72% Of Registered Iraqis Voted

[Biggie]

Canada hasn't had a turnout like that since the 1960s, which is pretty incredible considering how dangerous Iraq is.

[summerbronze]

What it is, is downright embarassing. We take democracy for granted. We take such a basic right for granted, and so many of us don't take the time to get off our lazy asses to participate in elections.

 

The turnout for the Iraqi election puts us to shame. Every single one of the 8 million or so who voted risked their lives in order to cast their ballot. There was absolutely no way of knowing if there may have been a suicide bomber outside the polling station they were going to.

Unfortunately at least 20 people did not return alive from the polling stations.

 

Relatedly, I was shocked and offended to hear Bush describe the election as a "resounding success". If anyone was wounded or killed in the US as a result of simply going out to vote, it would be deemed as a national

"tragedy". Such language seems so inappropriate it's almost unbelieveable. An Iraqi election during which no one is killed, if and when that day comes, will be a success. Then and only then.

[jhark]

Please dont be so naive --> its not true

 

Maybe 'Big brother' says that 72% of iraqis voted but we all know its someones agenda. Statistics are rule number one in the propagnada guide book.

[Biggie]

So... what's the truth?

 

And would you tell 8 million Iraqis who risked their lives and voted in a real election (meaning more than just one candidate) today for the first time in a generation that they're just part of some conspiracy? Just wondering...

[jhark]

Thats the point unles you are over there experiencing the election you dont know the truth. All your being told is the brave iraqis freed by the americans are standing up in the face of evil oppositon to come out to your so called 'real election'. Thank you george bush for the war! We knew you had a point to all the destrustion!! thank you thank you we can VOTE!! Even if the candidates wont even reveal their names ahah that doesnt matter im sure 72% of us will vote anyways.

 

Dont get me wrong i dont belive the iraqi people are part of a conspiracy, its not them its us. Are minds are all warped by the news and its all twisted in favour of the west. Until we have media we can trust there is no way i believe anything we are told about the iraqis, and my heart goes out to them.

[toolboxnj]

Please dont be so naive --> its not true

 

Maybe 'Big brother' says that 72% of iraqis voted but we all know its someones agenda. Statistics are rule number one in the propagnada guide book.

So, if dozens of credible news agencies (including foreign press not friendly to the Bush Admin) reported the same numbers without much question you still wouldn't be satisfied?

 

Why are you sulking around when this is certainly a day to celebrate?

[Biggie]

What media do you read? I try to access a good cross-section of sources, such as the NY Times, AP, Reuters, al-jazeera, cnn, etc, and then form an opinion If you don't trust what you read from certain sources, you should search harder. The internet is a wealth of information.

 

In the sense that 30 to 40 Iraqis died going to the polls, it wasn't successful. However, put Iraq into the context of the war zone which it is. A majority of eligible voters risked everything to go to the polls and reject tyranny. Upwards of eight million people gave a collective "fuck you" to the insurgents who want efforts to create a democracy to fail. The election was a success, and will have positive effects on the future of the country.

[ecnarf]

Funny thing, I was just listening to the radio - 72% of registered expatriate iraqis living in canada had voted. The figure on actual voting in Iraq was 60%.

[Biggie]

"They originally put it at 72 percent but later backtracked, saying possibly eight million had voted, or just over 60 percent of registered voters."

 

You're right, but 60 is still a hell of a lot better than what Canada or the US gets in peace time!

[ecnarf]

"They originally put it at 72 percent but later backtracked, saying possibly eight million had voted, or just over 60 percent of registered voters."

 

You're right, but 60 is still a hell of a lot better than what Canada or the US gets in peace time!

Hey, as long as I'm right...

[summerbronze]

Please dont be so naive --> its not true

 

Maybe 'Big brother' says that 72% of iraqis voted but we all know its someones agenda. Statistics are rule number one in the propagnada guide book.

Today or 3 weeks from today I would not rely on a specific statistic : 60% vs 72% - in that sense, you're right, we would be naive to think we'll get the objective "true" number.

However I think it's naive to think that there is not a shred of truth in the media and write it off completely. This is just as dangerous as taking everything you read as absolute truth.

 

Yes - it's amazing that so many people risked their lives to excercise a right we take for granted. I didn't mean to downplay that this must be recognized. I cannot bring myself to use the word 'success' to describe it because of the loss of life. Any event that leads to the unnecessary loss of life is by definition a tragedy.

[toolboxnj]

 

Edited January 30, 2005 by toolboxnj

[summerbronze]

As stated ; of course it would be naive to think the media is objective and unbiased, or to ignore the role of propaganda in all news sources.

 

This is where consulting as many sources as possible and critical reading of these sources comes in handy. You have to rely on the media for information - so you have to be able to make sense of what you read, sift through it and combine the most educated and objective picture of the situation as possible. And it's never going to be 100% objective, even though in an ideal world it should be.

[jhark]

Okay im not sulking, the steps taken by brave iraqis is all very good

 

But the people behind this election are americans you cant agrue that they have their hand in everything thats happened there for the last few years. They are the running the election and they could plausibly come up up with any number they wanted and report that to any press they wanted --> even foreign press against the bush Admin. Im sorry for seeming negative but people living in north america need to realize it!! The only way i support americans in iraq is if they start to work together with the opposing groups there today. This seems impossible i know but right now all they're going to accomplish is spliting the country in two.

[Biggie]

Which opposing groups? The ones who target civilians in suicide bombings?

