Iraqi Voter Turnout

[Frankenstein_Monster]

@RickJay

Are these guesses and runing estimates of voter turnout based on areas the U.S. has allowed voting to take place, or adjusted to reflect those areas where the population can’t vote?

We won’t know the answer for awhile but the best source I have found so far on this question is this.

[elucidator]

As noted in parallel thread: watching CNN, they have just expressed first skepticism as to the numbers, suggesting inflation on the part of the CPA.

And that’s the problem: none of us have a non-partisan, objectively reliable source of information.

[XT]

By any chance, did they go into the basis of their skepticism on CNN? The hotel I’m at doesn’t seem to have CNN or even Fox on its list of channels.

-XT

[elucidator]

A fleeting reference to the Arabic press, and something about the CPA backing down from previous statements. You know what I know: diddly squat.

[XT]

Here’s what they say on their web site.

However, U.S. commanders expecting a greater level of violence said they were pleasantly surprised that their massive security operation had paid off, CNN’s Chief International Correspondent Christiane Amanpour reported from the Iraqi capital.

The Independent Election Commission of Iraq clarified an earlier estimate of a 72 percent turnout in Sunday’s election, saying that the “figures are only very rough, word-of-mouth estimates gathered informally from the field.”

“It will take some time for the IECI to issue accurate figures on turnout,” the statement said. “What is certainly the case is that turnout has exceeded expectations throughout the country.”

More than 14.2 million Iraqis were registered for the vote. Polls have since closed, although voters who were in line at the time of poll closings are being allowed to cast their ballots.

U.N. election organizer Carlos Valezuela told CNN that while he was “happy with the turnout,” it was too early to report numbers.

“I would rather until we have much better reporting to be able to come up with figures,” he said.

CNN correspondents earlier reported that turnout was sporadic across the nation after 30,000 polling booths opened at 7 a.m. on Sunday (0400 GMT) under the watchful eye of Iraqi security forces and U.S. troops. Voting ended at 5 p.m. (1400 GMT).

In former president Saddam Hussein’s hometown of Tikrit, polling stations were virtually empty. But in other parts of the country booths were packed with people casting their ballots, many of them for the first time in their lifetime.

So, its still unclear at this point. Probably because in some places (especially Sunni strongholds like Tikrit) there was a low vote count, while in others it was heavy. It would be difficult to estimate with that situation. Just have to wait to count how many votes were cast.

I thought this was interesting:

Iraqis vote amid violence
Polls close on country’s first free vote in a half-century
Sunday, January 30, 2005 Posted: 11:04 AM EST (1604 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) – Polls have closed in Iraq’s first free election in a half century, with officials reporting a higher than expected turnout of registered voters amid attacks and threats of violence.

Insurgents carried out more than a dozen attacks across the country on Sunday, killing at least 25 people and wounding 71 others.

At least eight suicide bombings took place during the voting. There are reports of a ninth, but CNN has not confirmed those reports.

There were eight other types of attacks as well, including one in which insurgents identified Iraqi civilians as having voted – based on the ink on their fingers – and threw grenades at them, killing them.

Admirable ‘freedom fighters’ here…tossing grenades at civilians based on the ink on their fingers, or using suicide bombers attacking those waiting in line. Great guys here! I know, I know…they are fighting for their freedom and all, bravely killing civilians who were obviously evil because they wanted to vote. Doesn’t appear that there was as much violence as originally feared, though.

-XT

[Frankenstein_Monster]

Iraqis vote as attacks kill 33

The Iraqi election commission estimated that 8 million Iraqis had taken part in the vote, a turnout of 60%. Officials had earlier claimed a turnout of 72% but the commission later backtracked and said it had only been an estimate.

[XT]

God, what a mess. I didn’t see all that other crap in there. I don’t suppose a mod could remove all the stuff from “I thought this was interesting:” to the quoted section? I’d appreciate it.

-XT

[Ghost_of_Marlowe]

@rjung

It’s worth reminding that the election is not about choosing a Grand Poo-Bah Leader of Iraq, but of simply electing a 200±member council who will serve as an interim government while a Constitution is drafted and all that other long, tedious, boring stuff gets hammered out.

I think this says a lot about your political reflexes, rjung. Fie on all that boring Constitution stuff–just get straight to choosing a Maximum Leader for Life!

Men have shed blood for the right to that “long, tedious, boring stuff” that goes along with democracy and the rule of law. In THIS country, if nowhere else. You strike me as ungrateful.

[Squink]

@xtisme

What is this?

