At a point in time when the American and Iranian governments
have found various differences in ideology, the people of both
countries have shared an astute judgment in determining that they are
not happy with their elected officials.
In an election result similar to the election results in the United States, Iranian voters have dealt the hard line rhetoric, International politics and failed economic policies of their administrations a sharp blow, showing the differences in the governments do not always reflect the differences in the people. Even though the elections in both countries do not affect their respective administrations, and have no affect on the overall decisions their leaders make, it certainly signals a change in hearts and minds of the people of both nations.
In a surprise embarrassment to the Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the political opponents of the president made a very strong showing in local and community elections, according to CNN.com. Moderate conservatives in the Iranian political structure flexed their muscles in the local election and former President Hashemi Rafsanjani, collected the most votes to a key Tehran Assembly position. Even though several pro-reform candidates were barred from running in the election, moderates were successful in capturing several seats in the elections.
Another similarity in the dissatisfaction of American and Iranian voters in their governments is the voter turnout at the poll. Cnn.com reported that voter turnout increased by 10 percent over the previous election, and similar to the US, this would indicate that those who are mostly disaffected by their government's decisions made the trip to the polls to vote. And just like the Americans, the real winners were not the hard line conservatives or the reform liberals, but the moderates, which indicates that both peoples are dissatisfied with status quo and are seeking a change in their respective government policies. The citizens of both countries have clearly indicated that the elections were reflective of the fact that both peoples are concerned with how their governments are handling situations outside of the country, more than how their decisions affect them locally.