Rafsanjani And Mashaei Disqualified From Elections

[Hannibal]

Salams,

The Interior Ministry has finally released the results of those who can run for the presidency. Mashaei and Rafsanjani were vetted out.

Here is the list:

1) Saeed Jalili

2) GR. Haddad Adel

3) Mohsen Rezaei

4) Hasan Rawhani

5) Mohammad Reza Aref

6) Mohammad Gharazi

7) Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf

8) Ali Akbar Velayati

http://farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=13920231001346

Edited May 21, 2013 by Hannibal

[hasanhh]

(salam)

"Interior Ministry" ? Isn't it the Guardian Council that determines basic eligability?

Also, only "8" out of 368 'hopefuls' ?

[Hannibal]

(salam)

"Interior Ministry" ? Isn't it the Guardian Council that determines basic eligability?

Also, only "8" out of 368 'hopefuls' ?

Yes, but then they send the final list to the Interior Ministry who then announces it.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Hannibal

[Al-Englisi]

The Guardian Council has to produce the results within 5 days, they are allowed an extra 5 days if need be, when they come to a conclusion they pass the list on to the interior ministry to announce it within 2 days.

Usually they only allow 10 through, many of the people who apply have absolutely no qualifications or do not meet the requirements to become simple administrators, let alone president.

Also, people like Rafsanjani were vetted out because they were deemed physically unfit to run, the guy is falling apart in his old age.

[Abbas_Zaidi]

wow never expected Rafsanjani to be vetted out..it looks more like a one sided affair now..these two could have added spice into the elections..

[Thurston]

What's the point of holding an election when 2 main contenders are supposedly disqualified. They might as well appoint someone and not waste everyone's time.

[ShiaBen]

Hannibal, thanks for the great news.

Maybe there's a lack of "moral" integrity of vetting these two figures out.

But the country is best off if it is represented by genuine and sincere candidates who actually give a damn about Iran and are not in for some flamboyant sense of reputation or transgressive thirst for power.

Edited May 21, 2013 by ShiaBen

[Golden-crowned]

I am so happy that I am not going to see Mashaee in news anymore but I am little bit afraid of Ahmadinejad and the kind of things he may do to change this result.

[kadhim]

There has got to be a better, less heavy-handed, more democratic way to filter down the list of candidates for the ballot. Like maybe a requirement that the candidate needs the signature of nomination of some significant percentage of the voters in all provinces of the country, something like that. This system where the public has the list trimmed for them is just such an infantilizing disrespect for the people. But, then again, this infantilizing "management of the affairs of the 'incompetent'" is kind of the philosophy of the whole political system in Iran, so it goes pretty deep and is hard to root out.

[Ali-F]

Including thee eight, Ahmadinejad is with them? Right?

Go Ahmaedinejad

[Marbles]

What's the point of holding an election when 2 main contenders are supposedly disqualified. They might as well appoint someone and not waste everyone's time.

It's the only country where the soundness of your health must be approved from a Council before you run.

I was always under the impression that giving people a chance to size you up for the job was a better idea.

[Haji 2003]

I was always under the impression that giving people a chance to size you up for the job was a better idea.

But that does not happen anywhere else either.

Lots of different mechanisms in place in every country, ranging from having to to have a deposit, to needing a national machinery in order to get a meaningful quantity of votes, to a national press that universally hates you.

[Gypsy]

I don't really like Rafsanjani or Mahaei and I think it's not a big loss for the Iranians not to see both of them.

However, Iran should really let her people decide at the voting poll and not make these “high-level decision” on who is qualified or unqualified to compete. Also, Iran should not disqualify their women candidates just because they are female.

Lots of different mechanisms in place in every country, ranging from having to to have a deposit, to needing a national machinery in order to get a meaningful quantity of votes, to a national press that universally hates you.

If we go by this, then Rafsanjani should not even be disqualified at all. He has plenty of cash and also backers.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Gypsy

[repenter-gone4awhile]

Nothing new to those who follow the iranian news. Was pretty clear they both wouldn't get salahiyat. And it was also clear that Lankarani would step away in favor of Jalili after Ayatollah Mesbah Yazdis speech.

[Haji 2003]

If we go by this, then Rafsanjani should not even be disqualified at all. He has plenty of cash and also backers.

In most other countries the dice are loaded in favour of rich candidates. Good to see that is not necessarily the case in Iran.

[Shiabro]

In most other countries the dice are loaded in favour of rich candidates. Good to see that is not necessarily the case in Iran.