A ctrl-V thread?

[Ryan_Liam]

Some are so anxious for Iraq to fail they even suggest that Islam is somehow incompatible with democracy. Arabs can’t do the election thing we so take in our stride that less than half of British voters could be arsed to make a mark on a ballot paper at our most recent elections last spring. At best, this is hugely patronising; at worst, it is profoundly racist.

You can grasp why opponents of the war so loathe any prospect that Messrs Blair and Bush might be able to claim vindication from these elections. But to want democracy in Iraq to be a disaster simply to give yourself another reason to say: ‘I told you so’ is to put your self-righteousness before a better chance for more than 25 million people.

Andrew Rawnsley: A day of hope and a vote for a future

Regardless of how any of us feel, I think we should take heed of this.

[Avenger]

You can grasp why opponents of the war so loathe any prospect that Messrs Blair and Bush might be able to claim vindication from these elections. But to want democracy in Iraq to be a disaster simply to give yourself another reason to say: ‘I told you so’ is to put your self-righteousness before a better chance for more than 25 million people.

Who needs to bother wanting democracy in Iraq to fail to be able to say ‘I told you say’ to Bliar and Bush? There’s already plenty of reasons to do that.

Besides, I’m confident that when a democratic, self-assured and united Iraq finally does emerge from the maelstrom that the bungling invasion and occupation has plunged the country into, they will democratically tell Bush and the Neo-cons where they can stick their vision of the country’s future

[elucidator]

So, then, we can take it that you hate fluffy kittens and favor thrusting cute puppies into blenders? As well as hating Freedom and Liberty?

[Ryan_Liam]

Besides, I’m confident that when a democratic, self-assured and united Iraq finally does emerge from the maelstrom that the bungling invasion and occupation has plunged the country into, they will democratically tell Bush and the Neo-cons where they can stick their vision of the country’s future

Yep, but guess what? Those people you’re against brought that very government, and all the democratic institutions into place. Kinda ironic, isn’t it?

No good deed goes unpunished.

[Ryan_Liam]

@elucidator

So, then, we can take it that you hate fluffy kittens and favor thrusting cute puppies into blenders? As well as hating Freedom and Liberty?

Are those peskee eye-rabs not ready for deemockracy?

[Avenger]

Yep, but guess what? Those people you’re against brought that very government, and all the democratic institutions into place. Kinda ironic, isn’t it?

Not really ironic no. Why would it be?

[Ryan_Liam]

@Avenger

Not really ironic no. Why would it be?

Erm, because you oppose president Bush for what he’s done in Iraq, yet is creating the conditions in which Arab people can actually voice their opinions within a government.

[Avenger]

@Ryan_Liam

Erm, because you oppose president Bush for what he’s done in Iraq, yet is creating the conditions in which Arab people can actually voice their opinions within a government.

Oh that kind of irony. Like if your against little old ladies being mugged on the street, but for small children not dying of a hunger, and someone robs a little old lady to feed his starving children. That kind of irony.

[Ryan_Liam]

@Avenger

Oh that kind of irony. Like if your against little old ladies being mugged on the street, but for small children not dying of a hunger, and someone robs a little old lady to feed his starving children. That kind of irony.

I guess President Bush wants all that oil owned by the Iraqis to himself and the Zionists.

[Squink]

Radio Free Europe dopes on what the election commision said shortly before poll closing: Voter Turnout Strong In Nearly All Iraqi Provinces

Turnout nationwide was estimated to be at about 72 percent of registered voters. Sixty-five percent of registered expatriate voters have cast their ballots.
The figures are as follows in the following provinces.
Al-Najaf: 80 percent
Al-Qadisiyah: 50 percent
…

[elucidator]

There’s some very strange shit going on here, and I don’t pretend to understand. I very well might understand, if I had any objective information that I could trust, but when everybody has an agenda…

First off, does it strike anyone else that it seems as though the “anti-election” insurgency kind of backed off? Like they didn’t put out a full court press? In a situation like this, anything we don’t understand is a threat. Perhaps they decided that the election wasn’t where they wanted to bet their chips. Or, perhaps more likely, one faction of the insurgency, that associated with muslim fanaticism, did proceed with thier full strength, but that strength is relatively small. Which would imply a more powerful insurgency that is not opposed to democracy as such on religious/cultural grounds, like Al Zarqawi is. Would this mean a move to outflank Al Zarqawis faction from a more secular faction? Could this be why the Iraqis are suddenly so confident that they will get Al Zarqawi very soon?

And is that good news, bad news, or God only knows?