He may be a son-of-a-bitch, but he is our son-of-a-bitch
January 31, 2009 1:05 PM Subscribe
US meddling in Kenyan elections:
An exit poll, if it had been released in a timely manner, could have altered the result of Kenya's presidential election in 2007 and prevented the deaths of many people there, say people involved in the U.S. backed effort.
It is suggested that Michael E. Ranneberger US ambassador to Kenya was meddling in Kenya's Elections, playing down the corruption of Mwai Kibaki's government.
More than 1,000 people died and 304,000 displaced.
Related Metafiler threads on the 2007 Kenya election . 1, 2, 3 , 4
An exit poll, if it had been released in a timely manner, could have altered the result of Kenya's presidential election in 2007 and prevented the deaths of many people there, say people involved in the U.S. backed effort.
It is suggested that Michael E. Ranneberger US ambassador to Kenya was meddling in Kenya's Elections, playing down the corruption of Mwai Kibaki's government.
More than 1,000 people died and 304,000 displaced.
Related Metafiler threads on the 2007 Kenya election . 1, 2, 3 , 4
In Kenya's highly contested election, this exit poll, conducted by an experienced American organization, might have been the best gauge of who really won.
What exactly is the purpose of this article? That elections are unnecessary when you've got good polls?
posted by incessant at 1:28 PM on January 31, 2009
What exactly is the purpose of this article? That elections are unnecessary when you've got good polls?
posted by incessant at 1:28 PM on January 31, 2009
So if the other guy had won, there wouldn't be rioting? It seems that after the election the only thing releasing the poll could have done would have been to add fuel to the fire.
posted by delmoi at 1:52 PM on January 31, 2009
posted by delmoi at 1:52 PM on January 31, 2009
I'm sorry but I don't think that conducting an exit poll and not releasing the results in any way counts as meddling in an election. That is a pretty badly written article, imho.
It is entirely possible that the people who had the results didn't want to release them because they felt it might lead to exactly the kind of violence that occured. Or maybe it was just a badly done or analyzed poll and the numbers were known or strongly felt to be inaccurate.
posted by fshgrl at 1:52 PM on January 31, 2009
It is entirely possible that the people who had the results didn't want to release them because they felt it might lead to exactly the kind of violence that occured. Or maybe it was just a badly done or analyzed poll and the numbers were known or strongly felt to be inaccurate.
posted by fshgrl at 1:52 PM on January 31, 2009
Not releasing an exit poll does not qualify as meddling in an election.
posted by oaf at 3:09 PM on January 31, 2009
posted by oaf at 3:09 PM on January 31, 2009
delmoi : So if the other guy had won, there wouldn't be rioting? It seems that after the election the only thing releasing the poll could have done would have been to add fuel to the fire.
from the first article:
By Dec. 29, two days after the voting, trouble was brewing.
The Kenyan electoral commission's tally showed Odinga's
370,000-vote lead down to 38,000 and dropping, prompting
accusations of fraud.
I think the writer's point is that had the exit poll come out in time, and without US endorsement in the results, the incumbent would have not been able to successfully manipulate the vote, and would have been forced to concede. The concession would have eliminated the rioting.
posted by rakish_yet_centered at 4:56 PM on January 31, 2009
from the first article:
By Dec. 29, two days after the voting, trouble was brewing.
The Kenyan electoral commission's tally showed Odinga's
370,000-vote lead down to 38,000 and dropping, prompting
accusations of fraud.
I think the writer's point is that had the exit poll come out in time, and without US endorsement in the results, the incumbent would have not been able to successfully manipulate the vote, and would have been forced to concede. The concession would have eliminated the rioting.
posted by rakish_yet_centered at 4:56 PM on January 31, 2009
rakish: And we think that releasing the exit poll data would have caused a concession because...? I mean, I'm certainly not familiar with the details of this particular case, but typically governments/parties willing to commit vote fraud don't say 'oops, you're right, never mind' when confronted with proof that fraud occurred. They just say the evidence is false/trumped up/whatever and continue doing what they were doing.
posted by louie at 6:35 PM on January 31, 2009
posted by louie at 6:35 PM on January 31, 2009
I think Ukraine in 2005(?) was a good example of the international community (other than Russia) unwilling to recognize a vote, and positive events happening.
posted by rakish_yet_centered at 6:50 PM on January 31, 2009
posted by rakish_yet_centered at 6:50 PM on January 31, 2009
Great. The National Endowment for Democracy, the hydra that includes the IRI, is abusing democracy again.
I know MeFites hate editorializing, but connecting a few more dots for this post might've been useful. This is a decent place to start.
posted by shetterly at 9:35 PM on January 31, 2009
I know MeFites hate editorializing, but connecting a few more dots for this post might've been useful. This is a decent place to start.
posted by shetterly at 9:35 PM on January 31, 2009
Politics is like quantum physics. You alter the results simply by observing them.
posted by Xoebe at 8:37 AM on February 1, 2009
posted by Xoebe at 8:37 AM on February 1, 2009
« Older New Neurons Get Timestamped | Life at Ikea, via Flickr Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by gman at 1:14 PM on January 31, 2009