# results



## MaidenScotland

Here is the link to a spreadsheet...
in english

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AnDjICbGuDIEdDA4V3VIQ0tLcUN2ZG9pQ09OYzhQZGc&toomany=true


----------



## Milouk84

MaidenScotland said:


> Here is the link to a spreadsheet...
> in english
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/lv?key=0AnDjICbGuDIEdDA4V3VIQ0tLcUN2ZG9pQ09OYzhQZGc&toomany=true[/QUOTE
> 
> Too much stress. :mmph:


----------



## firstfossil

Had a play with the numbers to look for patterns: 

Mursi's lead over Fotouh grows as you get away from the cities. The combined totals of these two candidates are higher in rural areas too. 

Sabbahi is emphatically more popular in the urban and industrial areas than in Upper Egypt. If parts of Cairo and Giza are still not finished, could he overtake Shafiq?

Why is Shafiq nearly 20 times more popular than Moussa in Minoufiya?? I hope there's a decent reason for it!

I'm just doing the numbers here, I'll leave the whys and wherefores to the more knowledgeable members..


----------



## MaidenScotland

Rock and hard place..


----------



## expatagogo

MaidenScotland said:


> Rock and hard place..


Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.


----------



## Lanason

Mursi 25.48%
Shafik 24.36%
Abulfutouh	17.90%
Sabbahi 21.33%
Mousa 10.92% 

My money was on Mousa - what do I know ???


----------



## Wulfstryde

Lanason said:


> Mursi 25.48%
> Shafik 24.36%
> Abulfutouh	17.90%
> Sabbahi 21.33%
> Mousa 10.92%
> 
> My money was on Mousa - what do I know ???


I thought Abul Futouh would be a frontrunner, but hey, if Sabbahi can pull a major win in the remaining 'urban' governorates, I will be more than pleased. Not too much, just enough to nudge his way past Shafiq. It seems very likely to me that Shafiq-voters would back Sabbahi in a run-off scenario as opposed to Mursi.

Can someone explain why Ahmad Shafiq has such a strong following given his thinly-veiled appreciation for Mubarak and his regime in light of the Egyptian people's sentiments?


----------



## MaidenScotland

if it's the choice between an Islamist and a military man then I guess the Christian population will go for the military. 

what a dilema.. vote for someone who is from the old regime or vote for someone that wants to rule the country through the Koran.. something that you don't believe in.

The only good thing to come out of it is... it is only for 4 years or less.


----------



## Wulfstryde

Yeah I understand that most of the Christians have been forced to pick the lesser of two evils but why Shafik specifically? Sabbahi seems as secular as Shafik without the added weight of being a 'remnant' of the old regime.


----------



## MaidenScotland

Wulfstryde said:


> Yeah I understand that most of the Christians have been forced to pick the lesser of two evils but why Shafik specifically? Sabbahi seems as secular as Shafik without the added weight of being a 'remnant' of the old regime.


At least he has some experience and is well known... 

The problem is that MB and the old regime were really the only people who were organised.. the MB has been waiting in the wings for this day. I wonder if people took into consideration that the MB was not in the revolution until it seemed a done deal,


----------



## MaidenScotland

Voters admitted they faced tough choices. Hamada, a Cairo hairdresser, told al-Ahram he would vote for the "corrupt" Shafiq to protect his livelihood.

"We don't want an Islamic state, although we believe in the revolution. We need a force to counteract the Islamist-dominated parliament … we need someone to secure our jobs, to allow our wives to walk in the streets and help us raise our children safely.

"I know he's a thief, corrupt and a liar but who isn't? The two Brotherhood candidates [Morsi and Abul Fotouh]? Of course not! And Sabbahi won't reach the second round. I'll lose my job if an Islamist becomes president because my job will be forbidden. Our revolution has been stolen."


----------



## Wulfstryde

Hmm, I can see your point. I don't think many people expected Sabbahi to do as well as he did, but that's all moot now. Looks like the gap between him and Shafik has grown a tad too wide for any last-minute surprises.


