Mexico Restless for a Result

The crowds are getting bigger and his plans are getting grander. Leftist presidential-wannabe Andrés Manuel López Obrador, emboldened by huge turnout at two post-election rallies, is calling for more, more, more.


Officials estimated López Obrador's Sunday rally in Mexico City drew close to 1 million people, with many walking or busing in from across the country. Some quibbled with that crowd estimate, but no one argued that it was by far the largest mass demonstration the former mayor has staged and probably the largest in the Zocalo.

Election officials have declared conservative Paniísta Felipe Calderón the winner of the July 2 election, but his prime rival, López Obrador, has been fervently contesting the results, in the courts and in the streets.

According to a New York Times report on Sunday's rally, López Obrador told the crowd "the movement he was leading was about more than one man or one political party. He said it was about the future of this country's fragile democracy."

"''I have the deep conviction that despite all the machinery of the state, and all the money of a privileged group, they will not be able to stop the free will of millions of Mexicans,' he said. "'That is the greatest force of a democracy.'"

Artists, meanwhile, are finding inspiration in AMLO's post-election slogan "vota por vota," or vote by vote. About 100 writers, actors and other artists created posters defending voter's rights to display in conjunction with the Sunday rally.

If you were wondering what López Obrador could possibly have in store after Sunday's rally, Mexico City's leading newspaper, El Universal, is reporting that he is making plans to barnstorm the country, pressing his case for a recount or total annulment of the results. Likely stops include Chiapas and his home state of Tabasco, where local elections will be held later this summer and fall. (Campaign Conexión is asking for donations for a lawn chair if these demonstrations continue.)

The Tough Get Tougher

In interviews, the PRD's López Obrador, never known as a shrinking violent, appears to be even fiercer these days. In a recent radio interview, he said he would be willing to call off the protests -- if he gets his recount. (And it better be a good recount, he added.) Speaking to El Pais, he declared there was fraud "before, during and after the election."

Neutral observers, journalists and some inside the Calderón camp are vigorously debating whether López Obrador's strategy is having an impact--and what kind of impact it is.

"Some analysts said the demonstration was an indication that Mr. López Obrador plans to tie up the country and will use any method at his disposal in his quest for the presidency."

A poll published over the weekend showed about 60 percent of Mexicans do not think there should be a recount, while 37 percent believe one should be conducted.

However, the survey was published by Reforma, which is increasingly showing pro-Calderón tendencies. López Obrador adviser Manuel Camacho Solís told the Dallas Morning News that if the poll had asked people if they believed a recount would resolve the "question of credibility," more than 70 percent would have said yes."

Everyone's throwing around the word "fraud," but the San Diego Union-Tribune's S. Lynne Walker writes from Puebla that the challenge Mexico confronts may be much more fundamental:

The dispute over the winner of Mexico's presidential election has revealed a nagging problem with the country's voting system: It relies so heavily on poorly trained poll workers that the mistakes they made in counting the votes may have changed the outcome of the July 2 election...As the Federal Electoral Tribunal, or TRIFE, reviews López Obrador's allegations of fraud, some supporters of Calderón's National Action Party and even some electoral officials are beginning to say there should be a recount before the Sept. 6 deadline for declaring the next president.
"It would be good for this country," said Luis Garibi, who heads the Federal Electoral Institute, or IFE, operations in Puebla. "It would help us resolve this division, this polarization we have right now in Mexico. We should do whatever is necessary to have political peace."
Garibi calculated it would take about seven days, working 24 hours a day, for the IFE to conduct a recount.

Gone, But Not Forgotten

The PRI's Roberto Madrazo took a drubbing July 2, which makes the once-all-powerful party 0-2 in presidential elections. But the PRI is not without its strengths, namely a batch of governors, senators and congressmen. Some have begun negotiating with the Calderón team.

But it's not going to be easy, as the Christian Science Monitor reports:

Coalition-building will be a challenge for Mexico's budding democracy, say analysts, pointing to the fact that the political culture here was fostered under 71 years of authoritarian rule under the PRI. "It is really new for Congress to be more than just a rubber stamp," says Laurie Freeman, Mexico associate at the Washington Office on Latin America think tank.

No matter who replaces Vicente Fox Dec. 1, the next president would be wise to consider the numbers. Neither Calderón nor López Obrador can claim anything close to a majority.

"The Mexican public is deeply divided on whether to tighten or loosen its embrace of conservative policies favored by Calderón," writes Marla Dickerson of the Los Angeles Times. The political situation is a formula for more stagnation and infighting, which Mexico can ill afford...Mexico's long-term stability may hinge, experts say, on whether Calderón overplays his political hand by pitting one region against the others."

"He also can't afford to write off PRD legislators. He'll need their assistance in passing one of his most desired reforms: opening the state petroleum monopoly, Pemex, to foreign investors who could fund the new drilling and exploration needed to help the giant company replenish its declining reserves."

At least one person in Mexico isn't worried about the lack of a mandate. Calderón tells columnist Andres Oppenheimer 36 percent is plenty.

''I will be the president who comes out of the most democratic and most competitive process in Mexico's history. And, paradoxically, the president-elect with the largest number of votes in absolute terms,'' he said.

Calderón added that his National Action Party will be the largest bloc in Congress. As president, he said he would form a coalition government "to help Mexico and Latin America become more competitive in the global economy. 'Isolating our people has been a big historic mistake of Latin America, for which we have paid a huge cost,' he said."

The Seven Powerbrokers

Few ever heard of them before, but a panel of seven judges, serving 10-year non-renewable terms, is about to get real famous.

"The court has settled more than 20,000 electoral disputes; overruled banking secrecy laws in search of illegal campaign donations; and levied multimillion-dollar fines on electoral scofflaws. In 2000, it nullified a 7,000-vote victory by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, the PRI, in Tabasco state.

"That landmark ruling established the court's readiness to go beyond vote-tallying disputes and use 'abstract causes' of unfairness to void an election -- one of the principles López Obrador is now embracing."

And to "discourage attempts to bribe them," the judges are receiving "the highest salaries of any Mexican public official - about $415,000 a year," reports Richard Boudreaux of the Los Angeles Times. (If that's good money in the U.S., it's live-like-a-millionaire dough in Mexico!)

El Universal suggests the tribunal judges will not be affected by outside pressure. However, elsewhere in the paper, Camacho Solís accuses Fox administration interior secretary Carlos Abascal of pressuring the tribunal.

Some are already speculating about what López Obrador will do if he is denied a recount.

