Mexican standoff
July 1, 2006 3:53 AM Subscribe
The Mexican General Elections are held tomorrow, and the campaign has been extremely fierce and dirty. Long-time favorite center-leftist Andrés Manuel López Obrador, of the Party of the Democratic Revolution, who had been running with an up to 10 percentage point lead earlier this spring, is down to a 2-3 percentage point lead in the last polls before the poll blackout started on the 23rd of June. His main opponent is Felipe Calderón, of the right-wing National Action Party, whose Vicente Fox, an ex-executive of the Coca-Cola company, is the current president. But attacks against López Obrador started several years ago, when he was the head of government in Mexico City, as right-wing interests and the upper classes saw his populist rhetoric and support from the huge lower classes as a threat to their privilege and way of life. They compare him to Castro, Chavez and Morales, while his politics may in reality be closer to those of Kirchner, Lula, Vázquez and Bachelet. López Obrador has accused Calderón of corruption and nepotism, while Calderón has declared López Obrador a danger to Mexico. Meanwhile, the US would much prefer a right-wing president in Mexico, and some track that to the right wing's willingness to privatize the national oil monopoly, and of course, most of Latin America has been turning left lately.
Long, but very good, FPP Joakim Ziegler.
As was pointed out to me recently, [more inside] is a friend to everyone.
What happens in Mexico is, of course, partly the flip side of the "immigration" debate in north of the border. As the U.S. continues to lean to the right - and the right demonizes Mexicans to hold onto power - it seems inevitable that the result will be a lurch to the left in Mexico.
I, for one, will welcome Mexcio's new Leftist overlords. A renewed cold war against leftist/communist countries would be a far, far better place to be than continued hot wars against slogans.
posted by three blind mice at 4:51 AM on July 1, 2006
As was pointed out to me recently, [more inside] is a friend to everyone.
What happens in Mexico is, of course, partly the flip side of the "immigration" debate in north of the border. As the U.S. continues to lean to the right - and the right demonizes Mexicans to hold onto power - it seems inevitable that the result will be a lurch to the left in Mexico.
I, for one, will welcome Mexcio's new Leftist overlords. A renewed cold war against leftist/communist countries would be a far, far better place to be than continued hot wars against slogans.
posted by three blind mice at 4:51 AM on July 1, 2006
Good post. And links to Spanish language websites are fine in the [more inside].
Someone on NPR the other day mentioned that most of the "Obrador is the just like Chavez" is mostly hyperbole from PAN. Mexico is not like the rest of Latin America. 85% of its exports come to the US and it shares a 1500 mile border with the US. He will be left of Fox but still quite right of Chavez. The US government and business interests won't let him stray too far.
No matter who wins, it is how the drug cartels are dealt with will be the top priority. The violence in Tamaulipas is now spreading to Acapulco and Cancun. All the deaths over who gets to maintain the US drug franchise.
posted by birdherder at 6:03 AM on July 1, 2006
Someone on NPR the other day mentioned that most of the "Obrador is the just like Chavez" is mostly hyperbole from PAN. Mexico is not like the rest of Latin America. 85% of its exports come to the US and it shares a 1500 mile border with the US. He will be left of Fox but still quite right of Chavez. The US government and business interests won't let him stray too far.
No matter who wins, it is how the drug cartels are dealt with will be the top priority. The violence in Tamaulipas is now spreading to Acapulco and Cancun. All the deaths over who gets to maintain the US drug franchise.
posted by birdherder at 6:03 AM on July 1, 2006
The first rule of mexican politics is that you never talk about mexican politics. The second rule is that you don't talk about the first rule. Rule three includes a general disclaimer about people who make stupid comments implying there are rules to mexican politics. Rule four does not exist.
posted by blue_beetle at 6:37 AM on July 1, 2006
posted by blue_beetle at 6:37 AM on July 1, 2006
And here's the Bushfilter for ya all.
GEORGE Bush’s operatives have plans to jigger with the upcoming elections. I’m not talking about the November ‘06 vote in the USA (though they have plans for that, too). I’m talking about the election this Sunday in Mexico for their Presidency.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:36 AM on July 1, 2006
GEORGE Bush’s operatives have plans to jigger with the upcoming elections. I’m not talking about the November ‘06 vote in the USA (though they have plans for that, too). I’m talking about the election this Sunday in Mexico for their Presidency.
posted by rough ashlar at 7:36 AM on July 1, 2006
The other thing to remember, as the other flip side of the whole 'immigration' issue, is that there is a good chance that in a few years, say about a decade, the demonization of 'illegals' by the right wing in America will PROFOUNDLY backfire. Simply put, many of the children of illegal immigrants are born in America, and by definition therefore, American citizens. I predict a large and very anti-right wing voting block in a few years coming of age.