[jhark]

yea i know it sounds impossible but im sure at one point to iraqis the fall of saddam seemed impossible. You just cant process a revolutionary way of thinking. You say; they kill, they are bad, they have to held down. Nothing holds these things down... the only way to stop is too try to unserstand it and make peace with them. Iraqis will never be safe until this happens.

[Biggie]

The insurgents don't give a damn about the average Iraqi. Most of them are foreign, anyways. If they truly cared, they wouldn't kill so many people.

 

You're right. I can't process your way of thinking...

[Clayton]

and obviously our elections dont have a turnout because (before late) the liberals were really the only strong party.

 

I think in the next couple of elections we'll see growing numbers now that it will begin to affect people

[jhark]

The insurgents don't give a damn about the average Iraqi. Most of them are foreign, anyways. If they truly cared, they wouldn't kill so many people.

 

You're right. I can't process your way of thinking...

I think alot of the problems in our world come down to that one simple statement. We think differently

 

How are whole countries supposed to get along when even we cant agree? Are we just doomed?

[Biggie]

There's nothing wrong with disagreeing. But there's something profoundly wrong with detonating car bombs outside police stations instead of engaging in legitimate political discourse.

[jhark]

I dont disagree, but it seems to me thats still happening in the world, so maybe what ever we are trying to do to stop it isnt working. Some new ideas need to be brought to the table, so that next election voting wont have to be an act of bravery.

[ecnarf]

 

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com

 

http://raedinthemiddle.blogspot.com

 

I can go on.

 

EDIT: i'd also like to know why people think the insurgents will stop bombing people now that there has been an election. These guys know how to play ball, they won't give up just because a bunch of people turned out to vote. Who knows who everyone voted for? A vote is not necessarily a vote against insurgents, it's not a vote supporting the U.S. administration, and it's not a vote supporing the occupation. A vote is only a vote once its been counted. Just remember there are no international elections observers in Iraq.

 

Oh, Colorado had 88% voting turnout last November. And I can't remember what the overal turnout in the U.S. was, but I think it was in the ballpark of over 50 percent.

Edited January 31, 2005 by ecnarf

[no yu begin wher i end]

If you don't mind me playing devil's advocate for a bit...

 

 

U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote :

Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror

 

by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times (9/4/1967: p. 2)

 

WASHINGTON, Sept. 3-- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

 

According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday.  Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.

 

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here.

 

Pending more detailed reports, neither the State Department nor the White House would comment on the balloting or the victory of the military candidates, Lieut. Gen. Nguyen Van Thieu, who was running for president, and Premier Nguyen Cao Ky, the candidate for vice president.

A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam.  The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in January, 1966, to which President Johnson gave his personal commitment when he met Premier Ky and General Thieu, the chief of state, in Honolulu in February.

 

The purpose of the voting was to give legitimacy to the Saigon Government, which has been founded only on coups and power plays since November, 1963, when President Ngo Dinh Deim was overthrown by a military junta.

 

Few members of that junta are still around, most having been ousted or exiled in subsequent shifts of power.

 

Significance Not Diminished

 

The fact that the backing of the electorate has gone to the generals who have been ruling South Vietnam for the last two years does not, in the Administration's view, diminish the significance of the constitutional step that has been taken.

 

The hope here is that the new government will be able to maneuver with a confidence and legitimacy long lacking in South Vietnamese politics.  That hope could have been dashed either by a small turnout, indicating widespread scorn or a lack of interest in constitutional development, or by the Vietcong's disruption of the balloting.

 

American officials had hoped for an 80 per cent turnout.  That was the figure in the election in September for the Constituent Assembly.  Seventy-eight per cent of the registered voters went to the polls in elections for local officials last spring.

 

Before the results of the presidential election started to come in, the American officials warned that the turnout might be less than 80 per cent because the polling place would be open for two or three hours less than in the election a year ago.  The turnout  of 83 per cent was a welcome surprise.  The turnout in the 1964 United States Presidential election was 62 per cent.

 

Captured documents and interrogations indicated in the last week a serious concern among Vietcong leaders that a major effort would be required to render the election meaningless.  This effort has not succeeded, judging from the reports from Saigon.

 

NYT. 9/4/1967: p. 2.

 

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nytimes/826027...BY+VIETNAM+VOTE

 

 

 

Edit: btw, I'm not trying to diminish the fact that several million Iraqis braved terrorist threats to vote, or the fact that the elections were deemed legitimate by international observers, or anything else like that.

Edited January 31, 2005 by no yu begin wher i end

[Biggie]

Of course the insurgency won't stop immediately after the election. But the large voter turnout signifies that most people want a stable, democratic government, something the insurgents are deadset against.

 

The US election in November had a turnout of 60.7%, according to the Washington Post.

[wentwj68]

While I too am happy that the Iraqi people did get a chance to vote, I think it is being too positively spun. I think it was a great day for the Iraqis, but by no means a sole victory. Also i noticed it says of "registered" voters. I know heard a few weeks ago that only 1/4th of elligable Iraqi's were registered, not sure if that was a compeltely accurate number, but 72% of 1/4th isn't nearly as good a figure, yet again, I will say that i read this atleast two weeks ago and that I can't find it, so it may or may not be completely accurate but it's wording of that nature that can easily be viewed as overly positive.

 

It's good the Iraqi's voted and it went.. relatively smoothly atleast. The elections must be fair, and all factions of Iraq must be given a say and not repressed by whatever faction gains power, or else the region will degrade into a civil war.