Zimbabwe "elections"
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:08:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Zimbabwe "elections"
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Zimbabwe "elections"  (Read 6532 times)
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: April 01, 2005, 10:23:07 PM »

someone just needs to cap Mugabe. There's no other way to get rid of that lunatic.
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: April 02, 2005, 04:21:13 AM »

By Manoah Esipisu

HARARE (Reuters) - President Robert Mugabe's party seized the two-thirds parliamentary majority it needs to change Zimbabwe's constitution Saturday, clinching an election which both the opposition and western powers said was rigged.
   

Official results announced Saturday showed Mugabe's ZANU-PF party winning 71 of the 120 contested seats against 39 for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).


With the president appointing 30 additional members of the 150-seat parliament, ZANU-PF now has the two-thirds majority that Mugabe had set as a major election goal.


MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai has said the polls were marked by massive fraud and held in an atmosphere of fear and political intimidation -- an assessment echoed by the United States, Britain and other major western powers.


Tsvangirai, who has accused Mugabe of rigging the country's previous two elections in 2000 and 2002, has hinted his supporters may launch protests rather than attempt to fight the result in court.


The official Herald newspaper urged the MDC Saturday to accept defeat, saying the party's poor showing was the result of its "reflex reaction" to court Mugabe's western critics rather than Zimbabwean voters at home.


"The lesson the MDC should learn from its defeat is that electoral battles are fought in Zimbabwe, not Europe," the newspaper said in an editorial.


Mugabe, 81, and in power since independence from Britain in 1980, has dismissed criticism of the election, which he said were as free and fair as any in the world.


CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGES


Analysts say the party could use its majority to push through constitutional changes to protect Mugabe from the kind of prosecutions that have plagued some other African leaders when they stepped down. Mugabe is due to retire in 2008.


Critics accuse Mugabe of ruining once-prosperous Zimbabwe by a chaotic seizure of white farms for landless blacks and economic mismanagement.


Zimbabwe, once a regional breadbasket, is now crippled by huge inflation, unemployment and food and fuel shortages.


Mugabe blames his Western critics for sabotaging the economy and had demanded a crushing ZANU-PF victory to see off the challenge from the MDC, which he pillories as a British puppet.


The MDC says the whole electoral process favored ZANU-PF and the 5.78 million-strong voting roll was inflated with 1 million "ghost voters." It also questioned why tens of thousands of voters were turned away from polling stations.


MDC party leaders were due to meet Saturday to consider the path forward.


Regional observers from the Southern African Development Community (SADC), who had been expected to give the poll a clean bill of health, expressed concerns.


"The picture that emerged at the close of the poll was an election day which was peaceful. Notwithstanding these initial observations the SADC elections observer mission is however concerned with the number of people who were turned away from polling stations," the mission said in a statement.

   



"It is still not clear to us exactly how many people were affected in this way as well as the reason for them not being able to cast their votes," added the observers.

The conduct of the poll was roundly condemned by Western governments including Britain, the European Union and Germany.

"The independent press was muzzled; freedom of assembly was constrained; food was used as a weapon to sway hungry voters; and millions of Zimbabweans who have been forced by the nation's economic collapse to emigrate were disenfranchised," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in a statement.

Even so, campaigning and voting were generally free of the violence that marred parliamentary polls in 2000 and Mugabe's re-election in 2002.

The conduct of those elections is at the root of Mugabe's international isolation.
Logged
migrendel
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,672
Italy


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: April 02, 2005, 09:55:16 AM »

I was delighted to learn of Robert Mugabe's victory. I believe that his land distribution policies, while flawed, are the only way to displace certain of white colonial domination. Hopefully, Zimbabwe will move forward rather than backward.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: April 02, 2005, 10:29:51 AM »

Put down the crackpipe Migrendel.

1. Zimbabwe is only a semi-democracy as 30 seats out of 150 (or is it 120?) are appointed by the President.

2. The election was rigged... there were cases of the number of votes cast in some ZANU-PF areas rising AFTER the polls closed and it was the reverse in some MDC areas.
The electoral register is full of dead and dulipicate voters...

3. Millions of voters currently living abroad were purged from the electoral roll for no real reason... other than the fact they would have gone hugely for the MDC.

4. Years of intimidation and repression including "votes for food".
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: April 02, 2005, 10:34:08 AM »

Put down the crackpipe Migrendel.

1. Zimbabwe is only a semi-democracy as 30 seats out of 150 (or is it 120?) are appointed by the President.



*cough* Chamber of the Lords *cough*
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: April 02, 2005, 10:39:48 AM »

*cough* Chamber of the Lords *cough*

The House of Lords does not determine who becomes P.M, cannot dismiss the Government and cannot kill legislation. Even the Commons wants to it can even make it stop any blocking (it can't block "money bills" anyway).
If there is a standoff (like the Anti Terror bill) the Lords is supposed to cave in first.

