Iranian Election results look bad for Ahmadinejad

[GeneralLee]

The results so far show his conservative rivals gaining seats at the expense of his own supporters, but still in the minority. Somehow the reformers won a few seats despite all the prominent candidates being banned from the election.

My question is:
Is this a sham of an election with the only viable parties being different flavors of the same system were any opposition is stifled?
Or: Is this a successful democracy?

Reuters:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...WzYPgD8VE2B080

I personally feel that its an insult to real democracies to call them democratic, but I will admit they fall into a gray area compared to nations like China or Saudi Arabia.

[King Edward III]

My question is:
Is this a sham of an election with the only viable parties being different flavors of the same system were any opposition is stifled?

Yes.

[Carach]

Yes.

what Eddy said

[Farnan]

Haha, Iran's elections are such that the Supreme Leader really controls everything. He appoints half the Guardian Council, and appoints the people who appoint the other half of the Guardian Council. So in essance he appoints the whole Guardian Council. The only way you can run for office is with the approval of the Guardian Council...

[Burnum]

better then nothing, I suppose.

[lord_IRNBRU]

i would hope for his sake his party dont win or the usa might use it as a excuss for war but can a country that executes people for being gay really be democratic.

also the election will go his way when you think about how some candidates have been not allowed to run.

[GeneralLee]

I wonder if the Iranian people were trying to tell the clerics something by electing reformers they never heard of, or short of that conservatives who weren't in the ruling party.

[danzig]

My question is:
Is this a sham of an election with the only viable parties being different flavors of the same system were any opposition is stifled?
Or: Is this a successful democracy?

Pretty much a sham since any candiate not viewed as suitable can simply be removed from running.

[John I Tzimisces]

Pretty much a sham since any candiate not viewed as suitable can simply be removed from running.

Uh, doesn't Canada work like that too?
(struggles to remember)

[finneys13]

Largely a sham, but far more democratic than almost ever other country in the Middle-East/Central Asia.

[Farnan]

Largely a sham, but far more democratic than almost ever other country in the Middle-East/Central Asia.

Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria (since 1993), Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey, and Israel would probably disagree with you.

[GeneralLee]

Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria (since 1993), Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey, and Israel would probably disagree with you.

Didn't know it was that many.

[finneys13]

Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria (since 1993), Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey, and Israel would probably disagree with you.

Iraq? Not a proper democracy yet, at a par with Iran probably. Maybe Algeria as well.

So that leaves most of the Middle-East and Central Asia as undemocratic.

[Erik]

Iraq? Not a proper democracy yet, at a par with Iran probably. Maybe Algeria as well.

So that leaves most of the Middle-East and Central Asia as undemocratic.

I also struggle to call Kuwait a democracy.

[Major.Stupidity]

Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria (since 1993), Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey, and Israel would probably disagree with you.

Um, none of those countries above listed are inherently democratic, Israel is a Jewish democracy, and with Turkey one has the Military to worry about. Lebanon is always a question mark, same with Iraq. Kuwait and Jordan are iffy, with the monarch's retaining much of the power and able to close parliament as they please. I'm not sure why you put Algeria on there...

[Farnan]

Um, none of those countries above listed are inherently democratic, Israel is a Jewish democracy, and with Turkey one has the Military to worry about. Lebanon is always a question mark, same with Iraq. Kuwait and Jordan are iffy, with the monarch's retaining much of the power and able to close parliament as they please. I'm not sure why you put Algeria on there...

I didn't say they were democratic, just steps ahead of Iran...

Algeria is a democracy right now, Turkey has been a democracy since Ataturk died, not perfect but not really that bad. Israel is a democracy where Arab Muslims and Jews can vote. Lebanon and Iraq are both unstable but their form of government are democratic, though Lebanon needs issues to be resolved. Jordan is about 2 steps ahead of Iran and Kuwait is about one.

[Heinz Guderian]

After researching it, on paper, Iran has a pretty advanced democratic system compared to its neighbours, but the problem for me is that at the end of the legislative process there's a Supreme Leader with a big red stamp which can veto anything that he doesnt like unilaterally. Now he hasnt used that big red stamp very often, but it spoils the democratic flavour. And the fact that candidates for the legislature can be vetoed as well. Iran needs to make some not so far out changes, and we'll have a lively democratic system.

[Каие]

and with Turkey one has the Military to worry about.

According to American Members of this forums, the US President has the Army to worry about , if he tries to become a dictator or crate a Christian state. Same thing, the Army see themselves as the safe guarders of Democracy and Secularism, the Turkish atatruk constitution, same as the US.

[GeneralLee]

According to American Members of this forums, the US President has the Army to worry about , if he tries to become a dictator or crate a Christian state. Same thing, the Army see themselves as the safe guarders of Democracy and Secularism, the Turkish atatruk constitution, same as the US.

Not really, the Army is very very gunshy of politics. Now the president does have to worry about a heavily armed civilian population which has been brought up several times.

[confidential0216]

well you know that most of the opposition leaders who could have brought change were barred from the election right?