Skip to main content

Iraq Election Results (provisional)

There are those that say that the Vietnam Election results from 1967 are a precedent that informs the Iraqi Results announced about 90 minutes ago (1pm GMT, 4pm Iraqi Time).

I would argue differently. The national results which *provisionally give the following:
130 Kurd Alliance2,175,55126%
169 Shi'a UIA4,075,29548%
2851,168,94314%
Total Votes8,456,266


Are a clear victory for the Shi'a UIA list with the Kurds putting in a very strong showing. This gives the Kurds+Shi'a 74%. For key votes in the provisional national assembly 67% is needed. Also the Shi'a list have to be in government.

*provisional - subject to appeal by parties
Note I have only reported those parties that got over a million votes.

Most of the parties got small votes which will not deliver any representatives. 85 parties got less than 10,000 votes. That will probably give the Shi'a UIA a majority in the Assembly. (As those votes will most likely not be counted towards anything. I have, however, not checked the rules on this. )

Vote RangeNo of Parties
0-10,00085
10,001-50,00013
50,001-100,0004
100,001-1,000,0001 - list 255 at 150,680 Ghazi al-Yawer (Sunni Arab - President)
Over 1 Million3 as above


This gives the "big three" 7,419,789. If you assume 250,000ish other votes are counted towards representatives that gives a vote that matters of say 7,750,000.
This gives the UIA 53% and Kurds 28%.

There is a possiblity of calm in the future, but only if the belligerent forces are withdrawn.

Election Rules
I don't know what the rules are that relate the elected representatives and the numbers of votes. The system is a party list system which elects a number of representatives from a list starting with the first one. There are a number of systems that can be used. D'Hondt and St Lague are the most common. Both of these provide representatives until all the representatives have been allocated. I believe every third candidate is required to be female.

Mathematically the number of votes cast divided by 275 is 30,750. This would imply any party with more than 30,750 votes gets someone. Note that 85 parties have less than 10,000 and will get nothing. The allocation system tends to bias towards the larger parties as well. If they are using one of these systems then they probably will

The difference in Vietnam particularly was that the opposition to the US was divided into a large number of groups. The US sympathising faction in Vietnam got 35% of the vote and won. In Iraq the US associated faction (which also called for troop withdrawal in Arabic) only got 14%.

To that extent the result differs in that the winners cannot be defined as being sympathetic with the US. The Kurds have their own interests which have historically aligned with the US, but they don't have a blocking vote.

It is clear that the US have trained their sights on Iran. Hence having elections in Iraq which result in a faction seen as sympathetic to Iran being elected will not go down well with the Project for a New American Century.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Gender Issues comparison of candidates

John Hemming believes that an MP should represent everyone in their constituency.  This should be regardless of their race, religion, gender, abledness, sexual orientation or anything else.  It should be everyone.

When he was an MP he worked on issues relating to men, those relating to women and those relating to non-binary people. Everyone.

For example here is John Hemming on a demonstration outside the courts with the campaign group Women Against Rape (it related to the case of a mother who had her child removed from her because the mother was raped).




Jess Phillips, who campaigns on women's issues, notwithstanding the questions asked about her appointments in her parliamentary office, had the following response when asked for a debate on issues specifically relating to men: