Conversation on historic losses and perceptions of those losses

What if you considered that Mousavi and the other two losing candidates were right? An extract of a Skype conversation (edited only to remove my own ‘yes’ and ‘ok’ and ‘exactly’ and ‘i cannot stand makhmalbaf’ asides) with Alireza Doostdar from Tehran, between 1:07 PM to 1:17 PM (GMT-3).

i was thinking
 
let’s say mousavi is right.

let’s say, his vote really WAS 60-65 percent
 
let’s pursue that line of thought

karrubi is right too.he didn’t get 1 percent. he got 10 percent. yeah?
 
and rezai didn’t get 2 percent. he got 5.
 
so what we get is

60/65+5+10
 
= 75-80%

which leaves ahmadinejad with a whopping 20-25% of the vote, if we assume there were 0 cancelled ballots.
 
i mean, does anyone expect me to believe that ahmadinejad would get only that much? not even in tehran would that kind of pathetic showing be possible.

i think the guy won. at most, if there’s a recount, they might figure that he was a little lower.

but there’s a long way from 63% to 50%
 
they’d have to show that there are 13% rigged votes going to ahmadinejad. that’s about 5 fucking million votes.
 
and all that JUST to get mousavi to the second round.
 
it’s fucking impossible that mousavi would’ve won in the first round. that’s what i think. and all this screaming and chest thumping isn’t gonna go anywhere at the end of the day.

by the way, i was thinking today, if we take the interior ministry data seriously, it would show that this is the first time in history that tehran has voted in majority for a losing candidate. i think what we’re seeing is tehran refusing to accept that it’s been back-seated by the rural daro-dahatis.