Not really. In the US elections Obama won against much richer Republicans( if you count private money).

Also compare other countries(Zapatero in Spain, Socialists in France against Sarkozy, Germany, China, etc.).

In fact you can count me countries in which the richer candidates always win.

Being rich or not rich doesn't always make someone's personality/power.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Shiabro

[Ya Imam-e-Zamana Adrikni]

Rafsanjani can still appeal the GCs decision. In the past Ayatollah Khamenei has overuled the GC and reinstated candidates. How long do candidates have to appeal?

[Gypsy]

In most other countries the dice are loaded in favour of rich candidates. Good to see that is not necessarily the case in Iran.

How about the other guy who doesn't really appear to be as rich as Rafsanjani. So, what are the criteria for disqualifications?They seem pretty arbitrary to me.

[Marbles]

But that does not happen anywhere else either.

Lots of different mechanisms in place in every country, ranging from having to to have a deposit, to needing a national machinery in order to get a meaningful quantity of votes, to a national press that universally hates you.

Sure, but nowhere a high council with mysterious powers in a jamhoori country preempts candidates before standing the test of ballot. Candidates make use of the mechanisms to attract people toward them. That's why it's called jamhoori.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Marbles

[skylight2]

Awesome! The Guardian's council is finally playing its role of protecting the Islamic Revolution - the last Presidential elections was a good eye opener that not every tom henry rafsansjani musavi etc. are to be allowed to run and attempt to ruin the revolution for their personal gain.

[Abbas_Zaidi]

i think it would be better if the opportunity of rejecting the candidate should have been given to the Iranian people.

It pretty much becomes a one sided affair now...I dont think there will be good turnout this time.

[skylight2]

Iran is an Islamic Republic not a straight up "democracy" - they made the mistake of allowing people like Musawi to run last time, and look what happened... no need for such a repeat. Turn out might be bit lower, but having a high turn out at the cost of chaos and danger to the Islamic Republic is not really an option. Inshallah, the people of Iran have wised up and will turn out in high numbers. Besides, Rafsanjani already lost twice in the past two elections - once against Ahamdinadjad, and once in the face of Musawi again against Ahmadinejad - Rafsanjani does have an ally running who was approved - so they'll have the option for voting for his policies. Mashaei is really not capable of being the President (period).

[skylight2]

Not really. In the US elections Obama won against much richer Republicans( if you count private money).

Obama belongs to the same class background as the Republicans - not about relative "richness" but about class - if one of the two wealthiest classes in the US had not wanted Obama to win - he would not have won (period). A more accurate comparison would be with the Greens or other smaller third parties in the US - whose candidates are not backed by, nor are from wealthy class backgrounds - they get max 1-3% vote. The "guardian council" in the US are made up of the wealthiest peoples, groups, corporations of the US, and they decide (based on their corprorate/wealth interests) which two candidate will run in the elections, and what choices the people will get.

Contrast this with Iran - where 1) the choices are significantly more - 8 vs. 2 in the US, and 2) the criteria is based on protecting the Islamic Revolution - and the nation of Iran. Not protecting some big business wealthy imperialists.

[Marbles]

i think it would be better if the opportunity of rejecting the candidate should have been given to the Iranian people.

It pretty much becomes a one sided affair now...I dont think there will be good turnout this time.

The motley group of so called Reformists will be and have been sidelined but the Conservative rigidness is going to become their undoing when they start fighting amongst themselves.

[Abbas_Zaidi]

Iran is an Islamic Republic not a straight up "democracy" - they made the mistake of allowing people like Musawi to run last time, and look what happened... no need for such a repeat. Turn out might be bit lower, but having a high turn out at the cost of chaos and danger to the Islamic Republic is not really an option. Inshallah, the people of Iran have wised up and will turn out in high numbers. Besides, Rafsanjani already lost twice in the past two elections - once against Ahamdinadjad, and once in the face of Musawi again against Ahmadinejad - Rafsanjani does have an ally running who was approved - so they'll have the option for voting for his policies. Mashaei is really not capable of being the President (period).

Yeah i fully agree with you that Guardian Council was and should be very cautious this time so as to not to repeat 2009.

But my point is the majority of Iranians (even pro-regime ones) will not be motivated to vote because they know that all guys are having the same ideology.

It does not matter who comes to power.

I am sure turnout will be less this time around.

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

Ahmadinejad should be extended or polls should be postponed till the Syrian conflict is resolved

[imaan=faith]

Alhamdulillah...