----------



## aykalam

Brotherhood invites Hamdeen Sabbahi, Abdel-Moneim Abul-Fotouh, others to talks to discuss position of vice president, coalition govt ahead of Run-off, says Brotherhood official

BBC News - Egypt Muslim Brotherhood seeks presidential poll allies


----------



## Milouk84

aykalam said:


> Brotherhood invites Hamdeen Sabbahi, Abdel-Moneim Abul-Fotouh, others to talks to discuss position of vice president, coalition govt ahead of Run-off, says Brotherhood official
> 
> BBC News - Egypt Muslim Brotherhood seeks presidential poll allies


You can never trust what they say.


----------



## jemiljan

No matter the results, the sudden showing of Sabahi is the real story of this election. WIth little advertising and campaigning at that. I mainly heard of him by word of mouth. The results also show that the combination of Sabahi, Aboul Fotouh, and Moussa represent a sizeable huge voting block, and neither Shafiq nor Mursi have a clear majority. That is a good thing, for it tells us that no matter who wins in the end, they don't have a clear mandate to behave unilaterally at all. They may try, but the people won't stand for it. It may also serve to motivate the opposition to become better organised themselves. 

Also, while the Ikhwan may appear to present a united front at the moment in Parliament, we'll see just how long that lasts, as plenty of disagreements have surfaced. It's easy to be united in opposition, but less so when they are holding the reigns. There are a lot of different ways that this could play out. Comments that portray the current situation as being "caught between a rock and a hard place" are really something of a false dilemma. It may not be easy, smooth, nonviolent, but this is quite clearly very far from over, said, and done by a long shot.


----------



## Musical

Milouk84 said:


> You can never trust what they say.


No, I never trust what the BBC says... after all, it is the British state broadcasting organ, and as such produces as much biased propaganda as any other state's official media.


----------



## Lanason

Excuse me old chap - but the BBC is British !

As such no spin or political bias ;-).

Sent using ExpatForum App


----------



## Milouk84

I meant the MB


----------



## expatagogo

The plot thickens:

Sabbahi to seek election suspension, cites voting irregularities | Egypt Independent

Hamdeen Sabbahi will file a lawsuit calling for the suspension of Egypt's presidential election because of alleged voting irregularities and a pending case over the right of former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq to stand, Sabbahi's lawyer said Saturday.


----------



## aykalam

and Bagato (from the elections commission) is looking into allegations that army and police officers were included in the voters roll...


----------



## canuck2010

So the Army has a month to rig the election, should be interesting.


----------



## MaidenScotland




----------



## MaidenScotland

MaidenScotland said:


> View attachment 5561



It should really be a lamb... but the idea is there,


----------



## aykalam

canuck2010 said:


> So the Army has a month to rig the election, should be interesting.


what makes you think they haven't done so in the first round


----------



## CAIRODEMON

MaidenScotland said:


> if it's the choice between an Islamist and a military man then I guess the Christian population will go for the military.
> 
> what a dilema.. vote for someone who is from the old regime or vote for someone that wants to rule the country through the Koran.. something that you don't believe in.
> 
> The only good thing to come out of it is... it is only for 4 years or less.



You really think that? Just like their fellow Islamists in Iran then!


----------



## MaidenScotland

CAIRODEMON said:


> You really think that? Just like their fellow Islamists in Iran then!






Really think what?


----------



## CAIRODEMON

Musical said:


> No, I never trust what the BBC says... after all, it is the British state broadcasting organ, and as such produces as much biased propaganda as any other state's official media.



So you would trust RTE?


----------



## CAIRODEMON

canuck2010 said:


> So the Army has a month to rig the election, should be interesting.



Why would the army want to rig the elections? They want out and they want it quickly. Being given the right to govern Egypt right now is akin to being passed a parcel in a Belfast pub in the 70's


----------



## CAIRODEMON

MaidenScotland said:


> Really think what?



That the MB will call an election in four years time, ensure that it is fair and abide by the result


----------



## Eco-Mariner

The only time Egypt will have a fair election will be when the Youths of today overshadow the Old-Timers of the past. 

SCAF, Shafik and the MB are not eager to educate their voting population in fear of them realising how blind they have been.


Eco-Mariner


----------



## PoleDancer

Musical said:


> after all, [the BBC] is the British state broadcasting organ, and as such produces as much biased propaganda as any other state's official media.


