Fixed Iranian Election Makes No Sense

Well at least when Americans steal elections we make it look close. Cenk Uygur writes:

This conversation about whether the Iranian vote was fixed is nonsense. Of course it was! Yes, polls in Iran are unreliable but Mousavi was leading 54-39 in the one poll before the election. Heavy voter turnout favored him. And instead he loses 63% to 34%. That's an absolute joke. They might as well have gone all the way and called it 97-3%.

According to these "official" results Mousavi lost his own home district (which is inconceivable in Iranian politics) and got far less votes than previous reformist candidates [...]

You have to understand 63-34 is a gigantic blowout that is much larger than some of the biggest landslides in American history. When Reagan crushed Mondale in 1984 and carried 49 out of the 50 states, he only won 58.8% to 40.6%. To say Ahmedinejad won 63-34 is not only saying we fixed this thing, but we're rubbing it in your face.

The New Yorker's Laura Secor concurs.

Going this route is has terrible disadvantages for the man who wields the most power in Iran--Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. True revolutionary zeal has been awakened in Iran. Keeping Ahmadinejad in power makes it easier for the United States to pressure Iran to make concessions because Ahmadinejad's cartoonish villainy unites the world against Iran.