From Afghan Opposition Alleges Election Fraud (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041009/D85K2RL00.html):
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) - Afghanistan's historic presidential election turned sour Saturday when all 15 candidates opposing U.S.-backed interim President Hamid Karzai withdrew in the middle of voting, charging the government and the United Nations with fraud and incompetence.

Where’s the primary vote that reduces the 15 candidates, a number virtually guaranteeing that none will win against an incumbent? Where’s the federal campaign funding for those who win the primary?

Folks, this is how the US hoodwinks the world as it makes its puppets.

I thought I saw a primary on PBS. I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure it was either primary or an election for regional governors. I agree that federal campaign funding for those who win the primary will help to make things fair.

"Who is more important, these 15 candidates, or the millions of people who turned out today to vote?" Karzai said.

Very telling...what is more important free elections or appealing to emotions? It's easy to say Mr.Karzai when you are guaranteed a victory. :rolleyes:

All this melodrama is killing brain cells, folks.

Stop proving misery loves company.

Why must Utopia be your brand of hell on Earth?

http://www.dawn.com/2004/10/10/top12.htm
Afghan polls end amid boycott: Rigging charges levelled during voting

KABUL, Oct 9: Afghanistan's first-ever presidential election was thrown into confusion on Saturday after all of President Hamid Karzai's rivals said they were boycotting the poll because of irregularities.

The move by 15 of the 18 candidates in the fray effectively leaves Mr Karzai as the only one standing - two others withdrew in his favour earlier this week. The boycott decision was made at an emergency meeting during voting.

It was not immediately clear how much credibility the poll would have after the boycott or whether it would lead to further divisiveness in the country.

"Today's election is not a legitimate election. We are not a part of today's election," contender Abdul Satar Serat said after a meeting of most of the 15 candidates and the representatives of the others.

"We want the elections to be re-held as soon as possible in a fair, transparent manner and without interference. Any government that comes to power as a result of today's election has no credibility, no validity and is illegitimate for us."

Mr Serat, flanked by all those who attended the meeting, accused election authorities of favouring the US-backed Karzai and not being able to prevent multiple voting.

Opposition candidates alleged that people voted several times with multiple cards, polls closed prematurely in areas populated by opposition supporters, and that voters were pressured to choose Hamid Karzai. Even the sole woman candidate Masooda Jalal, the only opposition candidate not to join the boycott call, alleged 'planned and organised fraud'.

There had earlier been widespread complaints that the wrong pens were being used to mark voters' fingers to show they had cast their ballot, and what should have been indelible ink could be quickly wiped off.

Senior election officials from the Joint Election Management Body (JEMB) were meeting to discuss the boycott, said one official.

The organizers of the first direct presidential election in Afghanistan's history had earlier insisted that voting would continue despite the complaints.

"The JEMB has made the decision that voting continues throughout the country," Manoel de Almeida e Silva, the UN's chief spokesman for Afghanistan, told a news briefing.

Officials said the complaints were the result of a minor misunderstanding - the pens used to mark ballot papers had been mistaken for those used to mark voters.

"The workers have got two pens which look alike," said Reg Austin, a senior technical adviser with the JEMB. "One is for marking ballots and other is for indelible ink. Workers are using the wrong pen.

"We believe the scale of the problem is relatively small," Mr Austin added. "We would assume it is in the process of being corrected."

Leading presidential candidate Yunus Qanuni - one of the candidates at Satar Serat's meeting - had earlier told reporters he would not vote unless something was done to resolve the situation.

"We need to discuss this issue very urgently," Mr Qanuni told reporters.

"If this continues, the election in Afghanistan will not have any credibility. I am looking for a solution for all the candidates. If we find a solution we will go forward, if not, we will not vote."

Election officials refused to halt the process, which appeared to have been embraced enthusiastically by most voters despite fears that many would be too afraid to participate.

"Halting the vote at this time is unjustified and would deny individuals the right to vote," said election official Ray Kennedy. He said the allegations would be investigated but other officials said it could take weeks to complete the process.

