Much to my surprise, the New York Times published a pretty good editorial today on the Iranian presidential elections that were held today. The Times rightly rejects recent claims that Rafsanjani is a reformed-hardliner who is Iran's best chance for moving forward towards democracy and striking a deal with the West to halt his country's nuclear ambitions.
However, the Times feels that the people should not boycott the election and vote as "this election is the best tool available to the Iranian people to indicate which way they want their troubled country to head over the next four years."
It's hardly a mystery where the Iranian people stand. Voting in large numbers would only serve to legitimize the system that the Mullahs have set up. But, admittedly, it is debatable.
Early reports say the turnout has been relatively high, but still not enough to give any candidate more than 50% of the vote. Stay tuned.
UPDATE: Apparently, Iranians living in America can vote in today's elections, much like the Iraqi's did. My man WILL went to check it out in Houston and nearly went tete-a-tete with the Iranian regime.