The Iraqi Vote

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sat Jan 29, 2005 7:54 pm

O.k.Here's your chance to post your thoughts

1) Will the percentage of Iraqi voters be 40% or higher.

2) At what percentage of the vote will you consider the vote to be "legitimate".

3) What percentage do you think the world liberal socialist press will deem the vote legitimate.

I think the percentage will be above 40%. Probably around 60%

Legitimate percentage will be 35% or higher.

I think the world press, no matter how high the turnout in the Kurdish North or the shiite vote, will base the legitimacy on how the sunni's vote.

Zoop! · Post by **Zoop!** » Sat Jan 29, 2005 9:28 pm

The percentage will be at 55%.

The vote will be considered "legitamate" by the press as long as half vote. Of course, Iraqis voting will consider it legitimate. Once the new "government" is inaugurated, the terrorists will motion for a continuance of Jihad and will immediately try to filibuster.

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Sat Jan 29, 2005 10:27 pm

I think everything will go relatively well and quietly. There could be a couple insurgent uprisings, but nothing surprising there. The Iraqi election is not the end all solution, but it's a big step there. I hope it's as uneventful as the Afghan election.

Mobius · Post by **Mobius** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 12:53 pm

Zoop! wrote:The vote will be considered "legitamate" (sic) by the press as long as half vote.

By that definition, many US presidents were illegitimate.

A vote is a vote. If you don't vote, you can't complain. In Iraq, one could perhaps be forgiven for not voting, but it's a stretch. No one in the USA has a similarly good excuse, and yet voter turnout there is historically very low.

I want to congratulate Iraqis for voting, and hope it brings something better for Iraq.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:14 pm

what happens, happens.

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:33 pm

The polls closed at 1700 (5PM) our time and 8AM CST but the initial reports are that 72% of the Iraqis voted. Folks we should be ashamed. We canâ??t get that many people to vote in the US and no one is trying to kill us.

Yeah.

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:58 pm

Skyalmian wrote:
The polls closed at 1700 (5PM) our time and 8AM CST but the initial reports are that 72% of the Iraqis voted. Folks we should be ashamed. We canâ??t get that many people to vote in the US and no one is trying to kill us.
Yeah.

Ye gods, what would our percentage be if we "gasp" had to walk a couple of miles to vote?

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:44 pm

I think its safe to say they're in a slightly different situation then we here in the states are in. Illustrated by the fact that the US isn't in desperate need of voters come election time. The low turnouts are just examples of how poor our choices are and have been and as a result most of our people are uninterested.

Kyouryuu · Post by **Kyouryuu** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:20 pm

I'm really elated that 72% of the Iraqi population registered to vote actually voted. That told me, more than anything else, that they really cared about their newfound democracy and freedom and were willing to risk their lives to support it. So hoorah to the Iraqi people for putting our voting turnout to shame!

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:38 pm

What was the % turnout in the november election anyway?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:39 pm

One other thing the elections have shown:

The insurgency is truly weak. I mean... they were gearing up for this day... pulled out all the stops. What did they do? Not a lot. The Iraqi people, as a whole, are moving forward, and the insurgency is failing.

I liked how one marine put it:

"I am tired of hearing the crap, the whole, well, 'We are barely hanging on, we're losing, the insurgency is growing.' All that. We are doing fine. It's just a small, a small amount of people out there causing the problems. I mean, it is a small number, and weâ??re killing them."

-- Marine Sgt Kevin Lewis, to Dan Rather during his recent visit to Iraq (hat tip: mudville gazette via Hugh Hewitt

72% turnout is incredible. Way, way beyond what I expected. I'd been hearing estimates of 60% from the most enthusiastic places. Now, the 72% number I've heard isn't verified yet, but if it's anywhere close, the elections were a smashing success. With turnout that high, the results are very likely to stick.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Sun Jan 30, 2005 11:43 pm

Avder wrote:What was the % turnout in the november election anyway?

Google says 60.7%.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:21 am

Well, I say congrats to the Iraqis. They've taken the first very big step on the road to government 'of the people, by the people, and for the people". Yeah, maybe we Americans have gotten soft and complacent with the democratic practices here in our own constitutional republic. I hope we can look back on this fifty years from now and toast the Iraqis on their accomplishment. And perhaps a few voters in this country will take a little more civic pride in their right (and DUTY) to participate in the political process. At least until someone comes up with a better way to govern ...

bash · Post by **bash** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:25 am

Revised estimates indicate Iraqi turnout was on par with US turnout at around 60%.

Birdseye · Post by **Birdseye** » Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:54 am

One other thing the elections have shown:

The insurgency is truly weak. I mean... they were gearing up for this day... pulled out all the stops. What did they do? Not a lot. The Iraqi people, as a whole, are moving forward, and the insurgency is failing.

I pretty much agree. You expected their best on election day, which didn't turn out to be much. Unless they have something else up their sleeve, it looks like the troops are getting the job done.

KlubMarcus · Post by **KlubMarcus** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 10:37 am

from http://www.lonestartimes.com/

Baghdad Police HQ reported that at 1200 hrs today, Police Constable Abd al Amir was killed in the line of duty at the Khalil bin Walid Polling Center in the Yarmuk section of Baghdad. Abd al Amir identified a suspicious man wearing an explosives belt, and immediately tackled him, shielding the lines of voters with his body, and dying instantly when the terrorist detonated his belt.