Hamid Karzai also said the vote could not be negated. "It's too late in the day for a boycott," he told a news conference. "Millions have voted in the rain, the snow and the dust and we should respect their decision.

"It is too late to call for a boycott now that millions of Afghans have come from their homes despite rain and snow and they have voted," the US-backed candidate told a news conference.

"We should respect the people's will. I'm very delighted that all over Afghanistan, with the help of God, people with a lot of happiness and enthusiasm went to ballot boxes and voted.

"This shows the political understanding of Afghans and their will for a peaceful future."

During the campaign, some candidates expressed surprise that as many as 10.5 million out of the country's 28 million people had registered to vote, and said they believed many people had received multiple voter cards. -Agencies

"Who is more important, these 15 candidates, or the millions of people who turned out today to vote?" Karzai said.

Very telling...what is more important free elections or appealing to emotions? It's easy to say Mr.Karzai when you are guaranteed a victory. :rolleyes:

Yeah I thought the same thing about that quote. I'd say 15 candidates is more important, given that the number is so high as to make the election a joke.

While I believe that the results of this election were obviously inevitable, I believe a certain percentage of votes would have to be achieved in order to avoid a runoff. This means that the strongest few candidates would be running against each other without the many others. Karzai would attempt to avoid such a runoff, even if the results of that would be, without a doubt, in his favor.

You cannot have a primary without a two party system that dominates the United States. There are simply too many parties to even consider such a system. In the end the 15 candidates are not what made this election ridiculous, but the fact that there were no other viable people to oppose Karzai. He simply had all of the advantages, and this was not a fair election in that regard.

Towards, you summed it up perfectly.

While I believe that the results of this election were obviously inevitable, I believe a certain percentage of votes would have to be achieved in order to avoid a runoff. This means that the strongest few candidates would be running against each other without the many others.

A runoff would be a good idea even in the US. That would keep Nader from deciding the election, for example. The runoff should probably come down to 2 candidates, just as sports championships come down to 2 teams, so that the winner wins with a majority rather than simply a plurality (greatest number that may be less than 50%).

Sources: Lehrer news hour, Christian Paenti, and others:

Majority of Afghanis consider Karzai a US puppet and but are not upset by that. The people expect elections to be fraudulent but would prefer peace to clean elections. The people want peace.

In one area 140% of the population were registered to vote. In khost Karzai soldiers told people that if they did not vote for Karzai their houses would be burned down. In many areas and particularly in the areas unfriendly to Karzai they ran out of ballots and closed polls early. People were seen with three and four identification cards voting multiple times. In general, the elections were iregular.

The exit polling touted by NPR and other media was done by the "International Republican Institue" which means that it has no credibility.

Some of the candidates were warlords who are expected to be placated by giving them government positions. Unpunished crime, rape, theft, and illegal taxation by thugs alligned with government officials and war lords continues unabated.
.................................................. .................................................. ..........
REUTERS[ TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2004 12:10:59 AM ]
KABUL: Afghan officials delayed the counting of ballots in a historic presidential election on Monday to deal with complaints of fraud, but several of the candidates appeared to be pulling back from an initial decision to boycott the vote.

Saturday’s election, the first time Afghans have voted for a president, ended in confusion after 15 of the 18 candidates announced the boycott in the middle of the day, saying a system to prevent illegal multiple voting had failed.

However, many of them were reported to be willing to drop the boycott call and let the Joint Election Management Body (JEMB) decide on their complaints.

The JEMB, made up of UN and Afghan officials, said it could not start the count until it decided what to do with the ballots that are in doubt. “We have asked for the reconciliation of votes to carry on, but to hold off on mixing, sorting and counting of votes until we receive advice from the expert panel on measures to be taken regarding specific boxes,” JEMB vice chair J Ray Kennedy said.

“We are hoping all this will be in place by the end of the day tomorrow (Tuesday),” he said.

