It is often assumed that rebuilding and recovering states should hold elections quickly in order to rapidly democratize the state, but post-election violence is often a common occurrence in these states. Some have argued that holding elections too early can actually destabilize the state and undermine the development that democratization is meant to encourage (Brancati and Snyder 2011). The American invasion of Iraq caused destruction, chaos, and insecurity, but it also resulted in national elections, which were subsequently followed by increases in violence. How are the elections directly related to the violence? Why aren’t elections resulting in stability in Iraq – what are the underlying problems? Using the failed states framework, I identify the conditions which contributed to the outbreaks of violence and find a link with national elections, which ultimately results in a “voting to violence” cycle. I consider the 2005 and 2010 national elections and explain how their processes and outcomes are linked to the eventual increases in violence. This paper accounts for boycotts, power-sharing measures, the security situation, and additional factors that impact election outcomes. I utilize existing polling data and casualty rates and conduct original research utilizing various media reports. Additionally, I account for regional factors which include conflict in neighboring states, links with transnational organizations, and connections with competing states. Finally, I conclude with recommendations for breaking the cycle in the 2014 election.