Sorry, but that's complete crap. Hold what views on the BBC's bias as you care to, but it's simply untrue to suggests it's some sort of state media channel. It is fiercely independent, and whilst politicians (and others) certainly try to lean on it from time-to-time, it's actually very successful in resisting such influence.

BBC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## MaidenScotland

CAIRODEMON said:


> That the MB will call an election in four years time, ensure that it is fair and abide by the result




Yes I do believe an election will be called... a fair election might be another story.

The youth of Egyptian have risen up once and I think they would so again... 


The west rightly or wrongly will not allow Egypt to turn into another Iran..


----------



## CAIRODEMON

PoleDancer said:


> Sorry, but that's complete crap. Hold what views on the BBC's bias as you care to, but it's simply untrue to suggests it's some sort of state media channel. It is fiercely independent, and whilst politicians (and others) certainly try to lean on it from time-to-time, it's actually very successful in resisting such influence.
> 
> BBC - Wikipedia, the free
> 
> encyclopedia


Spot on. The BBC is a left of centre organization mainly staffed by Guardian reading PC fanatics. I personally would like it if they were a bit more pro-Britain, but they are not. I dislike the fact that I have to pay them a fee just to own a TV back home, but when I want to watch the news, wherever I happen to be, I will always try to find a BBC service. 

I have, for my sins, lived and worked in many different countries, amongst people who have often treated GB with a mixture of dislike and contempt, however, these same people unashamedly admit to using the Beeb as their main source of news. It is totally objective.


----------



## expatagogo

CAIRODEMON said:


> Spot on. The BBC is a left of centre organization mainly staffed by Guardian reading PC fanatics. I personally would like it if they were a bit more pro-Britain, but they are not. I dislike the fact that I have to pay them a fee just to own a TV back home, but when I want to watch the news, wherever I happen to be, I will always try to find a BBC service.
> 
> I have, for my sins, lived and worked in many different countries, amongst people who have often treated GB with a mixture of dislike and contempt, however, these same people unashamedly admit to using the Beeb as their main source of news. It is totally objective.


I have my coffee with BBC every morning.


----------



## txlstewart

I look for it wherever I travel. I am irritated that it isn't offered on U-Verse!!!

Sent from my iPhone using ExpatForum


----------



## Lanason

expatagogo said:


> I have my coffee with BBC every morning.


so does Her Majesty the QUEEN



Errr she has Earl Grey actually


----------



## Musical

CAIRODEMON said:


> Spot on. The BBC is a left of centre organization mainly staffed by Guardian reading PC fanatics. I personally would like it if they were a bit more pro-Britain, but they are not. I dislike the fact that I have to pay them a fee just to own a TV back home, but when I want to watch the news, wherever I happen to be, I will always try to find a BBC service.
> 
> I have, for my sins, lived and worked in many different countries, amongst people who have often treated GB with a mixture of dislike and contempt, however, these same people unashamedly admit to using the Beeb as their main source of news. It is totally objective.


. The BBC is a left of centre organization mainly staffed by Guardian reading PC fanatics.... It is totally objective.

No, it can't be both at the same time. Think about it.


----------



## Musical

PoleDancer said:


> Sorry, but that's complete crap. Hold what views on the BBC's bias as you care to, but it's simply untrue to suggests it's some sort of state media channel. It is fiercely independent, and whilst politicians (and others) certainly try to lean on it from time-to-time, it's actually very successful in resisting such influence.
> 
> BBC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Of course "auntie" BBC is the state news service... there's a subtle clue is in the name "British Broadcasting Corporation". It is only able to exist through government charter, which regulates it's operations and subscription is compulsory for every household which has equipment capable of receiving ANY live television signals. Evidence of heavy-handed government restriction and censorship are legion and have been clearly documented by reliable sources (though obviously not the BBC, generally). This has established a culture of "self-censorship" which has enabled the BBC to continue to broadcast, and allowed employees to keep their jobs.

Any GCSE Media student would laugh at the statement I have quoted above. There again, no student would use Wikepedia as a reliable verifiable source of evidence to back up their statements.

Finally, I understand that "vulgar language" is not tolerated under the rules of this forum. Has this slipped past the attention of the (usually very vigilant) moderators?