"López Obrador's supporters are also expected to file a case with the Supreme Court in coming days arguing that the tribunal must order a complete recount - and if the decision is to the contrary, it will constitute a violation of the public's right to vote and therefore be in the Supreme Court´s domain."

However a panel of experts convened by El Universal concluded "the article in the Constitution that gives the court the right to rule on elections has been made obsolete by recent electoral reforms that dictate the tribunal has absolute authority in electoral affairs."

Keep an Eye on Her

Speaking of power brokers, the once-all-powerful, now borderline pathetic PRI booted teacher's union leader Elba E. Gordillo from its ranks. But keep an eye on her. Campaign Conexión thinks she's going to be a player for quite some time.

By washingtonpost.com |  July 18, 2006; 11:16 AM ET  | Category:  Campaign Conexión
Previous: From The Post: Obrador Urges Civil Resistance | Next: Antojitos: The Good News

Blogs That Reference This Entry

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/cgi-bin/mt/mtb.cgi/8803

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



The situation seems to be that Calderon has legally won but just by an eyelash, and Lopez Obrador will refuse to accept any outcome in which he does not become el Presidente de Mexico.

This is a scenario for outright civil war, right across our southern border -- Mexico's rich capitalistic northern provinces, versus its poor leftist/populist southern provinces, which is how the votes split in the election just over.

What are the chances of avoiding such a disastrous outcome?

Posted by: gringoviejo | July 18, 2006 03:44 PM

Gringoviejo-- Such a sad scenario need not take place, but it is the specter of this that makes many of us nervous about AMLO's irresponsible accusations. He has a right to contest the election results and condemn any mischief he can document. The problem is-- he seems to have no evidence, just a lot of innuendo and speculation. What is even more amazing is that some people who seem rational and intelligent are actually going along with him.

I don't think this will lead to civil war, but here is what very well could happen--

The TRIFE does a recount and declares Calderon the winner (again). AMLO then condemns the TRIFE and claims the judges took bribes. He will have no more evidence for this than he did to show that his own PRD representatives took bribes to facilitate the vote fraud, but he will make the accusation and millions of fools will believe him.

Calderon then takes office amid street protests and possibly some violent actions. He proceeds with badly needed reforms, hopefully with the help of legislators from the PRI. The PAN-PRI alliance of convenience provides stability and helps the nation get through the turbulence caused by Lopez Obrador and his fanatics. Cooler heads in the PRD-- the Cardenas faction, for example, prevail eventually and AMLO ends up like subcomandante Marcos.

He will be able to fill plazas and rant and rave. He will command great respect from a certain small segment of the Mexican population, but to most people he will just be the clown who lost and couldn't accept it. There won't be a civil war, but there will be a deep, bitter divide that will eat at Mexico's heart for some time. Part of it will be based on real grievances and resentment felt by the poor, who make up nearly half the population. Whether a significant percentage of the poor continues to back Lopez Obrador or not, the suspicions and distrust he fomented and exploited will continue. Mexico will make slower progress in eliminating poverty and moving fully into the modern world. Much of the fault for this will reside with the man who saw himself as the country's messiah.

Posted by: Goyo | July 18, 2006 04:45 PM

Much like in Florida 2000...what exactly is the problem with a careful and comprehensive recount? If there are questions, do the full recount and resolve them.

Seems pretty simple to me. Or you can let some judges decide...it worked so well in 2K. Left everyone united allright.

Posted by: What is the problem? | July 18, 2006 04:48 PM

Clearly the margin of Calderon's victory (.58%) is too narrow to conclude with certainty -and this IS a Constitutional provision - that he won the election.

Vote counting in Mexico is done manually at the polling stations by poorly trained civilians, a provision designed to distance public servants from the process and is rooted on society's historical distrust of the government's handling of elections.

In most places the counting is done after a long day at the polling stations, and it starts at around 7.30PM. This is, from the 14th to the 17th hours of a working day!

Without even taking into consideration AMLO's claims, just the fatigue and prevailing illiteracy, what would you think would be an accurate estimate for the degree of error at each station?

If over .58%, then AMLO has a case -and a good chance.

Posted by: Bernardo Quintana | July 18, 2006 05:25 PM

I agree with "What is the problem." Votes have been cast and if there is uncertainty, it can easily be sorted out by a re-count.

Why risk the prospect of long-term instability over the claims of fraud when all it would take is a couple of weeks to clarify the issue

If Calderon is not hiding anything then he should be overtly promoting the re-count as a source of legitimacy.

Posted by: Claudia Robles-Gil | July 18, 2006 05:34 PM

Vicente Fox was not suppose to participate in the campagn of Calderon.This is a good reason to cancel this election.

Mexico needs social programs to go out of the third world. Only Obrador can give it to the Mexicans.

Viva Mexico

Posted by: Jocelyn Demers | July 18, 2006 06:28 PM

Jocelyn, you say that "Only Obrador can give it to the Mexicans." If this was a forum on some site like rotten.com, you would already have a couple hundred detailed (and obscene) descriptions of exactly how he was going to "give it to" the Mexicans.

Mexico does NOT need social programs to get out of the third world, it needs JOBS. To provide jobs, there must be a certain stability, low inflation, steady exchange rate, and the government should not spend more than it recieves in taxes. Somehow I doubt that AMLO will "give us" that scenario.

As to Fox "participating" in the campaign, come on, that kind of thing has been going on in Mexico and the world since day one. If you think the PRD govt. of the DF did not participate in Ebrard's campaign, you are nuts.


Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 18, 2006 07:18 PM

Some people are advocating for a recount, saying thats the only way things can settle down, the problem is not a recount (wich by the way, its ILLEGAL unless theres actual proof of irregularities), the problem is that we are facing a man (Obrador), who consistently has ignored the law, used social pressure to gets his way (even if its illegal), and changed his mind as many times as it takes in order to adjust the situation to his advantage.

Mexico has a historic problem, this problem is what prevents this nation from achieving its full potential, and that problem is NOT ENFORCING THE RULE OF LAW. People and politicians rutinely twist and ignore the law and prevent a climate of stability and fairness from blossoming. Now we have a candidate that wants the law to be broken so he can win and promiss to enforce the very same laws he is breaking??

I am completely against a recount, and not because i want calderon to win, but because i completely refuse to let a rogue wannabe president, to lie and pressure his way into the presidency. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS NATION DOES NOT NEED, a liar, a man of no word, a manipulator.

I am sick and tired of my goverment givin in to lawless groups, to politicians that use the poor as means to bargain for political power, and i will be damn if i am going to sit her and let this clown walk over our laws to get a second try at a game he already lost.