I think the Republicans in America are shooting themselves in the foot. In the long run.
Of course, they could just keep stealing elections.
Good link there rough ashlar.
posted by geekhorde at 8:03 AM on July 1, 2006
I think the Republicans in America are shooting themselves in the foot. In the long run.
Of course, they could just keep stealing elections.
Good link there rough ashlar.
posted by geekhorde at 8:03 AM on July 1, 2006
THIS is how you make a political post.
PRD is a PRI spinoff, right? Has the PAN figured out how to fix elections like the PRI did yet? And Fox is term-limited out, isn't he?
Has there been any talk about finally enforcing the land redistribution of Article 27?
posted by klangklangston at 8:13 AM on July 1, 2006
PRD is a PRI spinoff, right? Has the PAN figured out how to fix elections like the PRI did yet? And Fox is term-limited out, isn't he?
Has there been any talk about finally enforcing the land redistribution of Article 27?
posted by klangklangston at 8:13 AM on July 1, 2006
klangklangston: The PRD is a PRI spinoff in the sense that it was founded largely by the left, reform-oriented wing of the PRI, along with a bunch of smaller left-wing parties in the late 80s, largely as a response to the 1988 elections, where it's widely believed that the PRD's forerunner, the Democratic National Front, and its leader, Cuauthemoc Cardenas, were cheated out of the presidency by the PRI. Cardenas went on to found the PRD.
A side-effect of this is that there are many ex-PRIistas in the PRD, which is one criticism that has been brought against them (I agree to an extent, but it's not like the PRI was ever a monolithic party either).
There have been accusations of election tampering levelled against the PAN, specifically, an extract of the federal election institute's voter rolls showed up on a PAN intranet, whose access credentials were sent anonymously to CNN Latinoamerica journalist Carmen Aristegui last week, but in general, the IFE (election institute) has been quite successful, from what I can see.
The election system is decentralized and monitored by representatives of all parties on each level, and numbers from each voting station are signed by all party observers, and then published at the voting station, and so on for each level of adding up numbers.
It seems solid to me, in that sense, which is probably why the campaign has been so vicious. Since it's now had to directly affect the polls, attack ads and negative publicity have become the order of the day. There are a number of ostensibly "neutral" organisations attacking the left in various subtle and not so subtle ways, and all of them seem to have spokespeople and leaders from a certain segment of society, and have very deep pockets...
Yes, Fox can't be reelected. One of the rallying cries of the Mexican revolution, which ended the 35-year de facto dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, was "effective suffrage, not reelection", a reaction against the reelections of Díaz. and led to the revolutionary constitution of 1917, which states that a president can only serve a single six-year term.
Personally, I think that's a mistake, since there's no way to judge a president's performance through elections (although a lot of good that did you Americans), but reelections are still a taboo in the Mexican political discourse.
In fact, one of the more hysterical accusations against López Obrador from the right is that he will seek to amend the constitution and install himself as dictator through reelections. Or something, it's not a very coherent argument, but it's been repeated enough that he's been asked about it in every major interview, and has denied it every single time.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:33 AM on July 1, 2006
A side-effect of this is that there are many ex-PRIistas in the PRD, which is one criticism that has been brought against them (I agree to an extent, but it's not like the PRI was ever a monolithic party either).
There have been accusations of election tampering levelled against the PAN, specifically, an extract of the federal election institute's voter rolls showed up on a PAN intranet, whose access credentials were sent anonymously to CNN Latinoamerica journalist Carmen Aristegui last week, but in general, the IFE (election institute) has been quite successful, from what I can see.
The election system is decentralized and monitored by representatives of all parties on each level, and numbers from each voting station are signed by all party observers, and then published at the voting station, and so on for each level of adding up numbers.
It seems solid to me, in that sense, which is probably why the campaign has been so vicious. Since it's now had to directly affect the polls, attack ads and negative publicity have become the order of the day. There are a number of ostensibly "neutral" organisations attacking the left in various subtle and not so subtle ways, and all of them seem to have spokespeople and leaders from a certain segment of society, and have very deep pockets...
