I should say this right now:
I don't have a horse in the Ukrainian race. Yushchenko, Yakunovich, or Yushchunkovich, it's all the same to me.
What irritates me is hte hypocrisy of those who clamor that fraud MUST have happened, becasue it seems to me that they are less interested in the real results than in making certain that the election turns out how they want it to.
Ron Paul has pointed out how hypocritical it is for hte US to decry Russian influence in the elections.
Moreover, people like Sully who refer to "Yushchenko's electoral victory" (because they are certain that if all the votes were counted properly, their guy would have won) are just the mirror images of the Michael Moore-crackpots who think that the 2004 US Presidential election was stolen.
Why should we trust the election results in our country, but trust the exit polls in other countries?
Thre has been a suggestion that the Ukraine split in two. This last election did show a very strong divide betwen eastern and western Ukraine, with each candidate essentially dominating one continguous half of the country (Yush in the west, Yaku in the east). This may or may not be an indication of a need to separate, because after all, the US has a similar geographic division (although not as wide a margin between states - no candidate got >90% in any state, although the District of Columbia came close - and the divisions on the issues were presumably of more importance to most people in the Ukraine, seeing as they have a lot more to worry about than we do in the US). I suppose it depends on whether the difference is merely political or whether it represents a larger unbridgeable cultural divide that makes coexistence in the same country impossible (or at least unattractive).
Oh well, I'll analyze it more later.
That is all.