From The Post: No Winner Until September?

In today's Post, reporter Manuel Roig-Franzia writes, "Teams of lawyers are girding for a massive challenge of the results, threatening a crisis reminiscent of the disputed 2000 U.S. presidential election. Legal experts and campaign strategists here say the winner of Sunday's ballot might not be officially declared for up to two months." Read his article here: "Mexico Girds for Legal Battle as Election Yields a Near Tie."

The Post's editorial page also weighed in today, urging the two candidates to abide by the Independent Federal Election Institute's eventual declaration of a winner: "Regardless of who wins the election, mexico needs political leaders who will continue to strengthen its weak political institutions -- not just the electoral authority but the courts, prosecutors and central bank ..." Read the editorial here: "Photo Finish in Mexico."

By Editors |  July 4, 2006; 10:41 AM ET  | Category:  From The Post
Previous: One Election, Two "Winners" For Now... | Next: Missing Ballots, Court Challenges and Hints of Street Protests

Blogs That Reference This Entry

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Please email us to report offensive comments.

I for one cannot see any need to wait for a declared winner until September.

Mexico has gone to great lengths to install a tranparent and fair system of elections. It would appear that Calderon will emerge with more votes than AMLO.
Isn't that the result that should enable IFE to declare a winner?

What occurred in 2000 on behalf of Gore and his legal team was shameful and I would not want to wish that on Mexico.

Sufragio Efectivo, No Recount!

Posted by: vivaCalderon06 | July 4, 2006 12:13 PM

"Sufragio Efectivo, No Recount!" Cute, very cute, "vivaCalderon06." It only happens that, despite your very respectable opinion, the verification mechanisms in place have to be followed. If your candidate won, what are you concerned about? Let's all be convinced.

Posted by: pasilla | July 4, 2006 01:04 PM

Of course you cannot see any reason for a recount you are obviously a panista therefore your opinion is biased

Posted by: Todd | July 4, 2006 01:24 PM

Ah, how Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004. The Washington Post asks that the 'Looser', the candidate Washington fears and hates, to just surrender to the dictates of the PAN dominated election commission.

Obrador has the constitutional right and hopefully the guts to challenge the election results until every vote is accounted for. Calderon would have assuredly done the same.

I hope that Obrador doesn't cave to the nostrum of 'do the right thing' that the American media advocates. Look what happened in the United States. Let Mexico be Mexico.

Posted by: opus444 | July 4, 2006 01:28 PM

institutions and the law exist for a reason, therefore we concur with the washington post article

Posted by: comitemaya | July 4, 2006 07:04 PM

Although I am no fan of Lopez Obrador, I have to agree that he has a right to challenge the vote if he has credible evidence of something being wrong. But if he is just upset by the results and has no real proof of fraud, he should not be slandering the IFE. He is saying they "manipulated" the vote count. That is a serious charge against an electoral organization that has won high praise from international observers as well as most Mexicans.

At some point, it would be nice if politicians put the interests of the country first and their own ambitions second. To his credit, some would say, Cuahtemoc Cardenas did not dispute the obviously rigged election in 1988 because he knew it would lead to violence. Now, many of the current PRD crowd think that was a mistake. Maybe they are right. Maybe you have to make a stand sometimes.

If Jesus Ortega and Camacho and all the others around Lopez Obrador who are threatening legal actions and strife in the streets (Camacho made that threat to reporters yesterday)do not have real evidence to back their complaints, they should back off and shut up. They would be putting the nation and the Mexican people in harm's way only to satisfy their own lust for power and the ego of their candidate.

Posted by: Goyo | July 4, 2006 08:53 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.


© 2006 The Washington Post Company