Pakistan's Election

[CountArach]

I'm disappointed, no topic for this already exists:

http://news.smh.com.au/musharrafs-ri...0219-1svf.html

Musharraf's rivals win Pakistan election

February 19, 2008 - 10:50PM

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf's opponents won a big election victory after voters rejected his former ruling party, raising questions about the future of the US ally who has ruled since 1999.

Counting was continuing with results still awaited in less than 20 seats, but no party was expected to win a majority in the 342-seat National Assembly.

The opposition parties of assassinated former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif appeared to have won enough to command a majority, according to unofficial results. But there is no certainty that they will work together.

The pro-Musharraf Pakistan Muslim League was trailing a distant third, and the party's spokesman conceded defeat but kept open the possibility of joining a coalition.

"Obviously, the nation has spoken through the ballot. We couldn't convince them. They have rejected our policies and we have accepted their verdict," PML's Tariq Azim Khan told Reuters.

"For the best interest of the country, we're willing to cooperate and work with anybody."

As of 3.30 pm (1030 GMT), unofficial results for 252 seats showed Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) had won 86 and Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) had 65.

The pro-Musharraf PML trailed with 37. Small parties and independents shared the others.

A few seats weren't contested, while 70 seats reserved for women and religious minorities will be divided up proportionately among parties according to the number of seats they've won.

Musharraf has said he would accept the results and work with whoever won to build democracy in a country that has alternated between civilian and army rule throughout its 60-year history.

Groups of happy opposition supporters celebrated in the streets in cities across the country as results trickled out.

Some analysts said reasons for PML's defeat ranged from Musharraf's unpopularity to resentment over inflation, food shortages and power cuts.

Pakistan's main stock market welcomed the peaceful polls and absence of rigging complaints, and shares rose more than 3 per cent. But dealers said the formation of a parliament hostile to Musharraf would make investors nervous.

Monday's vote was postponed from Jan. 8 after Bhutto was assassinated in a suicide attack on Dec. 27, which raised concern about the nuclear-armed country's stability.

The PPP, led by Bhutto's widower, Asif Ali Zardari, had been expected to reap a sympathy vote, while Sharif's party is doing surprisingly well despite a mixed record as prime minister, when he clashed with the judiciary.

His defiance of old foe Musharraf and support for the judges he purged had paid off, analysts said.

As president, former army chief Musharraf did not contest the elections, aimed at completing a transition to civilian rule, but the outcome could seal his fate.

A hostile parliament could try to remove Musharraf, who took power as a general in a 1999 coup and emerged as a crucial US ally in a "war on terror" that most Pakistanis think is Washington's, not theirs.

Analysts said the implications for a president whose popularity slumped after he imposed emergency rule and purged the judiciary last year were ominous.

"It's the moment of truth for the president," said Abbas Nasir, editor of the Dawn newspaper. "There will be thoughts swirling in his mind, whether he can forge a working relationship with two parties whose leadership he kept out of the country."

A victory for Sharif, who has repeatedly called for Musharraf's removal, or the inclusion of his party in a coalition with the PPP would be disastrous for the president.

Some analysts said differences between the PPP and Sharif's party made a coalition doubtful.

Increasingly isolated, Musharraf allowed Bhutto to return from eight years in self-exile, and reluctantly let Sharif, the prime minister he overthrew come back from exile in late November. Sharif was promptly barred from standing in the polls.

At least 20 people were killed in election violence, including, Zardari said, 15 PPP activists.

But that was not as bad as feared after a bloody campaign.

Opposition concerns about rampant rigging by Musharraf's supporters also proved unfounded.

An election watchdog group put turnout at 35 per cent.

Congratulations Pakistanis for running a much cleaner campaign than we thought you could. This is restoring my faith in Democracy.

However, I am disappointed that no one party won a majority. That would have leant a great deal of stability. What I will say is that I am glad that Musharraf didn't win.

[Geoffrey S]

An election watchdog group put turnout at 35 per cent.

And that's the worrying part.

[CountArach]

And that's the worrying part.

Yes. Hopefully in future election when people realise this one was relatively bloodless and they will come out to vote.

[Vladimir]

And that's the worrying part.

No it's not, it means they have a healthy democracy!

Seriously, we need to set Mushy up with a nice retirement plan. We owe it to him (if he lives...wee Irish meade!!!)

[seireikhaan]

Well, this turned out better than I had hoped, with the caveat of the very low voter turnout. But perhaps this will serve to motivate people in future elections, a signal that they CAN go out and vote and put their opinion forth and that it will actually matter and they won't get prosecuted for it.

[Gregoshi]

I guess Castro had withdrawn from this election too...

[Vladimir]

I guess Castro had withdrawn from this election too...

You're not still bitter are you?

[Gregoshi]

You're not still bitter are you?

Nope. Just a tasteless attempt at humour.

[HoreTore]

Well, this turned out better than I had hoped, with the caveat of the very low voter turnout. But perhaps this will serve to motivate people in future elections, a signal that they CAN go out and vote and put their opinion forth and that it will actually matter and they won't get prosecuted for it.

What? We don't fear getting shot when voting in other democracies, but the turnout isn't that much higher...

Anyway, didn't Musharraf say he wasn't planning to retire anyway? Now that's a shocker. Host an election to show the world how progressive he is, and disregard the entire thing when noone is looking...

Not that we'd care anyway, we're worried about dem tewwowists, can't hold two thoughts at the same time, you know...

[Xiahou]

I guess Castro had withdrawn from this election too...

Yeah, I stopped caring after Thompson dropped out.