Posted by: Jesse | July 18, 2006 07:54 PM

I think the TRIFE may (and should) simply refuse to grant AMLO's recount request since he has already said basically said that he will not accept any verdict that goes against him. Why should a court waste time ruling if they know they are going to be ignored anyway?

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 18, 2006 08:09 PM

Speaking of the RULE of LAW, including the electoral rule of law, I posted this yesterday:

The rule of electoral law in Mexico states that: (1) the current president shall not use the presidential podium to make statements in favour of any candidate running for the next presidential term and (2) that the winner of the election shall be declared only by the federal electoral tribunal.

Both AMLO and Felipe Calderon declared themselves winners of the election on election night, thereby violating the rule of law. Vicente Fox openly and repeatedly used the presidential podium in support of Calderon during the presidential campaign, to the extent that even the IFE had to warn him against making further statements. Therefore, Fox also violated the rule of law. To make things worse, the IFE insinuated that the winner of the election was Calderon, without first waiting for the federal tribunal to make this declaration.

When the rule of electoral law is broken by the current president, then by the IFE and sadly by two of the highest-ranking candidates, fears of electoral fraud --whether founded or unfounded-- surface only naturally. I believe that we Mexicans must first come to terms with the fact that the rule of electoral law has not only been broken by both of the leading presidential candidates, but also by our current president. Any purist statments placing blame for this conflict on either the leftist or the right-wing candidate are simply the result of passionate politics and not objective self-criticism. We Mexicans saw this coming a mile away before the election and we let it happen by not telling our president to stay out of our polling stations.

The fact that has happened in Mexican history before --using the presidential podium in support of the next candidate, colloquially known as "dedazo" -- is no excuse for it to continue. This is about democracy and not the perpetuation of power.

Posted by: Raul | July 18, 2006 08:11 PM

While it is true that the people who counted the votes may have been poorly trained, being as how they are voluntary citizens working for their country, it also true that the votes are counted in front of party representatives. All together, the IFE volunteers and the party representatives, we are talking about at least 9 people observing the counting, and that when there are only three parties represented at the poll desk.
How many people do you need to count the votes?
The true is there are many filters in place and we have a great electoral system. We wouldn't be in this situation if we had responsible people running for office.
AMLO is desperate, he is crazy for power and his ambition is greater than his love for his country. He is right to go to the tribunals but he should sit and wait for them to decide. Already we Mexicans know he will not recognize the results.
A problem with the vote-by-vote recount is that is presuposses an strategy from the PRD or PAN when the recounting is performed because naturally they will object to all votes in those districts where they already know they lost and they will try to nullify them and we will be in for many months of litigation over one sigle vote that had a little scratch and that PRD wants to nullify and PAN wants to make valid.
We have a law that foresees this scenario and allows for a recount of a specific Poll Desk only when there are valid evidence that the ballots need to be recounted.
And by the way, the votes can be counted many times before the sealing of the package at the end of the election day.
At the district counting the party representatives have another chance to clarify and open if they show evidence enoungh to sustantiate the need to open the ballot packages.
Our Electoral Process does not need anything. It works. What needs to be changed is people like AMLO. They should be sent back home to Tabasco to deal with the local caciques there.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 18, 2006 09:22 PM

Bernardo Quintana:

You say "Clearly the margin of Calderon's victory (.58%) is too narrow to conclude with certainty -and this IS a Constitutional provision - that he won the election."

Please, tell me where does it say the in Mexican Constitution that 243,000 votes are not enough of a difference in any election. There are a lot of cities in Mexico that don't have that many people.

"Vote counting in Mexico is done manually at the polling stations by poorly trained civilians."

Have you ever participated as a funcionario on a federal level or are you just repeating what someone else said as an excuse to challenge the process? Please, note that most of the balloting places challenged by the "Coalition for the good of all" were not in the most backward part of Mexico. Sorry. But, I hate generalizations without proof.

Posted by: TG | July 18, 2006 11:34 PM

voto por voto casilla por casilla el pueblo de mexico no va a permitir otro 88, fraude a la vista de todos, mexico no olvida y si no ahi estan los millones de personas que se expresaron pacificamente el domingo 16 de julio,

Posted by: julio leal | July 19, 2006 12:40 AM

NO rotundamente no se desconfia de los miles de ciudadanos voluntarios que contaron los votos fungiendo como funcionarios de casilla, la gente conto bien y quizas tuvo errores humanos. Sin embargo esos votos que contaron esas personas que en realidad son la parte fundamental del IFE, no coinciden con lo que se capturo en el PREP, o despues en el cotejo de las actas muestra de esto son los resultados que en el acta se presentaban y no correspondian a la cantidad de votos en el paquete electoral. Es decir las actas ya en los consejos distritales fueron manipuladas o al momento de mandar la información al IFE central del df ahi es donde se produce el FRAUDE estimados amigos lectores NUNCA EN EL CONTEO QUE SE REALIZO con la participacion de los ciudadanos. Entiendan por eso es que se debe hacer voto por voto no por que se desconfie de ellos sino de Hildebrando que fue denunciado no por lopez obrador, sino en una investigacion en el periodico LA jornada eldia 20 de abril 2006 chequen esa fecha, hildebrando metio las manos truqueo los datos por medio de software que en simulacros del IFe fue probado. Atencion Fraude a ojos visibles.

Posted by: julio cesar leal espinosa | July 19, 2006 12:49 AM

Julio Leal, you repeat slogans very well. How long did it take to memorize that? As to the "millones de personas" last sunday, it was more like one million, maybe less, and should surprise no one, since most of the Chilangos voted for AMLO anyway, and a good many of the people in the Zocalo were probably accareados.

Raul, this is about democracy, and in a democracy the person with the most votes wins. Unless you think the Mexican voting public is too stupid to decide on their own how to vote, and has to wait for Fox or the church or whoever to tell them how to vote, election propaganda does not really matter. Every one is smart enough to make up their own mind, right?

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 19, 2006 12:50 AM

Just a few things:

a) About the "poorly trained civilians": all you have to do when you are an official in a balloting place (I've been one twice) is to check that the IFE card matches with the booklet you're given, mark the voter's finger and count the votes. The harderst part maybe to fill up the tally sheets but, when you're notified that you'll be an official at a balloting place, you're given by your IFE instructor a small guide with an example of how to fill them up. In my case, in both times the IFE instructor came to my place to prepare me for the election day, we did a little practice of how to fill up a tally sheet so I wouldn't mess it up on such an important date.

