still could be the issue that decides the election.


http://www.coldheartedtruth.com/

Part 2

[ajmarine1]

This year, in what appeared to be a no-brainer, the Democrats have been tripping over each other arguing about who opposed the war first, who opposes it the most, who opposes the surge the most, who would declare defeat get us out the quickest. But once again it seems that the public is moving away from the positions that seems so certain just a few months ago. This same Pew poll is showing pluralities (or even majorities) citing improvement in almost every aspect of both the military and political situations in Iraq. People in large part are rejecting the argument that the troop surge has failed and that the war is lost.

Now granted, I think that despite the results of this poll, a vast majority still wants to see our troop levels decline. They do want to see some effort to create some time-table for withdraw. But I think they would prefer that our military and intelligence officials are making these calls, rather than our politicians. I think the American people are getting sort of a second wind here and they would be willing to live with a military presence in Iraq as long as conditions in Iraq are improving, especially if our military commanders can start calling for troop reductions.

Part 1

[j-whitman]

fredgrad2000,,,, Interviews with Iraqi troops show everyone of them watch our politics & news --- They are all hoping for a win by either Hillary or Obama, they''ve seen what republicans do.

[j-whitman]

fredgrad2000,,,, Go back to school

[fredgrad2000]

To even give the mullahs use of the word "elections" to describe what happened today is disingenuous; the mullahs banned anyone who doesn''t believe the hidden imam is hiding in a well outside Qom, ready to return as long as your abuse your women, support terrorists, support nuke weapons, and agree that a Muslim Napolean is a great leader (even though he can''t manage to do anything other run his mouth).

Now, they are not on the same level, but we in America have our own Guardian Councils as well; organizations our candidates must kow-tow to in order to be allowed into the general election, and we all know who they are (BIG BIG difference is they don''t execute you for calling them for what they are and they aren''t terrorists): All Dems must bow at the anti-war altar of MoveOn.org and CodePink; otherwise Soros and Co. will smear and distort and try to destroy them (see Joe Lieberman for example; or see how quickly Hillary and Barack have run to the left since their presidential campaigns began) and all Republicans have to bow to the Christian Coalition; though I am so proud to say that their power must be waning because if it wasn''t, John McCain, who has been disparaged by many of the Dobson/Falwell ilk would never have become the GOP nominee. Perhaps, just perhaps, McCain will vanquish the GOP Guardian Council; too bad there''s no Dem with the cojones to take down the Dem Guardian Council; all the Dem candidates are dutifully worshipping at the MoveOn altar this election cycle.

[j-whitman]

crusherking,,,, I''ve been having these problems too, maybe CBS should give their people better coffee.

If McCain wasn''t such a staunch supporter of Bush''s policies -

-- We would all be sitting around still with our homes intact smoking Cuban cigars celibrating the total defeat of Al Queda & the Taliban & the capture & trial of Ossama Bin Laden

[ajmarine1]

The suspicion is that the authorities are in two minds about what sort of turnout they want.

They need enough voters to endorse the legitimacy of what they still insist is a democratic process.

But too high a turnout might encourage those who have given up on the government to go out and register their protest, if they can find a like-minded candidate who has not been disqualified.

Some observers mischievously suggest the turnout has already been decreed as a safe 51% - the same as last time.

Maybe that is unfair. But the result certainly seems entirely predictable.

Control of parliament is almost certain to remain with the conservatives, or "principalists" as they prefer to call themselves - how can you be a conservative and a revolutionary at the same time, after all?

http://tinyurl.com/2pslhz

Here we go, nice free open elections! B.S. period. When you start "disqualifying" candidates because they aren''t islamic enough or want a freer country you have a dictatorship. I know the leading cleric will say the elections are free but as we can all see they are neither free or open.
What is being created and continueing to eveolve is a country of people fored / raised to hate westerners and directly America and her people.
I say that if Iran doesn''t want to be part of the world and follow the UN, expell them and cut off all commerce with them, no exceptions.
Maybe being the worlds only nation to have zero outside contact would help change the closed mind thinking of their leadership.

[grazinggoat]

Selective, restrictive and limited participation on who is allowed to run is not Democracy, its bogus elections, stacking the deck in your favor out of fear of losing, like the Russian elections, all the while allowing Iran to claim it had a Vote!

Posted by tbweb at 08:35 AM : Mar 14, 2008

-You think a communist or a Castrist (not castratist, lol!) run in an election? I mean look if Obama, Clinton did not prosternate before AIPAC and pledge for Israel security, they would not be dreaming...

-Almost the same. Look how much coverage did RonPaul get from the press, or Ralph Nader would have...

[crusherking]

Jwhit,
Hope this is not a repost.. Didn''t seem to go through so I will post again.

I''ll still take McCain over Obama or Hilary any day. I just can''t bear the thought of having an American hating (semi) Muslim in the Oval Office nor can I stand the thought of Bill in the white house time(and probably interns) on his hands. Ok. So the Bill comment was just a joke. I really can''t stand the thought of Hilary taking us down the road to socialism full steam ahead.

[crusherking]

Jwhit,
Hope this is not a repost.. Didn''t seem to go through so I will post again.

I''ll still take McCain over Obama or Hilary any day. I just can''t bear the thought of having an American hating (semi) Muslim in the Oval Office nor can I stand the thought of Bill in the white house time(and probably interns) on his hands. Ok. So the Bill comment was just a joke. I really can''t stand the thought of Hilary taking us down the road to socialism full steam ahead.