Yes, Fox can't be reelected. One of the rallying cries of the Mexican revolution, which ended the 35-year de facto dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, was "effective suffrage, not reelection", a reaction against the reelections of Díaz. and led to the revolutionary constitution of 1917, which states that a president can only serve a single six-year term.
Personally, I think that's a mistake, since there's no way to judge a president's performance through elections (although a lot of good that did you Americans), but reelections are still a taboo in the Mexican political discourse.
In fact, one of the more hysterical accusations against López Obrador from the right is that he will seek to amend the constitution and install himself as dictator through reelections. Or something, it's not a very coherent argument, but it's been repeated enough that he's been asked about it in every major interview, and has denied it every single time.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:33 AM on July 1, 2006
Oh, about article 27, I wasn't actually aware of it, and no, I haven't heard much about it, I don't think it's an issue at the moment. The PRD and López Obrador have had the support of various more or less radical groups, including land rights and farmers' groups, but it's not been a central issue.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:44 AM on July 1, 2006
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:44 AM on July 1, 2006
PAN has been learning election stealing from the gabachos.
The president is limited to a single 6 year term in Mexico. He'll probably go back to selling Coca Cola and making mejor pesos in the private sector.
The distribution of land to ejidos was effectively reversed with an amendment to Article 27 in the 1990s. ¡Viva el mercado libre!
posted by birdherder at 8:46 AM on July 1, 2006
The president is limited to a single 6 year term in Mexico. He'll probably go back to selling Coca Cola and making mejor pesos in the private sector.
The distribution of land to ejidos was effectively reversed with an amendment to Article 27 in the 1990s. ¡Viva el mercado libre!
posted by birdherder at 8:46 AM on July 1, 2006
Just remember when you let it all go,
What happens in Mexico,
Stays in Mexico
posted by paulsc at 12:37 PM on July 1, 2006
What happens in Mexico,
Stays in Mexico
posted by paulsc at 12:37 PM on July 1, 2006
Looks like Calderón will win, with 96% of the votes tallied and 1% difference in his favor. If he wins, good for Mexico, good for the region. We don't need another socialist, we have plenty.
Honestly, all you gringos who are so happy with the leftization of Latin America, be it with caudilhos like Castro, Chavez and Morales or pelegos like Kirchner, Lula, Vázquez and Bachelet, feel free to pack your bags and move down here. You will be more than welcome in this socialist utopia.
I would trade places and citizenships with you anytime.
posted by falameufilho at 7:31 AM on July 3, 2006
Honestly, all you gringos who are so happy with the leftization of Latin America, be it with caudilhos like Castro, Chavez and Morales or pelegos like Kirchner, Lula, Vázquez and Bachelet, feel free to pack your bags and move down here. You will be more than welcome in this socialist utopia.
I would trade places and citizenships with you anytime.
posted by falameufilho at 7:31 AM on July 3, 2006
Actually, it's a technical tie, and the federal election institute saying that it'll have to go to the full counts, which will be done on Wednesday.
falameufilho: I did move to Latin America, from Norway, a country where social democracy as the most prevalent political ideology over the last 50 years has resulted in the highest standard of living in the world.
Calling Kirchner, Lula, Vazquez and Bachelet Socialists is pretty disingenious, they're pretty clearly social democrats, as is López Obrador. Castro is a communist dictator, obviously, but Chavez is democratically elected. Lumping all of these people together makes rational debate very difficult.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:37 AM on July 3, 2006
falameufilho: I did move to Latin America, from Norway, a country where social democracy as the most prevalent political ideology over the last 50 years has resulted in the highest standard of living in the world.
Calling Kirchner, Lula, Vazquez and Bachelet Socialists is pretty disingenious, they're pretty clearly social democrats, as is López Obrador. Castro is a communist dictator, obviously, but Chavez is democratically elected. Lumping all of these people together makes rational debate very difficult.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 8:37 AM on July 3, 2006
Lula, around whom there used to be an aura of honesty that some have called "a monopoly of ethics", has built one of the most corrupt governments in the history of Brazil. In order to ensure his reelection next october he is raising government expediture illegally to cater to the basic needs of the poorest Brazilians, literally buying votes. Kirchner is a populist that strives for nothing more than to be regarded as the new Perón as he destroys the Argentinian economy once again.
