Your argument that Ahmadinejad somehow fostered political debate or freedom of speech is more than a little disturbing. Even if I bought this argument, Ahmadinejad’s brutal repression of political dissent in the post-election Iran is evidence enough that he is a monster.

The Tehran Bureau article I cite simply lists 40 polls, and as such I am not citing their expertise. However, I would like you to point out a single falsehood in their 2+ years of covering this story.

I quote Karroubi’s advisor because, as a campaign strategist, he was rooting for a high turnout before the election because he had his own polling evidence that such a turnout would boost his results. He was not the only expert, as I point out, that believed this ahead of the election, This is an important data point, because he could not have known how high the turnout would be. Turnout was very high.

As for Ahmadinejad being the change, this is ridiculous. First of all, neither Mousavi nor Karroubi had recently held a decisive position of power. Secondly, the conservatives have almost always been in power, and they almost always have complete power. Even during Khatami’s administration, many reform efforts were frustrated by the conservatives and by the mullahs.

There is so much wrong with your recount, here, that I have to seriously question your own objectivity. As a non-Iranian and an anti-imperialist, my only concern is accurately reporting the human rights abuses against the peaceful people of Iran. I maintain that I have done so, and have yet to see you provide any real evidence to the contrary.

Furthermore, the focus on the election results is a red-herring, an attempt to ignore the current brutality of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“In 2005, Iran elected Ahmadinejad, an event widely considered a referendum to George Bush’s “Axis of Evil” speech. Previous to this election, Iran had a reformist president, Khatami, so it is hardly beyond the scope of possibilities that a reformist could return to the Presidency, especially after Bush was replaced by Obama as the U.S. president.”

Basically, you are saying that Iranian vote for their Presidents based on US actions??

What an insulting opinion and shame on any Iranian who is on your side with such comments.

“So, according to this logic Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite a dismal economy (featuring inflation as high as 25%, unemployment over 11%, and 25% of bank loans defaulting), despite international sanction, despite religious and ethnic tension, despite the loss of political momentum in 2006, despite further political losses in 2008, and despite all historical precedent and voting trends, managed to rally all corners of his nation to vote for him as he crushed his opponents by a nearly 2-1 margin. ”

Your argument is that since YOU fault his presidency, he couldn’t have won? Why not then cancel all elections in the world, and let a few elite choose?

I mean, is this even an argument??

“However, of the “1,731 people contacted, well over half either refused to participate (42.2%)”
This is not something extraordinary. Polls conducted in western countries have a refusal rate of over 50%.

“First of all, 90% of the respondents ranked the economy as the most important priority. This stunning number was the result of an economy in complete disrepair, an economy that Ahmadinejad was elected to fix only four years earlier. The poll also showed that 4 out of 5 Iranians wanted to choose the Supreme Leader directly. Iranians in the poll ranked “free elections and a free press as their most important priorities for their government (behind the economy),” and over 70% wanted to cooperate with weapons inspectors and stop development of nuclear materials, and over 77% wanted to normalize relations with the United States. Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, an avowed holocaust denier, has vowed that Israel, the “Zionist regime,” would be “wiped off the map,” he has proclaimed that the ”‘satanic power’ of the United States faced destruction,” and he has repeatedly blocked weapons inspections while defending Iran’s “peaceful” nuclear program. He is also, and obviously, far from a freedom of the press advocate, and he has defended the governmental structure of the Islamic Republic. In other words, the poll that definitively shows Ahmadinejad as in the lead, according to defenders of the election, also shows that more than 70% of Iranians disagree with major segments, perhaps even the core, of the Ahmadinejad platform.”

You seem to say that people can’t seem to vote for Ahmadenijad because YOU think they shouldn’t?

One by one.

Economy – The TFT poll shows that people didn’t necessarily blame Ahmedinijad for the economy, if anything, I would argue they voted for him because economy was their main concern, which was what Ahmednijad focused on, while Mousavi didn’t. Whether you agree with it or not, Ahmedinijad talked the language of the lower class, and the majority of the public had more trust in him than Mousavi’s backer, Rafsanjani.

Choosing the Supreme Leader – This has nothing to do with Ahmednijad or reflects a person’s vote for him. Ahmedinijad was always the new kid on the block, while Rafsanjani, Mousavi, Karoubi et al, were the old elites.

Free Press – It was only in Ahmadenijad’s tenure that, for the first time ever, candidates had open and frank face-to-face live debates. People concerned about free press would have looked at this positivity in line of Ahmedinijad’s actions.Also, Ahmadenijad has always been more open and frank than previous candidates.

USA – You talk about how people want normalize relationships with USA but you then talk about Israel, ignoring the fact that high percentage of Iranians polled were against Israel. Why are you being dishonest? Also, when it comes to America, Ahmednijad can be seen by the public as making more overtures towards the US than other Presidents, such as his letters to the Presidents of USA. You also ignore that Iranians support the nuclear programm and you use the oftly-mistranslated “wipe of the map” comment.

“More than 60 percent of those who state they don’t know who they will vote for in the Presidential elections reflect individuals who favor political reform and change in the current system…According to this leading indicator, if Ahmadinejad received ALL of the other undecided votes, he still wouldn’t get to 50%, the minimum needed to avoid a run-off.”

One thing you can’t grasp is that Ahmedinijad was seen by many as the CHANGE. Remember, Mousavi was 8 years Prime Minister, Rafsanjani 8 years, Khatami 8 years, thats 24 years of the 3 decades of the post-revolution Iran. And Karoubi was also Majlis leader. So, saying “change in the current system and political reform” to many WAS Ahmedinijad, the person who was seen as being NOT PART OF THE ELITE.

The next paragraph hardly deserves a mention as you are using the campaign manager of Karoubi to prove that Ahmadenijad would have lost!

And then you the “leaked” report. Is this in the same line as the “leaked” election results??

Then you quote Tehran Bureau? Have you even visited that site? When was the last time there was anything objective on there?

We have now several MAJOR international polls before and after the poll that are in line with each other.

I have no patience for the rest at the moment, but I might tackle it later on.