Those who continue to follow events in Iran will find this analysis of Iranian voting patterns and possibilities of interest:http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/publications/papers/view/-/id/755/HT: NYTimes which offered this summary:The authors cite these highlights of their analysis:

1) At a provincial level, there is no correlation between the increased turnout, and the swing to Ahmadinejad. This challenges the notion that his victory was due to the massive participation of a previously silent conservative majority.2) In a third of all provinces, the official results would require that Ahmadinejad took not only all former conservative voters, and all former centrist voters, and all new voters, but also up to 44% of former reformist voters, despite a decade of conflict between these two groups.3) In 2005, as in 2001 and 1997, conservative candidates, and Ahmadinejad in particular, were markedly unpopular in rural areas. That the countryside always votes conservative is a myth. The claim that this year Ahmadinejad swept the board in more rural provinces flies in the face of these trends.http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/sunday-updates-on-irans-disputed-election/Bob Nunz references this in his comment.President Obama: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/us/politics/23text-obama.htm