So, to sum it up, all you need to know is to write and count. It is not brain surgery. And you don't count the ballots once, you count them up to 20 times or more by the 4 balloting place officials and the parties' representatives; you count them any number of times until everyone is happy with it. It is important to add that the IFE, of the 6 million people they randomly call for the election, they select 1 million considering their previous experience and they educational level so, if in a poor community you have as options someone who just finished till 5th grade and someone who made till secundaria, the IFE ends up choosing the person who has the highest educational level, in other words, the secundaria graduate.

From my perspective, the only chance of a confusion is on the tally sheets. The copies given to the parties are done with carbon paper, and as you all well know, they don't always work all that well. So, if you write on the official tally sheet 167, in the last copy it would probably appear like a 107 or 67. The problem isn't in the counting of the votes, is on the copy of the tally sheet. A solution to this is to insist to the officials to use the carbon paper and then to rewrite over the numbers in every copy so it is clearly shown the result of the election.

That's why the IFE has a file appart for those balloing places with differences in their tally sheets. A file that was later included in the results of the PREP and that were clarified with the district recount.

b) About president Fox's supprot to Calderón: I don't know where the drama is. It is something that is expected in an election. In the USA and France, just to name a few, presidents actually run for reelections, they campaign being the actual president and no one complaints of unfairness in the election. Cases in point, the actual president of France Jacques Chirac and Germany's Angela Merkel who won the election over Gerard Schröder who at the time was the chancellor of that country.

Besides, you're forgetting that Calderón wasn't Fox's candidate, it was Santiago Creel, and just like it happened with him six years ago, the higher official of the PAN, including the president, didn't support him util the middle of the campaign. And now that we are on an accusatory mode, we have to be objective. A jalar parejo. Marcelo Ebrard didn't even do a proper capaign of himself he relied on the AMLO effect using public funding of the government of the DF. And he won. Even to this minute, the building of the DF government shows cartoons and signs supporting AMLO.

In name of justice, if we are going to blame the president for supporting Calderón, shouldn't we blame too AMLO and Encinas for supporting Ebrard?

c) About the vote by vote recount: actually I agree, if the PAN really won the election they should be no problem in supporting the vote by vote recount. And I agree, that would bring a lot more certainty to the result. The sad part is that it is against the law. And another problem that was created by AMLO himself: in the hypothetical case the vote by vote recount is done, who would count them? Since the IFE are a bunch of delinquents and sell-outs to the PAN there's no one in the political map with the creadibility Saint AMLO needs to recount the votes.

So, the vote by vote recount isn't happening.

Posted by: bunburina | July 19, 2006 12:52 AM

So yesterday some radical supporters of PRD offended and attacked Felipe Calderon and PRD and AMLO justified them. This is the thug they wanted to get to office. This is the thug hypocrite analists like Raymundo Riva-Palacios, Denise Dresser, Carlos Monsivais and other radical UNAM graduated writers defended and justified, some openly some not so openly. What will they say about this new and violent incident, and about AMLO's threat against Felipe Calderon's family in front of a million people?
Now there is the firm conviction, in the great mayority of Mexicans, that AMLO must not get to power or trouble will arise, and I mean real trouble, not the little things these PRD underachievers from Mexico City can do, that is nothing. Many people in north Mexico are even considering splitting the country and forgetting about the poor and eternaly subsidized south.

Posted by: emptyvotes | July 19, 2006 06:47 AM

Most PRD followers come to do here is to repeat like parrots their baseless slogan. Vote by vote as if the votes had not been counted before, they will repeat whatever their mesianic leader tells them. There is no rationale in these poor, untutored and frustrated underachievers and they always destroy any intelligent discussion, we must be careful not to pay much attention to them.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 19, 2006 07:08 AM

Emptyboxes:

It is extremely intelligent to call PRD followers "untutored and frustrated underachievers." By the way, what exactly do yo mean by "untutored"? Just checking. But, again, as I said before, what can one expect from somebody who calls a writer of the stature of Carlos Monsivais "mentally challenged pesudo-intellectual."? By the way, you have to inform President Fox that his Secretary of Education, President of the selection committee for the National Prize of Sciences and Arts, is a left-leaning intellectual, as other collaborators like Xochitl Galvez and Sari Bermudez, committee members, also are. One more sample of your, and Jerry Bourbon's missinformed, or worst, brays.

Contrary to your disdain, I pay attention to what you write, even if it's nonsense, and wonder with sadness every time what educational institutions, what social milieu engenders in an individual so much bigotry, so much hate against fellow Mexicans.

Intelectual superiority is not trumpeted, but demonstrated. And I have not seen much of that in your discourse.

Posted by: pasilla | July 19, 2006 09:13 AM

Pasilla, "hate against fellow Mexicans" is better demonstrated with actions, not words in an English language forum. Actions like attacking the car of Calderon as he is leaving a meeting.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 19, 2006 10:32 AM

pasilla: I believe you are right. "Intelectual superiority is not trumpeted, but demonstrated"
But there is no stature in Mexican intellectuals who write for a presupossed and brained-washed reading clientele from Tlalpan or any other non panista delegation of DF or for the pleasure of UNAM students and professors. A true Mexican intellectual must ponder on the state of the nation, completely, from Baja California and all the way to Yucatan and he or she must also ponder on how they think and what they want Mexico to be, the whole Mexico, not only Mexico City. There are very good writers in Mexico and who are truly national writers but I will not mention them here.
The same happens for UNAM, taken hostage by an ideologically-oriented gang. Instead of being a national university, it is a leftist university that represents the points of view of only a part of Mexico.
People vote, and this vote must also be respected as a point of view. The results of the elections greatly contradict what the UNAM represents, greatly ridicule what all these pseudo-intellectual tried to conviced us of, what they tried to sell us.
Mexico is not Tlalpan, or Mexico City. It is much greater than that and our intellectuals must be up to the task.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 19, 2006 10:38 AM

Dont want violence? Then do a recount, what is Calderon, the PAN and FOX, trying to hide? Dont give already desperate people reason to act out violently, and to deney a full recount, vote by vote, to declare himself, like napleon, winner, to have FOX lie, when he said hes obeyed limits on helping FECALs campain, when everyone saw how open it was. When u have the media, a virtual goverment mouthpiece, commercial after commercial, lying about how dangerous AMLO would be to Mexico, big money also harping against AMLO all illegal actions. Is it any wonder that the young man gave FECAL the finger? Its only through a full recout will u aviod that finger turning into a gun.