[Papewaio]

The voters are too interested in the Indian Premier League (Cricket) to bother with something as minor as voting.

[KukriKhan]

I've been interested in, and watching elections since 1968. In that 40 years, the single most important factor about them has been: citizen participation.

(Insert long, inspiring speech about the "good and brave men and women fighting and dying to give us the right to vote", and our consequent moral obligation...)

I grew up in American culture, so I have that strong streak of automatic anti-authoritarian: "You're not the Boss of me, and can't tell me what to do!" in me.

However. After all this time, I conclude that the Aussies have the best solution to the west's (and esp the US's) dismal participation rates: mandatory "showtime" at the polls. Just like jury duty, military service, and tax-paying.

Fines and/or jail for non-compliance. Provision made for opt-out or alternative methods (vote-by-mail, etc).

It's that important. In my opinion.

[LittleGrizzly]

I have sometimes thought about compulsory voting but then i think, those who don't care enough to go and vote don't care enough to find out what is happening with the country and who will do what about it.

The main reason i am put off however is... A few times 1 or 2 of my friends have said lets all vote BNP and they had quite a few people agree with them, now i can imagine a situation on voting day, me and all my friends are out somewhere and go off to vote, on the way someone says, lets all vote BNP and a few of them are already up for it, most of the rest of them then would probably happily go along with this.

I could imagine this happening to lots of different groups not just my own.

[Vladimir]

I've been interested in, and watching elections since 1968. In that 40 years, the single most important factor about them has been: citizen participation.

(Insert long, inspiring speech about the "good and brave men and women fighting and dying to give us the right to vote", and our consequent moral obligation...)

I grew up in American culture, so I have that strong streak of automatic anti-authoritarian: "You're not the Boss of me, and can't tell me what to do!" in me.

However. After all this time, I conclude that the Aussies have the best solution to the west's (and esp the US's) dismal participation rates: mandatory "showtime" at the polls. Just like jury duty, military service, and tax-paying.

Fines and/or jail for non-compliance. Provision made for opt-out or alternative methods (vote-by-mail, etc).

It's that important. In my opinion.

I would vote for politicians who want to repeal mandatory voting. It's voting at gunpoint.

[KukriKhan]

I see your point(s) Grizz, and they're good ones.

But the end result is: we get the government we deserve.

If the voting population decides to remain blissfully ignorant, or easily swayed by their peers or the media, those are matters of great concern, but ultimately irrelevant to the goal: if everyone has their "say" (even if they frivolously throw it away) there's a better chance that the resulting government & laws will accurately reflect the will of the people (from whom it draws its legitimacy).

I should have added that all elections (in Kukri's perfect world) should have a gah ("none of the above") option, which, if that's the winner, dictates a new election.

I'd better add something about Pakistan, to stay on-topic:

uhm. Whatever the people of Pakistan decide in a free, fair, and all-voter-inclusive election, is OK with me. We'll deal with whatever the result is.

[KukriKhan]

I would vote for politicians who want to repeal mandatory voting. It's voting at gunpoint.

And if a majority of gunpoint-induced voters agreed, I'd live with the result.

[Vladimir]

And if a majority of gunpoint-induced voters agreed, I'd live with the result.

Looking for that 99% turnout? There are places like that, you know.

[KukriKhan]

Looking for that 99% turnout? There are places like that, you know.

Yeah. The natives call it "Australia" (though it's only 95%).

[Vladimir]

Saddam era Iraq, Chechnya, and a slew of tin-pot dictatorships. Who do they usually vote for in Australia? Should Disney create a third party in the US?

Personally I'd vote Donald Duck. Can't understand a damn thing he's saying but he is prior service. I think Goofy was army but I can't bring myself to vote for a black guy.

[CountArach]

However. After all this time, I conclude that the Aussies have the best solution to the west's (and esp the US's) dismal participation rates: mandatory "showtime" at the polls. Just like jury duty, military service, and tax-paying.

Yep, I love the system. If you ask me, every Democratic state should have it.

I have sometimes thought about compulsory voting but then i think, those who don't care enough to go and vote don't care enough to find out what is happening with the country and who will do what about it.

Now this is sometimes the downside. We appeal to the 30-40% of people who normally wouldn't go out and vote. These people are the ones most susceptible to fear campaigns. However, we have still made some surprisingly good choices since it was introduced, because when people hear that the economy is crewed up, or that XXXXX isn't working, they store that away, because they HAVE to vote.

Saddam era Iraq, Chechnya, and a slew of tin-pot dictatorships. Who do they usually vote for in Australia? Should Disney create a third party in the US?

Conservatives

[Vladimir]

Conservatives

Don't give me that! Mickey is a tax and spend moderate. That's not what America needs.

[Papewaio]

The voting system in Australia trumps New Zealand, there I've said something good about Aus. My good deed for the year is done.

It is compulsory to turn up and get your name signed off at the polling station. You don't actually need to fill in the paper, just dispose of it in the ballot box. There are alternative methods for those who can't attend such as postal voting. And if you have a valid excuse such as being out of the country then you don't have to vote.

In New South Wales (NSW) it is compulsory to turn up for Federal and State elections.

Add to it that the voting is preferential.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austral...ectoral_system

[Tribesman]

Add to it that the voting is preferential.

yeah thats what we have , you put the biggest idiot at the bottom then try and work up to the least despicable candidate for your #1 preference, it would be easier if you could just put them all at the bottom though .

[CountArach]

yeah thats what we have , you put the biggest idiot at the bottom then try and work up to the least despicable candidate for your #1 preference, it would be easier if you could just put them all at the bottom though .

Tear up the ballot