All you American citizens who failed in your right and responsibility to vote should be ashamed of yourselves. BTW, the line of voters for that polling center kept on voting afterwards.

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 10:56 am

KlubMarcus wrote:from http://www.lonestartimes.com/
Baghdad Police HQ reported that at 1200 hrs today, Police Constable Abd al Amir was killed in the line of duty at the Khalil bin Walid Polling Center in the Yarmuk section of Baghdad. Abd al Amir identified a suspicious man wearing an explosives belt, and immediately tackled him, shielding the lines of voters with his body, and dying instantly when the terrorist detonated his belt.
All you American citizens who failed in your right and responsibility to vote should be ashamed of yourselves. BTW, the line of voters for that polling center kept on voting afterwards.

See Marcus, thats whats great about America.
If someone chooses not to Vote thats their right to do just that.

You spout how great Our country is yet you belittle the inhabitants for exersizing their rights.

double standards are also your right.

KlubMarcus · Post by **KlubMarcus** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:09 am

Hattrick wrote: See Marcus, thats whats great about America. If someone chooses not to Vote thats their right to do just that. You spout how great Our country is yet you belittle the inhabitants for exersizing their rights.

Actually let me correct you, "not voting" is not a right. The Bill of Rights are limitations on national government, not limitations on individuals. Individuals who do not wish to vote even though they can are not exercising any right. Read the Bill or Rights. The "right not to vote" is not even listed. So how can you "exersize" it?

double standards are also your right.

Double standards are not a right, either. Freedom of speech is.

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:47 pm

OMG.

nice way to side step there.

maybe I should have used freedom instead of the word "rights".
But then again you'd come and trash on that too.

narrow minded people suck.

KlubMarcus · Post by **KlubMarcus** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:16 pm

Hattrick wrote:OMG. nice way to side step there.

No, I am not side-stepping Hattrick. You know I'm right. It's obvious in your feeble response. How can you exercise a limitation on government that isn't even documented to be a limitation? You're using the wrong terminology. It's similar when you correct a newbie for not using the proper Internet lingo.

maybe I should have used freedom instead of the word "rights". But then again you'd come and trash on that too.

Well, you didn't use it in your past post, did you?

narrow minded people suck.

People who call others narrow minded because they feel bad for not being on target suck even more. People who whine when someone else points out their mistake suck even more. Who is narrow minded now Hattrick?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:07 pm

There's no law requiring people to vote. If someone chooses not to vote, that's entirely up to them.

If they don't vote and then they complain about the outcome, we have every right to ridicule them...

Freedom is a wonderful thing.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:38 pm

Lothar wrote:
Avder wrote:What was the % turnout in the november election anyway?
Google says 60.7%.

Is that eligible or registered?

If its registered, what % of eligible voters were registered?

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:37 am

I think all voting numbers are "registered". You can probably convert really easily just by finding what percentage of eligible voters are registered.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 1:39 am

I have the ability to take a crap on your head Markus. does that mean I have to?

KlubMarcus · Post by **KlubMarcus** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:13 am

Ferno wrote:I have the ability to take a crap on your head Markus. does that mean I have to?

That must mean your butthole is above your neck.

That would explain your last remark.

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:04 am

KlubMarcus wrote:
Hattrick wrote:OMG. nice way to side step there.
No, I am not side-stepping Hattrick. You know I'm right. It's obvious in your feeble response. How can you exercise a limitation on government that isn't even documented to be a limitation? You're using the wrong terminology. It's similar when you correct a newbie for not using the proper Internet lingo.
maybe I should have used freedom instead of the word "rights". But then again you'd come and trash on that too.
Well, you didn't use it in your past post, did you?
narrow minded people suck.
People who call others narrow minded because they feel bad for not being on target suck even more. People who whine when someone else points out their mistake suck even more. Who is narrow minded now Hattrick?

Thanks for the laugh there Marcus.

People who know me, know I'm very open minded.They also know I hardly ever post here. when I do, it's usually to get a laugh at the expense of some person that is totally off base.

narrow minded? you proved my point in this thread and in fact the first of your threads I came across here.

have fun with the regular E&C peeps.Youve provided my laugh and I'm done here for now.

KlubMarcus · Post by **KlubMarcus** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:10 am

Hattrick wrote: Thanks for the laugh there Marcus.

You're welcome. An open-minded guy such as yourself could always use a laugh, eh?

People who know me, know I'm very open minded.They also know I hardly ever post here. when I do, it's usually to get a laugh at the expense of some person that is totally off base.

See, it's really easy to get you to do something you don't normally do, isn't it?

narrow minded? you proved my point in this thread and in fact the first of your threads I came across have fun with the regular E&C peeps. Youve provided my laugh and now I'm done here for now.

See you later. Please be more prepared next time, we wouldn't want you to run away so fast.

Hattrick · Post by **Hattrick** » Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:40 am

ok so I lied, I'm back.

prepared?? to do what ? match wits with you? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

sigh

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

you arent worth the preperation.

now to really get my dander up your gonna have to try harder. so far your narrow mind has somehow blocked your ability to come up with an arguement that has any substance.when and IF you do accomplish that, I will be back to discuss whatever you wish.
Til then, I'm off to the ranch.

ta ta have a nice day..................heh

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Thu Feb 03, 2005 1:14 am

KlubMarcus wrote:
Ferno wrote:I have the ability to take a crap on your head Markus. does that mean I have to?
That must mean your butthole is above your neck. That would explain your last remark.

hahahah.. dude that's too easy.