I think the Lords should have a large elected element, but it doesn't compare with the joke of a system in Zimbabwe... an equivilent to that would be letting the P.M appoint 100 M.P's.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2005, 12:43:15 PM »

I was delighted to learn of Robert Mugabe's victory. I believe that his land distribution policies, while flawed, are the only way to displace certain of white colonial domination. Hopefully, Zimbabwe will move forward rather than backward.

um, he hasn't improved life at all for the blacks since the white rule. The land reform hasn't improved things at all for the typical blacks, just that Mugabe and his cronies grabbed all the best land for themselves, and still aren't caring that the common people are starving. Mugabe hasn't done a thing for the typical black who suffered under colonial rule, he just forced them from one tyranny to another.

I also would never praise a victory that occured after such obvious fraud, such as this.
Logged
Bono
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,699
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: April 02, 2005, 02:40:08 PM »

*cough* Chamber of the Lords *cough*

The House of Lords does not determine who becomes P.M, cannot dismiss the Government and cannot kill legislation. Even the Commons wants to it can even make it stop any blocking (it can't block "money bills" anyway).
If there is a standoff (like the Anti Terror bill) the Lords is supposed to cave in first.

I think the Lords should have a large elected element, but it doesn't compare with the joke of a system in Zimbabwe... an equivilent to that would be letting the P.M appoint 100 M.P's.

I know, just teasin ya. Smiley
Logged
WMS
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,562


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -1.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: April 02, 2005, 10:43:00 PM »

I see it's time to dust off Freedom House again.

Freedom House Press Release 1

Freedom House Press Release #2, with link to the full 2005 rating report

Zimbabwe (Political Rights/Civil Liberties)
2004  7* 6   NF
2003  6   6   NF
2002  6   6   NF
2001  6   6* NF*
2000  6   5   PF
1999  6* 5   PF
1998  5   5   PF
1997  5   5   PF
1996  5   5   PF
1995  5   5   PF
1994  5   5   PF

1980 independence after overthrowing the Rhodesian regime Ruled by Robert Mugabe since then; 1980-1987 as Prime Minister, 1987-current as President; always under the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF)
Initially repressive but stable, but highly brutal 1983-1987 military campaign against Ndebele (largest minority group in Zimbabwe), who resisted Shona (largest group in Zimbabwe) total control over the government
Things really get bad after 2000, with forcible land redistribution  *****THAT MOSTLY GAVE LAND TO MUGABE'S CRONIES IN THE ZANU-PF AND NOT TO "THE LANDLESS RURAL BLACK ZIMBABWEANS WHO WERE SUPPOSED TO BENEFIT"*****; economy implodes
2000 parliamentary elections; highly violent and not even remotely free and fair; Mugabe pardons all those who committed election-related crimes (including mass rapes) against the M(ovement) for D(emocratic) C(hange) (MDC) party
2002 presidential election; not even remotely free and fair
2003 by-elections; not even remotely free and fair
2005 as we've just seen (2 April 2005) parliamentary elections; not even remotely free and fair
Read the Freedom House report for more details...

And from Stratfor: Mbeki is backing Mugabe... [emphasis mine]

"Mbeki and his African National Congress party have been very supportive of their neighbor to the north throughout the election process -- both in the current cycle and in the 2000 and 2002 polls. ANC members have consistently stated their belief that this year's election would be both free and fair, saying they have no evidence to the contrary. They've also continued to commend Mugabe for complying with the electoral regulations of the South African Development Community (SADC), even though the SADC Parliamentary Forum has been excluded from observing the Zimbabwean election and other observers allege that many regulations were broken.

Mbeki is putting himself on the line for the regime in Harare -- but why?
.....
But there's a method behind this apparent madness.

Within South Africa, the ruling ANC is a tri-partite alliance, comprising the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu), the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the African National Congress (ANC) party itself. Cosatu is a consistent critic of the Mugabe regime, saying the Zanu-PF has not protected the rights of workers in the region. In recent days, the SACP and Cosatu held joint demonstrations to protest of the Zanu-PF government and Zimbabwe's elections.
.....
Mbeki is well aware that if a labor rights movement is able to take power in Harare, he personally could face enormous pressure and make an easy target for ouster, even from his leadership of the ANC. Mbeki has been in power since 1999 and is preparing for retirement; he likely feels the need to hold his golden parachute -- ballooned by international and domestic respectability -- intact until then."
Logged
Notre Dame rules!
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: April 03, 2005, 06:12:09 PM »

I was delighted to learn of Robert Mugabe's victory. I believe that his land distribution policies, while flawed, are the only way to displace certain of white colonial domination. Hopefully, Zimbabwe will move forward rather than backward.



If murdering the landowners, and displacing their skilled farmworkers with Zanu-PF cronies that are incapable of growing food is the most equitable way to redistribute land, I hope like hell that you never get elected to any political office.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: April 03, 2005, 06:22:13 PM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.
Logged
Jake
dubya2004
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,621
Cuba


Political Matrix
E: -0.90, S: -0.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: April 03, 2005, 06:30:13 PM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.