Ballot boxes were being opened at eight counting centres across the rugged country and the votes were being reconciled — the number of papers in each box is being tallied with the totals maintained by poll officials.

Although no firm programme was announced, many officials had said the count would start on Monday.

Millions in the impoverished Islamic nation participated enthusiastically in the election, ignoring threats of violence against voters by militant Taliban insurgents.

President Hamid Karzai, the favourite to win the poll, said on Sunday some of the candidates who had called for a boycott had changed their minds and were willing to accept its legitimacy.

“Some of the esteemed candidates have rejected the boycotting of the election,” Karzai told a news conference. “And we are hopeful that other candidates do not ignore the national jubilation and let the votes be counted.

“The Afghan people voted in millions and that is what I see,” he added. “I am blinded to everything else. It was a celebration, I’m thrilled.”
The problem was the indelible ink put on the finger of everyone who voted to stop them voting again. Some election workers used the wrong pen to mark voters, and the ordinary marker ink was quickly washed off.

Fears of multiple voting were stoked by the late issue of a high number of voter cards — 10.5m in a population of about 28m, only about half of them adults.

One election official said it was possible that the investigation would be handed over to an independent commission, but no decision had been taken yet.
Any controversy could be worrying for a nation made up of a patchwork of ethnic groups and often warring tribes, and held together for the last three years by Karzai’s interim government.
But at least two candidates — the lone woman in the fray, Massouda Jalal, and Hazara chieftain Mohammad Mohaqiq — appeared to back away from the deadlock on Sunday and said they would accept the result of an investigation into the irregularities.
Tajik commander Yunus Qanuni, seen as Karzai’s most powerful challenger, might also fall in line, sources close to Qanuni and Western diplomats said.
“I think at least among the main candidates, an agreement will be possible,” said the European Union’s envoy to Afghanistan, Francesc Vendrell, who held talks with candidates including Mohaqiq.
The US envoy to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, has acted as a go-between to persuade Karzai’s leading opponents to drop their threatened refusal to recognise the result, other sources said.
The international community is keen that the election be widely accepted as legitimate. Western donors have pumped in aid into Afghanistan after the collapse of the Taliban and the UN has been closely involved in the election, which many believe will endorse the US-backed interim government.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder visits Afghanistan on Monday. He said in Pakistan on the eve of his visit: “The peaceful way elections took place and the high participation makes me optimistic even though there have been some problems.
“I am convinced that if there have been misdoings or some mistakes with the election, the UN and the international observers will find that out.”
Saturday’s vote came three years after US-led forces invaded Afghanistan to oust the Taliban regime for harbouring Osama bin Laden, the alleged architect of the September 11 attacks.
US President George W Bush, facing his own election battle next month, has claimed the Afghan vote as a foreign policy success and is hoping it can be mirrored in war-torn Iraq.
Karzai and 17 other candidates were on the ballot but two of them later withdrew in favour of the president. The winner needs 51% of the votes, otherwise a runoff between the top two candidates will be held in November. — Reuters
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/881594.cms