These are NOT the people that will take Latin America to the standards of living and development you find in Scandinavia. Lula, Kirchner, Scandinavia; oh God, there's a GIANT non sequitur in that train of thought. Of course, you of all people should know that.
And excuse me while I DO lump all those guys together. With a notable exception of Bachelet, about whom I don't know much about (except for the low opinion of her from some Chilean acquaitances of mine), all the others have proved again and again to be birds of a feather.
And by now it is clear it is not a technical tie. Of course you are going to give me the obvious response that the election was fixed. It's ok. Socialists are all for law and order and right, except when things don't go their way.
posted by falameufilho at 7:48 AM on July 5, 2006
These are NOT the people that will take Latin America to the standards of living and development you find in Scandinavia. Lula, Kirchner, Scandinavia; oh God, there's a GIANT non sequitur in that train of thought. Of course, you of all people should know that.
And excuse me while I DO lump all those guys together. With a notable exception of Bachelet, about whom I don't know much about (except for the low opinion of her from some Chilean acquaitances of mine), all the others have proved again and again to be birds of a feather.
And by now it is clear it is not a technical tie. Of course you are going to give me the obvious response that the election was fixed. It's ok. Socialists are all for law and order and right, except when things don't go their way.
posted by falameufilho at 7:48 AM on July 5, 2006
Today's article on Opinion Journal shows another view of what Lopez Obrador represents, and why it is such a victory for Latin America that he is not getting control of the second largest economy in the region:
The race was every bit as tight as pollsters had predicted. And by Monday morning when it began to appear that Mr. López Obrador had secured only second place, Mexicans were treated, on national television, to a flash of anger that revealed the trademark intolerance that has made him such a polarizing figure: The red- faced candidate gripped the podium in frustration, pledging to exhaust every available legal channel. His head shook uncontrollably as he demanded that the country "respect" his "triumph." Yesterday, his senior aides told Reuters that his supporters would take to the streets if the election authorities don't go his way.
The problem for Mr. López Obrador is that in order to prevail, he has to do more than convince Mexicans that Mr. Calderón is a thieving opponent who managed a massive conspiracy against the will of the people. He also has to portray the IFE and the thousands of citizen volunteers--who on Sunday put on a clinic for the rest of the world on how to run a transparent and orderly election--as enemies of the Mexican people. That won't be easy, and public opinion is fast turning against him.
Amen. As Reinaldo Azevedo said, may Uribe's victory in Colombia represent the beginning of the end for Chavez, Lula, Obrador and their kind in Latin America.
posted by falameufilho at 3:00 PM on July 5, 2006
The race was every bit as tight as pollsters had predicted. And by Monday morning when it began to appear that Mr. López Obrador had secured only second place, Mexicans were treated, on national television, to a flash of anger that revealed the trademark intolerance that has made him such a polarizing figure: The red- faced candidate gripped the podium in frustration, pledging to exhaust every available legal channel. His head shook uncontrollably as he demanded that the country "respect" his "triumph." Yesterday, his senior aides told Reuters that his supporters would take to the streets if the election authorities don't go his way.
The problem for Mr. López Obrador is that in order to prevail, he has to do more than convince Mexicans that Mr. Calderón is a thieving opponent who managed a massive conspiracy against the will of the people. He also has to portray the IFE and the thousands of citizen volunteers--who on Sunday put on a clinic for the rest of the world on how to run a transparent and orderly election--as enemies of the Mexican people. That won't be easy, and public opinion is fast turning against him.
Amen. As Reinaldo Azevedo said, may Uribe's victory in Colombia represent the beginning of the end for Chavez, Lula, Obrador and their kind in Latin America.
posted by falameufilho at 3:00 PM on July 5, 2006
« Older Request anything and this guy will draw it. | Farm Hustle Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I can't vote, since I'm a foreigner in Mexico, but it's no secret that my preference is for the PRD and López Obrador. The attacks against him have been fierce, and from as varied a collection of sources as a supposed anti-crime organization (in reality backed by the upper classes), the Catholic Church, and the national business council. Only yesterday, his web site was hacked and made to show a supposed letter from him, dated to the day after the elections, and supposedly calling people to the streets because he'd been denied victory in the elections.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:57 AM on July 1, 2006