feigned shock

the la times appears to appear [bugmenot login] genuinely troubled by preliminary election results from iraq.

The myth of a unified Iraqi identity may have finally been laid to rest this month.
More clearly than any other measurement since the U.S.-led 2003 invasion, preliminary results from the Dec. 15 parliamentary elections show Iraq as three lands with three distinct identities, divided by faith, goals, region, history and symbols.

while these results fall short of optimistic desires for a more national result, the results are not entirely unexpected

[The preliminary election results] show a nation starkly fragmented into ethnic and religious cantons with different aims and visions.
Nine out of 10 Iraqis in the Shiite Muslim provinces of the south voted for religious Shiite parties, according to the early results from the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq. Nine out of 10 Iraqis in Sunni Muslim Arab areas of central and western Iraq voted for Sunni parties. Nine out of 10 Iraqis in the Kurdish provinces of the north voted for Kurdish candidates.

la times staff reporters Borzou Daragahi and Louise Roug invoke the MSM favorite anonymous source

"Iraq is still very much in a stage of identity politics"

despite being only 2 and a half years old, iraqi elections exhibit similar characteristics to american elections, a country 2 and a half centuries old. an examination of a 2004 election breakdown reveals some voting patterns by race, religious affiliation and region demonstrate divisions along "distinct identities, divided by faith, goals, region, history and symbols" that the la times laments in iraq.

back to iraq, i think the reason for these results derive from the national slate structure of elections thusfar. once elections become 'more local', the voting and representation may not have the 'stark differences' of these recent elections.

how else do you explain a 'loser' democrat getting elected in relatively republican nevada?