Posted by: maya0 | July 19, 2006 11:24 AM

Jerry Bourbon:

If you call AMLO followers "untutored and frustrated underachievers," what dou you expect in return, a bouquet of flowers? Let's keep things in perspective. What damage can do a bare hand against an armored van? Besides, AMLO didn't justify the act, only explained what he thinks were the motives. I know what you and emptyboxes are going to say; you are going to make AMLO responsible for the behaviour of all of his followers. Did Calderon asked either of you to come to this forum to call names to respected intellectals, or you do it on your own? Did Calderon asked emptyvotes to come here to threaten with a North-South country split, or is his own bragging? I want to remind you once more that the advertisement about the "danger to Mexico" (that was found ILLEGAL) was paid by the PAN.

Emptyboxes:

Come on! Why don't you mention the intellectuals of your preference? Is it fair to name only those who you insult, because they think different than you? People is worth of your class only if they think alike. By the way, the voting perhaps represents UNAM, but not for the reason you imply. UNAM is a diverse institution, and I'm sure that the division of the country, at least at the Presidential election level, is just a pale image of the diversity of opinions debated in the UNAM, one of the great universities of the world. To save you poisson, I didn't study in UNAM.

Posted by: pasilla | July 19, 2006 11:46 AM

"Dont want violence? Then do a recount, what is Calderon, the PAN and FOX, trying to hide?"

Your sound like the perfect uninformed brainwashed Andres Manuel supporter, all you have is the slogans he is feeding you. Please, read what i say and actually think.

1.-Calderon, Pan, and Fox DO NOT have the power to decide if theres a recount or not, only the TRIFE can decide that.

2.-Doing a recount, is ILLEGAL if there is NO PROOF of irregularities. If the TRIFE decides to do a recount, its because theres something wrong and i believe than THEN the entire nation would side with Obrador for a recount, even myself. If the court sees no evidence of wrong doing, then all we have is a sore loser who cannot accept his defeat.

Posted by: Jesse | July 19, 2006 11:53 AM

I am glad to see Jerry Bourbon, bunburina and others taking on this strange charge that Fox somehow violated the law by supporting Calderon. I was not in Mexico for the entire campaign period, but I never saw him overly do anything to support Calderon. Is there a photo somewhere of Fox on a podium with Calderon, smiling and waving at the crowd of supporters?

So, as others have pointed out, Fox is perhaps guilty of doing what the PRD government did in the DF, he trumpeted his own government's successes, which implied that people should vote for continuity. In what democracy in the world is this not done?

More to the point, however, is the whole AMLO approach to declaring fraud. If there was an unfair set up from the beginning, then why did he participate? Why didn't he condemn the whole process as a farce and withdraw? If there was fraud, was it a computer manipulation, as he first charged, or was it old style, as he now says? But even more to the point-- where is the proof?

As to the recount-- I think most people now feel a recount would be a good idea politically just to clear the air. But there may be some legal problems with that and I am not sure how the TRIFE will handle it. But if the whole apparatus established for counting the votes the first time has been called into question, why would anyone have more confidence in the TRIFE counters? Of course, God himself could come down from heaven with a bunch of angels to do the count and if it came out with a one-vote victory for Calderon, AMLO would claim the PAN paid off a few angels or maybe even God himself. Next thing you know there would be marchers in the Zocalo with banners condemning God.

Posted by: Goyo | July 19, 2006 12:34 PM

Lopez Obrador has just admitied in an interview, that he will NOT accept Calderon's win even AFTER a recount.

He has gone completely insane and hopefully, many of his more moderate and intelligent followers will realize that we now truly, have a Hugo Chavez on the making.

Posted by: Jesse | July 19, 2006 02:24 PM

Wouldn't you be suspicious if your oponents Brother-in-law owned the company that wrote the softwar to count the votes for the IFE? Wait a minute that sound familar dosn't it? Software company executives whose companies write the code for the elections, having close ties to conservative politicians who win by a hairs breadth. could't be nahh nothing suspicious here.

Posted by: Todd | July 19, 2006 03:10 PM

Jesse, I'm not sure if I'm intelligent, but I would like to read the transcript of the interview that you mention and make my own mind, instead of trusting your biased criterion. If you are talking about an interview with Adriana Perez Canedo, a summary can be read in the website of Proceso; and AMLO said something a tad different, notwithstanding your histeric (and, franlkly already stale) comparison to Hugo Chavez.

Posted by: pasilla | July 19, 2006 03:25 PM

My wife was in the city of Oaxaca on election day. She noticed several things.
1) the people wanted to vote. Voter turnout was in greater percentages than the US ever gets.
2) People were almost violent went told that their polling place ran out of ballots.

#2 raises the important question.. IF Polling places ran out of ballots... and all were used. THen who voted???

Posted by: Martin | July 19, 2006 03:38 PM

So, in OTHER countries it is okay for the president to show support for the candidate of his political party during a presidential campaign. It is against the rule of law in Mexico. No drama. It´s just the law.

This is a fundamental principle to bear in mind when discussing the rule of law. It must be firmly set by example by the President. If it is not, it allows for others to demand equal flexibility with the rule of law and demand, for example, a vote by vote recount.

Posted by: Raul | July 19, 2006 03:50 PM

I was one of those that where in the fence waiting until at the very end, i decided to vote for AMLO. And i have to admit, i made a very grave mistake by giving this man my vote, in fact, i am angry that i waited 4 hrs in the sun in order to cast my ballot for him. What i find completely disturbing, is the fact that he has changed his mind so many times during these 2 weeks, he has gone from accusing the PREP, to accusing IFE, to accusing Fox, to accusing Calderon, to accusing his own followers. He has also changed his mind by saying that he would trust the TRIFE, only to later say he would only accept a recount, and now apparently, the man is saying that even if Calderon wins in a recount, he wont concede defeat.

At this point in time, i have to say i am disgusted, angry, and very dissapointed at his behavior, and now wish the election to be cancelled in order for my to correct my mistake and vote for anyone except this irresponisble man.

I support having another election, by this time, hundreds of thousands of moderate voters like me, who trusted Obrador to be a fair and moderate, will no doubtely, change thier minds.

Posted by: Carlos H | July 19, 2006 04:37 PM

Martin

Were the people that you say were not able to vote at a regular balloting station or a special one?

If they were at special balloting station usually located in airports, train & bus stations, and border crossings, there were only 750 ballots available. This is because those people were voting outside of their district and the political parties agreed that only 750 ballots could be provided for each station. These are set up for people who are intransit, have recently changed residence or live on the border.

The regular balloting stations have ballots for all of the people on the nominal lists assigned to the station plus ballots for the political party representatives accredited to that station. All of which are folioed to avoid stuffing. I don't think that any regular balloting station can run out of ballots.