This is an article on Jimmy Carter and Mugabe.
Logged
CARLHAYDEN
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,638


Political Matrix
E: 1.38, S: -0.51

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: April 03, 2005, 06:49:27 PM »

Rumors suggest to insure that the 'election' posts the results he wants, Mugabe has hired Dean Logan as a consultant to 'fix' the system.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,693
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: April 03, 2005, 06:56:28 PM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.

This is an article on Jimmy Carter and Mugabe.

the Mugabe of 1980 is far different than today. Look at the archived Freedom House scores.

The question is whether Carter has praised Mugabe recentely, or claimed the recent elections were legitimate, as Notre dame has claimed here.
Logged
Notre Dame rules!
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: April 03, 2005, 10:31:28 PM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.

This is an article on Jimmy Carter and Mugabe.

the Mugabe of 1980 is far different than today. Look at the archived Freedom House scores.

The question is whether Carter has praised Mugabe recentely, or claimed the recent elections were legitimate, as Notre dame has claimed here.



As I pointed out to you earlier, the comment about Carter was sarcasm, and was based on his earlier comments in which he praises dictators, or dictator wannabees, for winninng their 'free' elections.  I have no doubt that Carter will praise the statesman that is Mugabe for conducting an honorable campaign.   Carter has become a pathetic caricature of a former statesmen.  I guess that is what an ass-whooun at the hands of Ronald Reagan can do to you, even after this much time has passed.
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: April 04, 2005, 04:35:54 AM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.

This is an article on Jimmy Carter and Mugabe.

the Mugabe of 1980 is far different than today. Look at the archived Freedom House scores.

The question is whether Carter has praised Mugabe recentely, or claimed the recent elections were legitimate, as Notre dame has claimed here.



As I pointed out to you earlier, the comment about Carter was sarcasm, and was based on his earlier comments in which he praises dictators, or dictator wannabees, for winninng their 'free' elections.  I have no doubt that Carter will praise the statesman that is Mugabe for conducting an honorable campaign.   Carter has become a pathetic caricature of a former statesmen.  I guess that is what an ass-whooun at the hands of Ronald Reagan can do to you, even after this much time has passed.
Umm, no. The Carter Center has a record of condemning Zimbabwe's farces  Mugabe calls elections.

"The election process was fundamentally flawed by pre-election intimidation and violence against the opposition by ruling party militants with tacit or even active support from the government, as widely reported by credible international and domestic observers on the scene. Nonetheless, candidates from all parties campaigned actively and relative calm prevailed on the two days of balloting, although a significant number of voters were turned away and scattered reports of intimidation in rural areas were received."

http://www.cartercenter.org/viewdoc.asp?docID=1023&submenu=news

Logged
Notre Dame rules!
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 777


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: April 04, 2005, 08:12:37 PM »

Now please point me to Jimmy Carter's praise of Mugabe or his claims that the elections were fair.

This is an article on Jimmy Carter and Mugabe.

the Mugabe of 1980 is far different than today. Look at the archived Freedom House scores.

The question is whether Carter has praised Mugabe recentely, or claimed the recent elections were legitimate, as Notre dame has claimed here.



As I pointed out to you earlier, the comment about Carter was sarcasm, and was based on his earlier comments in which he praises dictators, or dictator wannabees, for winninng their 'free' elections.  I have no doubt that Carter will praise the statesman that is Mugabe for conducting an honorable campaign.   Carter has become a pathetic caricature of a former statesmen.  I guess that is what an ass-whooun at the hands of Ronald Reagan can do to you, even after this much time has passed.
Umm, no. The Carter Center has a record of condemning Zimbabwe's farces  Mugabe calls elections.

"The election process was fundamentally flawed by pre-election intimidation and violence against the opposition by ruling party militants with tacit or even active support from the government, as widely reported by credible international and domestic observers on the scene. Nonetheless, candidates from all parties campaigned actively and relative calm prevailed on the two days of balloting, although a significant number of voters were turned away and scattered reports of intimidation in rural areas were received."

http://www.cartercenter.org/viewdoc.asp?docID=1023&submenu=news







The article admits that Mugabe stole yet another election, yet gives him credit for not murdering opposition voters, or at least not too many of them.  Give me a break!  The only reason that relative peace ensued is because oppostion candidates know that if they riot, they will be killed.  It's that simple.  Africans aren't stupid!  They have learned from Rwanda's experience that anything can happen in Afirica, including wholesale genocide, and nobody from the outside world will do ANYTHING meaningful to stop it.
Logged
2952-0-0
exnaderite
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,221


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: April 05, 2005, 05:26:18 AM »

True, but this time they were banned from observing this election. That's why they made no statement.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.051 seconds with 11 queries.