Although credible observers put turnout in this week's election at well less than 15%, Egyptian officials claim that 46% of eligible voters turned out to vote. Some newspapers, such as al-Akhbar report even higher figures. Skeptical observers such as the Guardian's David Hearst clearly failed to take into account innovative telepathic voting, which frees voters from the burden of standing in annoying queues. The technique was so successful that there no annoying queues.
In contrast to Pew polling, which indicated that 54% of Egyptians held positive views of the al-Sisi, 96.9% of Egyptian voters actually cast votes for Field Marshal Abdul Fattah al-Sisi. So much for the accuracy of polls. Then again, could it be that only the pro al-Sisi voters showed up to vote?
In contrast to Pew polling, which indicated that 54% of Egyptians held positive views of the al-Sisi, 96.9% of Egyptian voters actually cast votes for Field Marshal Abdul Fattah al-Sisi. So much for the accuracy of polls. Then again, could it be that only the pro al-Sisi voters showed up to vote?
In December I wrote the following in Current History:
After decades of enjoying unchecked political prerogatives, not to mention opportunities for corruption, the denizens of the state who view democracy as an affront to their privileges have taken nearly every possible to ensure the failure of the democratic, and to discredit the very idea of democracy.
The May 2014 presidential election illustrates the point. A more recent essay by Tareq Ali is apposite. [Added: Timely analyses at Middle East Eye; and see this edifying NYTimes piece by David Kirkpatrick.]
[It is announced that al-Sisi received 24 million votes.]
"Where are the "votes"?"
No comments:
Post a Comment