Posted by: TG | July 19, 2006 05:01 PM

Principles that rule the behavior of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) according to the 41st article of the Constitution:
a) Certainty
b) Legality
c) Independence
d) Impartiality
e) Objectivity

Proof of fraud:
1. Before the election
a) The 9 member General Council of the IFE doesn't fulfill the principles of Impartiality and Objectivity. 5 of the "consejeros", including Luis Carlos Ugalde, represent Elba Esther Gordillo's PRI parliamentary fraction. 4 were placed by the PAN parliamentary fraction. The PRD fraction led by Pablo Gómez was excluded from the negotiations.
Considering that Gordillo has manifested publicly and privately her pragmatic adherence to Felipe Calderón's campaign, there exists a strong possibility that most of the "consejeros" preferences were tilted towards the right-wing candidate.
Additionally, Calderón himself was witness to Ugalde's wedding, which raises suspicion towards the relationship of the presidential candidate and the top "consejero".

b) Electoral Law (Cofipe):
Art. 48.-
fraction 1:
Electoral proselytism on radio and television is an exclusive right of political parties.
fraction 13:
Under no circumstances will third parties be allowed to make electoral proselytism on radio or television.

One of the leading chambers of commerce and industry: the Consejo Coordinador Empresarial (CCE), as well as certain enterprises like Jumex or PepsiCo (Sabritas), and certain businessmen like Victor González Torres, among others, violated the 48th article of the Cofipe law, under the tacit complicity of the General Council of the IFE. The damage towards the left-wing candidate had been
already done by the time the Electoral Tribunal of the Federation's Judicial Power (TEPJF) forced the IFE to uphold its responsibilities on the application of the Law.
The same happened when the head of the Federation's Executive Power, Citizen President Vicente Fox Quezada, was scolded, a little too late, for staging a massive campaign on the media trying to convince the citizenship of the benefits of continuity and the inherent "dangers" in the opposition's project.
The fact remains that the CG-IFE reacted late. Such ambiguity subverts the principles of legality and objectivity and lays the foundations for an inequitive campaign.
c) The fourth power: the mass media.
The omnipresent duopoly of Televisa and TV Azteca, after the approval of the, at all glances, unconstitutional Media Law (colloquially known as the "Ley Televisa"/ see art. 28 of the Constitution), made a poor job of disguising the fact that they had thrown their weight behind presidential candidate Felipe Calderón.
This fact completely undermines any trace of equity in the campaign. When every single news-anchor, talk-show host, soap opera character, commercial ad, interviewer, guest intellectual, poll, or radio announcer, kept repeating the same message: lies and slander about the left-wing candidate, his project, his administration as Mayor of Mexico City, and his biography became, by force of repetition, truths, doubts, or, in the worst case, fears in society's subconscious.
d) There is strong suspicion that federal social programs were used with electoral motives. Josefina Vázquez Mota, Calderón's current campaign coordinator, used to direct the Social Development Secretariat (Sedesol) under Fox's administration. Up to date, no evidence has been placed forward by the federal government to clear any doubts about the illegal use of such programs.
e) Carmen Aristegui, a very respected independent journalist in Mexico, reported on her CNN show that the PAN had internet access to strictly confidential data concerning the elector lists. Possession of these databases is an exclusive right of the IFE.
Presumably, Diego Hildebrando Zavala (Calderón's brother in law) through his company: Datanet, after securing a contract with the IFE (product of "tráfico de influencias") managed to get a hold of the lists.
Possession of said lists undermines completely any trace of equity in the campaign. Multiple assumptions or suspicions are raised from this fact:
- Did Calderón have an unfair advantage over his rivals while campaigning?
- Were the personalized phone calls and letters designed to scan the electoral register for possible voters or adversaries?
- Were some electors erased ("rasurados") or misplaced from the electoral register?

Here's an attachment to see Carmen Aristegui's video (for those who speak Spanish):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFMoibL-3As&search=aristegui


The arguments above were placed to prove that the electoral process strayed far from the principles stated in the 41st article of the Constitution and the Cofipe Electoral Law.
From my point of view, they are evidence enough to annul the whole process altogether (regrettably, a worst case scenario were both the right-wing and left-wing partisans, and the country as a whole have much to lose from).

I hope I have time to state more arguments to prove unfairness and fraud during and after the electoral process in future interventions on this same blog.

Posted by: fco. | July 19, 2006 05:01 PM

Martin

Were the people that you say were not able to vote at a regular balloting station or a special one?

If they were at special balloting station usually located in airports, train & bus stations, and border crossings, there were only 750 ballots available. This is because those people were voting outside of their district and the political parties agreed that only 750 ballots could be provided for each station. These are set up for people who are intransit, have recently changed residence or live on the border.

The regular balloting stations have ballots for all of the people on the nominal lists assigned to the station plus ballots for the political party representatives accredited to that station. All of which are folioed to avoid stuffing. I don't think that any regular balloting station can run out of ballots.

Posted by: TG | July 19, 2006 05:06 PM

On july 2nd, 2006, a sunday, here in the north of Mexico, 8am was suppose to be the starting time of the elections. Well, I personally went to vote early, at 8am, and suprise, the voting booths where not ready yet, and by 9am, a small line of people where standing by waiting for the boxes to be placed, kits open, etc. etc. Not untill a bit after 9am, did they finally open, allowing the 1st ppl to vote. Now, was this happening in how many places all over Mexico? Of 130,000, what? 50,000? How many people could not vote at that early hour, workers perhaps, it was sunday, but still ppl work even on sunday, and how many didnt vote, because their poll place was not open on time? This alone, is proof that the election was run incompentently, and the demand for a recount, should be obeyed. Oh, and to those people who still want to think of AMLO as a danger to Mexico, he was mayor for 5 years, and Mexico city didnt get blown off the map. So get real, AMLO will be like roosevelt, using the goverment in massive projects that will lift millions out of poverty, which is what is needed in Mexico. Not these modern day tecno bandits, who use brother in laws, to help create software, a la ohio elections. Enough is enough! Recount! Vote by Vote. Or are they afraid of the outcome? The stealing of the elections, and that AMLO is the legitimate president of Mexico.

Posted by: maya0 | July 19, 2006 05:29 PM

Here are two comments taken off of Yahoo news:
First, AMLO on the thugs who menaced Felipe Calderon "Lopez Obrador later declined to criticize the protesters, saying, "I don't condemn it. I condemn electoral fraud."

Second, "An opinion poll released on Tuesday showed about 56 percent of Mexicans think the election was clean but 35 percent believe there was fraud."

