"… the polling hours in Damascus, which suffered a lot from the fighting, had to be extended until 11 pm to accommodate all the voters.
There were even polling stations set up by the government in recently liberated Palmyra and Al-Qaryaten, though those polls were largely symbolic because the inhabitants of those towns have not yet been able to return to their homes due to widespread destruction, prior to liberation by the Syrian Arab Army.
The voter participation rate is key to this election, more important than the individual candidates who were elected.
Here’s why: you need to understand elections in a constitutionally-created state, in which one party dominates, in terms of a strike vote in a trade union.
It demonstrates continuing confidence in the leadership at a turning point in the struggle. A union would not be satisfied with a strike vote of 58%, going into a strike. And probably the Syrian government would have wished for a higher rate going into the negotiations at Geneva. But it knew from the start that holding the elections under the conditions of war and occupation was a gamble, because there are a lot of eligible voters living outside of Syria right now, living in places besieged by the terrorists, and who have died but not yet been accounted for.
Taking into account these factors, the participation rate would probably have been much higher." Southfront
120,000 Syrians in exile in Lebanon returned to the country for the purpose of voting. I think a participation rate of 58% is pretty good considering the ongoing war all over the country. IMO the results indicate that Assad could probably win an internationally supervised election for president.
The Borgist media refuses to take much note of the election.