Pravda http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/10/12/56567.html
Boycott of Afghanistan's presidential election
04:33 2004-10-12
The immediate crisis over Afghanistan's presidential election dissipated Monday as Afghan and United Nations officials said an independent commission would recommend steps to overcome irregularities in Saturday's voting. The most prominent of 15 presidential candidates who had rejected the vote as illegitimate joined several other candidates in reversing that stance.
"We want unity in this election, not a boycott," Yunis Qanooni told journalists in Kabul, the capital. "To respect the will of millions of Afghans and to go along with our national interests I would accept the results of the election after the investigation."
The joint UN-Afghan body that is running the election said a Canadian diplomat and a Swedish elections expert would serve on the commission to investigate irregularities in the vote and recommend steps to avoid a tainted result. A third commission member is to be named by the European Union, which helped finance and monitor Saturday's voting.
The 15 candidates announced a boycott of the election hours after voting began, after Afghan citizens complained that in some polling stations voters found they were able to wash away a supposedly indelible ink applied to their thumbs to prevent people from voting more than once. But deep public enthusiasm about the election helped push the candidates to withdraw their rejection, as did pressure from Western governments and the United Nations.
Qanooni said he decided to rejoin the electoral process after meeting U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and UN official Jean Arnault. An aide to a lesser-known candidate, Abdulsatar Sirat, said Sirat also would accept the plan for the investigating commission, The Associated Press reported. At least four of the 15 candidates have formally announced their readiness to accept the vote's result, and the others were widely expected to follow, informs Newsday.
According to the Daily Times, incumbent Hamid Karzai was set for a landslide victory as his chief rival said he and other candidates were withdrawing their rejection of Afghanistan-s first presidential poll.
Millions of Afghans took part in Saturday-s poll, the first time the impoverished, war-torn Islamic nation voted for a president, but all 15 of Karzai-s challengers announced a boycott, saying a system to prevent multiple voting had failed. ?We want unity in this election, not a boycott,¦ ethnic Tajik commander Yunus Qanuni told reporters after intermediaries, including US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, interceded in the row. ?The people want it and we appreciate their feelings.¦
Qanuni said he was speaking for several candidates but not all. But his acquiescence means the end of the most serious opposition to the poll, which was held under the shadow of threats of violence by Taliban insurgents.
An exit poll conducted by the Washington-based International Republican Institute (IRI), a US think tank, showed Karzai heading for a landslide. With more than 12,000 survey responses recorded, Karzai had over 50 percent of the vote - a trend maintained from when the sample had reached 2,000 - enough to avoid a run-off with second-placed Qanuni.
The opposition boycott that threatened to wreck Afghanistan's first presidential election appeared to be crumbling yesterday, as the leading opposition candidate said he would recognise the poll result pending an independent inquiry.
The latest threat to the county's traumatic first encounter with democracy comes at the start of a three-week counting marathon that promises more controversies before a final verdict can emerge.
Ballots placed by voters who defied everything from Taliban threats to an indelible-ink fiasco have begun to pour into counting centres, some brought by mule from remote mountain areas. But the fear remains that the credibility of the election has been undermined by allegations of massive voter fraud in favour of the American-backed President Hamid Karzai, reports the NEWS.
Mr Karzai's chief rival, the Tajik, Younis Qanooni, said yesterday he was withdrawing his call for the results of Saturday's election to be cancelled and the vote to be held again, after the United Nations announced it would hold an inquiry into alleged irregularities. Election monitors confirmed that indelible ink used to mark voters' fingers and prevent them voting twice was faulty, and washed off easily. Other allegations by opposition candidates, that thousands of Pakistanis voted illegally, could not be confirmed.

why do you need a 2 party prefered system like the US?

why not a preferential system?

i mean thats what we have here for both the house and the senate, you number every box rather than voting for one person. That way it really wouldnt matter if you had 500 canditates (altho people would be shitty about numbering that many boxes), you would be still getting a fair vote for everyone

it goes like this

candiate 1 gets 10% of the first round
2 17%
3 30%
4 20%
5 20%
6 3%

so 6 gets knocked out and the people who voted for 6 get there next preference distributed, and that continues untill one person gets a clear majority of the total votes

I like it; that's the best so far.

Originally posted by: Asguard
why do you need a 2 party prefered system like the US?

Why indeed. That is why the US is always in this conundrum of choosing the lesser of 2 evils rather than the best candidate to run the country. The 2 party system is corrupt and give voters very little choice in who to vote for.

"The 2 party system is corrupt and give voters very little choice in who to vote for. ", I Am F_AQ2

Corruption exists in every government, and the United States is no different. I would not, however, agree that it is higher than another country, or blame it on the two party system. The Clinton fiasco certainly was proof that the Republicans were willing to prosecute one from another party. That system has been used for an extremely long time, and has shown few problems. I would not mind a third party to show some strength in order to shake things up a little, but Congress has set up many of its traditions and rules based on that two party system.