In other words, the people who voted for AMLO are sure there is fraud, but the rest of the country would like to move on.

The way things are going, Calderon ought to suggest that the IFE order a runoff between him and AMLO. That, once and for all, would be the end of AMLO's political career. (But, he would surely whine fraud there, too.)

Incidentally, did anyone see the little note in El Universal about the Atenqueros who were marching down the street in Mexico City, masked and carrying machetes? If I put on a mask and got a machete and headed up the street in Tijuana, the police would grab me in about three seconds. Why doesn't the (PRD dominated) govt. of the DF do something about this??????

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 19, 2006 05:43 PM

Maya, I was out and about riding my bicycle early Sunday morning, and passed, between 8:00 and 8:30 about 20 polling stations (in "Northern Mexico", Tijuana to be exact). 19 were open, one was not, and had a line waiting. So what? Who do you think runs the elections, angels from on high? They are run by about a million ordinary people like us, and in a million people, you will find screw ups. Do you, by chance, have a better suggestion on how to run them?

Furthermore, how is a RECOUNT going to help your idol if the fraud was in preventing people from voting in the first place? If somebody did not vote, you can count the votes as often as you like, but his vote will not be there. Do you want a new election? Bring it on (as another president rather foolishly said). Having enjoyed 3 weeks of AMLO's paranoia, finger pointing and veiled threats of violence, a new election will not be decided by any 240,000 votes.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 19, 2006 05:59 PM

I was one of those that where in the fence waiting until at the very end, i decided to vote for AMLO. And i have to admit, i made a very grave mistake by giving this man my vote, in fact, i am angry that i waited 4 hrs in the sun in order to cast my ballot for him. What i find completely disturbing, is the fact that he has changed his mind so many times during these 2 weeks, he has gone from accusing the PREP, to accusing IFE, to accusing Fox, to accusing Calderon, to accusing his own followers. He has also changed his mind by saying that he would trust the TRIFE, only to later say he would only accept a recount, and now apparently, the man is saying that even if Calderon wins in a recount, he wont concede defeat.

At this point in time, i have to say i am disgusted, angry, and very dissapointed at his behavior, and now wish the election to be cancelled in order for my to correct my mistake and vote for anyone except this irresponisble man.

I support having another election, by this time, hundreds of thousands of moderate voters like me, who trusted Obrador to be a fair and moderate, will no doubtely, change thier minds.

Posted by: Carlos H | July 19, 2006 06:01 PM

I was one of those that where in the fence waiting until at the very end, i decided to vote for AMLO. And i have to admit, i made a very grave mistake by giving this man my vote, in fact, i am angry that i waited 4 hrs in the sun in order to cast my ballot for him. What i find completely disturbing, is the fact that he has changed his mind so many times during these 2 weeks, he has gone from accusing the PREP, to accusing IFE, to accusing Fox, to accusing Calderon, to accusing his own followers. He has also changed his mind by saying that he would trust the TRIFE, only to later say he would only accept a recount, and now apparently, the man is saying that even if Calderon wins in a recount, he wont concede defeat.

At this point in time, i have to say i am disgusted, angry, and very dissapointed at his behavior, and now wish the election to be cancelled in order for my to correct my mistake and vote for anyone except this irresponisble man.

I support having another election, by this time, hundreds of thousands of moderate voters like me, who trusted Obrador to be a fair and moderate, will no doubtely, change thier minds.

Posted by: Carlos H | July 19, 2006 06:18 PM

See how dumb FECALs supporters are?, I mention that the late opening of poll places was but one of numerous things that happen on july 2nd, that had it occuered anywhere else, would have null and void the election. What part of that is hard to understand? This reminds me of how PAN backers say that Mexico is split down the middle because 16 south states went to AMLO and 16 north states went to FECAL, and somehow they won, because the north is bigger than the south, yes its bigger in size, but not in people...Get real, AMLO won the largest city of Mexico., the most populated state, the state of Mexico, the southern states,where most of Mexico resides, and he also took northern votes, i live in the north, and voted for him. That alone, by sheer numbers, logic followed that AMLO won, but nope, FECAL won because the north all voted for him. Wheres the logic in that? So lets open them ballot boxes, and vote by vote, see who won. Why are they afraid to recount all of them? Because the truth would show that AMLO is the legitimate president of Mexico.

Posted by: maya0 | July 19, 2006 07:04 PM

A young child is born, at the IMSS, maternity services provided by the Federal Government: hospital, doctors, nurses, beds, towels, medicines, etc. It is all free, the government pays for it.
The boy grows and goes to school. Elementary School: Building, books, desks, tables, chairs, doors, blackboards, erasers, teachers, assistants, administrative staff, all paid for by the government.
Secondary school the same, building, books, water, electricity, professors, administrative staff. All free, paid by the government.
High School the same, building, books, professors, administrative staff, paid for by the government.
University, UNAM or any other state university, highly subsidize and pay only a few pesos per semester. The rest is covered by the government.
Graduated, now to work. Infonavit: a soft credit for a house, the governments still helps, no problem. IMSS the same, pay a little and the rest is covered by the government. Want to get a free piece of land, just get together with some friends and go invade a land somewhere, no problem, the government will help you get it legally after a few years. It will be free.
But the problem is the government can't take care of everybody, there isn't enough money there to support everybody.
And what about you? What are you going to do for Mexico? What will your contribution be besides extending your hand to receive a little miserable help? Many people asked themselves the same question, many people opened their own little business with their hands and hard work, others left in search of better opportunities elsewhere.
This paternalistical system does not work, it only creates underachievers, poor miserable people waiting for the government to come and give them education, jobs, land, everything. Many people in north Mexico dislike this way of life, we have built our own hospitals and universities and industries and we wait for none to give us anything, what we want is a good and responsible management of the economy and an independent judicial system, and institutions like IFE, to be respected and honored by everybody, without exceptions.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 19, 2006 07:25 PM

Maya0,

Its illegal to open the ballots, the PRD ITSELF created the law that prohibits it, if the PRD cannot even respect the laws they themselves create, why should i believe anything they say about vote fraud?

Your arguments are ridiculous.

Posted by: Carlos | July 19, 2006 07:36 PM

Maya, as you have mentioned that those of us who support the PAN are dumb, you will have to excuse me for this question, but could you explain "FECAL" to those of us who are not intellectuals? Please? Did you think that up yourself, or did someone teach it to you? Whatever it means, it sounds cute....

Also, again probably because I am not an intellectual, I do not understand why winning "the largest city and state in Mexico" has anything to do with winning the election. Did the rules change, and now Chilangos get 2 votes each? And this logic means that because a bunch of Chilangos and YOU voted for AMLO, he must have won? Interesting logic, are you a philosophy major?

