Bad, but not sooo bad.

Every Egyptian Ive talked to has a story about the elections; their name had been taken off the role, their friends had not been allowed in, if you voted for Mubarak you got a chicken, etc etc. But how much would the vote rigging have influenced the outcome- official with 88% of the vote to Mubarak and 7% to his closest contender Ayman Nour? The University of Pitsburgh School of Law Publication, The Jurist, summarises authoritively.

"The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) [advocacy website] issued a joint report with 21 other rights groups Saturday on last week's Egyptian presidential elections [JURIST news archive], concluding that although up to 15 percent of the votes cast may be questionable, there was lass fraud in Egypt's first ever contested elections than in past ballots. Monitors reported widespread fraud and violations [JURIST report] during Wednesday's election and a losing candidate has alleged fraud in the vote count, but EOHR said that the amount of fraud would not be enough to over turn the victory of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. One of the main problems during Wednesday's vote was that groups of voters were bused to polling stations and were allowed to cast ballots without showing registration. The EOHR also reported low voter turnout, saying that actual turnout was likely less than the official figure of 23 percent."

So yes it seems "officially dodge"- but not dodgey enough that anyone is at all surprised- and apparently a hell of a lot more real than the previous "presidential ratifications". So bad Mubarak- but a move in the right direction. How 'bout we do it for real next time?

And though I do not endorse free electoral chicken- it can be oh so tasty.*

*By F.D.A standards McChickens must actually include at least 7% "electoral chicken", or other B list "electoral meats".