There's some pushback on his interpretation of the Iranian vote statistics. Check his comments thread. Maybe he'll respond. As one reader points out:
The problem with Nate's analysis of the Iranian election plot is that he split the states effectively randomly (by alphabetical order). The results as they were released in Iran were not released in such a random way. The "waves" that he describes were regional. You would not see that sort of a straight line if you were to split the waves into geographic regions the way that they should. Also, he didn't address your question about the precedent for such a high turnout and such walloping by the incumbent candidate.
2006-2011 archives for The Daily Dish, featuring Andrew Sullivan