[WilayaBlood]

Aslamalaykum,

1) Saeed Jalili

2) GR. Haddad Adel

3) Mohsen Rezaei

4) Hasan Rawhani

5) Mohammad Reza Aref

6) Mohammad Gharazi

7) Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf

8) Ali Akbar Velayati

Out of those 8 candidates, who is an ally of the supreme leader?

[repenter-gone4awhile]

Aslamalaykum,

Out of those 8 candidates, who is an ally of the supreme leader?

They all say they are more or less, but Jalili is hardcore wilayati.

[Noah-]

Ahmadinejad should be extended or polls should be postponed till the Syrian conflict is resolved

Ahmadinejad should leave when his time is up! And hopefully people who oppose him just leave him alone in his last days.... they should show him some respect for some of his good works he has done for his country...and prepare him for a save and peaceful exit. Because, Ahmadinejad will say 'goodbye' to politics..

He has no personal influence over Syrian crisis.... and instead his government made some wrong moves on Syria and Egypt in trying to appeal to Sunni-Ikhwanists.... And his government still insists on grouping with Hamas/Jihad and other anti-Shia Saudi puppet movements.... something that has negative impacts on Iran's position/foreign relations and in weakening Shias' position in the region.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Noah-

[Marbles]

On second thought, I think if the Guardian Council is tasked with approving the aspiring candidates, they might as well just select one from the many applicants and save people the trouble of queuing at the ballot box.

Mr. Jalili is already the next president of the Islamic Republic. Anyone here doubts my rocket science?

Edited May 22, 2013 by Marbles

[ShiaBen]

Going to hijack this thread and make it a bit more broader. Instead of talking about the expelled "potentials" lets also make way for discussion about the "elite 8".

Who do you guys like and why? And I'm interested in hearing from hamvatans who either reside in Iran or live abroad who are still eligible to vote.

In the last elections there was a great rift. We had the reformists who voted for Mousavi, as well as some conservatives who were disgruntled with Ahmadinejad's first term and decided to vote against him by switching to Mousavi during the following election, with the remainder voting for Ahmadinejad for a 2nd term.

Anyways, as you can see, both major reformists are vetted. There are some minor players still eligible but that's irrelevant as there are more popular conservative candidates who will probably make the run as close as 2005.

I think of the 8, while most of them are solid, IMHO I'm leaning toward Ghalibaf. He did a great job as a commander during the 1999 and 2003 protests. Effectively ended them from getting any worse than they already were.

More important than his status as a revolutionary commander is his status as mayor. He took up a field that's somewhat challenging and different than his own and just marveled at it. Both the reformists and conservatives appreciated his time as mayor.

-Milad Tower (solid move for attracting more tourism esp. in Tehran which is not a touristic city in the veins of Isfahan, Shiraz)

-Police 110 project (put some use to policeman as their responsibilities were a lot more limited in the past and they've became more active ever since, have trouble finding a governmental building? Need directions to important sites? They're a lot more accessible now than in the past)

-His hand in the Tehran Metro System (revolutionized transportation in a city that's as dense as Mexico City, taxis, buses, are not always enough so this has made life much easier for fellow Tehroonis than in the past)

It is almost a crime not to highlight his contributions to Iran. But with all said and done, I'm for any of these 8 candidates as long as they're willing to continue Iran's nuclear program and to help Iran get better and better over time.

[Noah-]

^Agreed on Qalibaf.... In my opinion amongst the 8 he might be the best candidate to replace Ahmadinejad for many different domestic/foreign reasons...!

And then Rezaei is also a good one....

[repenter-gone4awhile]

On second thought, I think if the Guardian Council is tasked with approving the aspiring candidates, they might as well just select one from the many applicants and save people the trouble of queuing at the ballot box.

Mr. Jalili is already the next president of the Islamic Republic. Anyone here doubts my rocket science?

Depends what kind of science you are using? Do you mean he is already the next president by fair vote? OR by cheating?

[skylight2]

On second thought, I think if the Guardian Council is tasked with approving the aspiring candidates, they might as well just select one from the many applicants and save people the trouble of queuing at the ballot box.

Mr. Jalili is already the next president of the Islamic Republic. Anyone here doubts my rocket science?

Things are a bit different in Iran, from the Pakistani science you might be using, where the US embassy decides elections, or if they are to happen in the first place, and who gets to get assassinated , and when the military is to take over etc.