----------



## PoleDancer

Musical, you've clearly got some sort of chip on your shoulder about this and I'm not about to embark on a protracted debate about the nature of the BBC. However I do resent you presenting what is a wholly misleading picture to the outside world, and so my link to Wikipedia was as a 'general primer' for anyone less familiar with the situation. If anyone wants to research deeper, there's the whole internet out there, including no doubt plenty of conspiracy theorist sites to fuel your argument. It won't take anyone too long to work our your view is a somewhat 'unusual' one. Certainly one will find much whingeing from left-wing media luvvies that unless they and their mates are given limitless cash, then the BBC's much cherished independence is compromised. However the fact that that is the nature of the criticism will soon contextualise debate for most 'balanced' folk.

I apologise if the use of the word 'crap' offends you or anyone else.

Oh and sorry folks for getting dragged off into a slightly off-topic debate. I hereby desist.


----------



## MaidenScotland

:focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus:


if you want to discuss the BBC.. take it into the cafe. 

p.s I do believe the BBC is biased :focus:


----------



## CAIRODEMON

Musical said:


> . The BBC is a left of centre organization mainly staffed by Guardian reading PC fanatics.... It is totally objective.
> 
> No, it can't be both at the same time. Think about it.



Yes it can. What precludes a person from holding left of centre political views (or in fact any political views) and still reporting the news accurately and objectively?


----------



## MaidenScotland

CAIRODEMON said:


> Yes it can. What precludes a person from holding left of centre political views (or in fact any political views) and still reporting the news accurately and objectively?


:focus::focus::focus::focus::focus:


----------



## CAIRODEMON

MaidenScotland said:


> Yes I do believe an election will be called... a fair election might be another story.
> 
> The youth of Egyptian have risen up once and I think they would so again...
> 
> 
> The west rightly or wrongly will not allow Egypt to turn into another Iran..


Fair enough! I can't say that I agree with you but I do respect your opinion. I genuinely hope that you are correct


----------



## Musical

PoleDancer said:


> Musical, you've clearly got some sort of chip on your shoulder about this and I'm not about to embark on a protracted debate about the nature of the BBC. However I do resent you presenting what is a wholly misleading picture to the outside world, and so my link to Wikipedia was as a 'general primer' for anyone less familiar with the situation. If anyone wants to research deeper, there's the whole internet out there, including no doubt plenty of conspiracy theorist sites to fuel your argument. It won't take anyone too long to work our your view is a somewhat 'unusual' one. Certainly one will find much whingeing from left-wing media luvvies that unless they and their mates are given limitless cash, then the BBC's much cherished independence is compromised. However the fact that that is the nature of the criticism will soon contextualise debate for most 'balanced' folk.
> 
> I apologise if the use of the word 'crap' offends you or anyone else.
> 
> Oh and sorry folks for getting dragged off into a slightly off-topic debate. I hereby desist.


The ad-hominem attacks above illustrate the weakness of your argument and confirm that there is a vast difference between having a world view and having a "BBC World" view. Shame. Nonetheless, I do accept your apology as sincere. Thank you...

Oh well:focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus::focus:


----------



## Sonrisa

Ah well, is there any media out there that is completely independent? 
to be honest there have been occasions that I have read or watched something on the BBC and caught myself thinking oh my god cannot believe how biased this is.

Having said that I do watch the BBc world broadcast and visit their website at least once a day, so I guess you could say that I enjoy watching and reading grh BBc.


----------



## MaidenScotland

Sonrisa said:


> Ah well, is there any media out there that is completely independent?
> to be honest there have been occasions that I have read or watched something on the BBC and caught myself thinking oh my god cannot believe how biased this is.
> 
> Having said that I do watch the BBc world broadcast and visit their website at least once a day, so I guess you could say that I enjoy watching and reading grh BBc.





Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh No more comments on the bbc folks... take the chat to the cafe.. :focus::focus::focus::focus:


----------



## MaidenScotland

Any more comments on the BBC on this thread will be deleted.


----------



## aykalam

Tahrir now

https://twitter.com/justimage/status/207140020396638211/photo/1


----------