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 19, 2006 08:12 PM

It gives me hope for Mexico to read the comments of Carlos H. He voted for AMLO in good faith. No doubt he liked AMLO's expressions of sympathy for the poor and his plans to help the poor.

Now, however, he sees the ugly truth about the man he voted for and he wishes he had not done so. He says that if another election were held today, he would not vote for AMLO and probably there are hundreds of thousands of people like him.

There is hope for Mexico as long as there are reasonable people who can admit they made a mistake and take a different path.
AMLO in Los Pinos would have been a disaster for the country.

Posted by: Goyo | July 19, 2006 08:33 PM

"it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing".
From the Tragedy of Macbeth.
Shakespeare

AMLO has been only partially successful on trying to convince the public opinion about the electoral fraud. Polls indicate that only a third of the population favor a vote recount, but two thirds do not favor it. And there is more because new polls will be coming out soon and they will show how his popularity and credibility has been greatly compromised.
Even the most supporting journalists who defended and apologized AMLO during the campaign are now moving away from his radicalization. No journalist is talking about the alleged fraud, they are treating it as what it is: fraud allegations made by a candidate who lost the election. It will go away and will be remembered as an alleged fraud claimed by a loser who could not admit defeat. Just like that big lie about the Hilderbrando and cuñado gate, for as much as they talked about it, nobody remembers it today.
Mexico is changing, the generation of politicians like Lopez Obrador, Camacho Solis, Madrazo, and Monreal among others is leaving and they are doing it for good.
A young, modern and vibrant generation of politicians like Felipe Calderon, Marcelo Ebrard and others is here to stay and to set the course for the future of the country in more and ever more competitive elections. We Mexicans can only benefit from such changes and put the past and its characters behind us. long life to Felipe Calderon and Marcelo Ebrard! The new leaders of the most vibrant political forces in Mexico.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 19, 2006 08:37 PM

There are soooo many thinks I like to clarify:

a) Presidential support and reelection are signs of a helthy and mature democracy. Not having presidential support and no reelection are actually antidemocratic actions. I know that we have a bad history of reelections: Santa Anna, Juárez, Díaz. But that all happened in the 19th century. I think it is time to move and leave those historic stigmas behind. Oh, and show me where is it a crime for the president, the governors, the deputies and the senators to support their candidate.

b) About the IFE officials: no one left out the PRD in the election of the officials. The PRD voluntarily left the negotiation table and didn't want to cooperate. So, the show must go on and the other parties chose the officials. Period. the reasons for leaving the negotiations are known only by the PRD but using that against the IFE is just simply low.

c) The Consejo Coordinador Empresarial is formed by citizens. Citizens have the basic human right to express their political views. I hate double standards, so let's be fair. A group of entrepreneurs supported Calderón. Group Carso and Genomma Lab made AMLO's tv ads and helped him financing the campaign. They are citizens too and they have all the right to do that. But if you're going to point fingers at the CCE, please look at who's aiding your candidate in the first place.

d)So, there's a doubt that Josefina Vázquez Mota used the lists of Oportunidades in favor of Calderon. Fair enough. There's also a doubt that the PRD used the lists of the financial help of the elderly in favor of AMLO. Then again, please, drop the double standards.

e) Many people are using the whole Hildebrando thing as a proof of fraud. It may look suspicious, I admit. But, may I remind you, Saint Peje himself said in his "informative meeting" that it wasn't a cibernetic fraud after all, it was done, and I'm quoting him, "a la antigüita". So, AMLO himself has dismissed that option. Besides, the supposed Hildebrando software was used for the PREP. Big deal, the PREP isn't the official result. It exists for a quick countdown and nothing else. The final word (and not in this election, but in every single election) is the TRIFE.

I've said it a bizillion times, I'm not pro-Calderón. I'm not pro-Peje. I voted for someone else (Patricia Mercado, if you must know) But what I can not stand, and I will not tolerate is lies, corruption, and double standards. And all I've seen as the supposed proofs of this "fraud" is nothing more but lies, corruptions and double standards. How long is it going to take you people to realize that?

Posted by: bunburina | July 19, 2006 09:52 PM

I must admit I voted for Felipe Calderon. I went to the polls and I cast my vote with all my confidence in our IFE volunteers and our institutions. I also admit that I wished and prayed for Felipe to win. Now I know I was right, I am so proud of myself. His comeliness and good manners, his unruffled continent as oppose to that of his opponent.
I can only feel sorry and extend my most sincere sympaties for those who regret having voted for deceit.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 19, 2006 10:23 PM

Algunas preguntas al aire, he escrito ya que no se desconfia de las personas que estuvieron en las casillas ya que de manera voluntaria estuvieron ahi para que votaran aproximadamente los 42 millones de personas el dia 2 de julio.
a) Pero que paso con Hildebrando dias antes de la eleccion se probo con carmen aristegui la manipulacion que se habia hecho para beneficio del candidato.
b) Perdon pero porque el IFE mando hacer mas de 1 millon de boletas ademas de las establecidas para que queria ese "colchon".
c) Que raro que en 79 casillas o mas, quien le cree ahora al IFE, esa cantidad la dio el IFE hoy 19 de julio. En esas casillas votaron mas personas que las que estaban inscritas en las listas nominales. IMPOSIBLE cuando los que sabemos JAMAS, NUNCA se pueden acabar las boletas en una casilla a menos que sean especiales pero no es el caso y sino votan todos los de la lista nominal mucho menos que voten mas de los que estan inscritos. Razones por las que no votan todas las personas incritas en una lista nominal: 1)fallecidos, 2)emigracion (pero creo en mexico no se da verdad), 3)abstencionismo.
d)Porque en algunos distritos para el conteo rapido se baja la muestra de casillas, y si se baja ese muestra en que distritos se sube. ¿porque? se bajarian en distritos con preferencias a favor de Lopez Obrador.
e)¿Porque? a la gente de las casillas no se les da calculadora para realizar el conteo en algunos distritos. Ok diran ustedes los que leen es muy facil hacer cuentas de mil boletas mas o menos, si es facil quizas para nosotros que podemos leer en ingles y algunos en ingles, pero en la casilla hubo personas de diferentes niveles de estudios, incluso unos ni sabian leer o escribir.
f)¿porque?no se informa con anticipación de las actas con anomalias que no son sumadas al PREP, sino hasta despues que el candidato AMLO lo da a conocer.
h)Porque se dan cambios al momento de capturar las actas y no coinciden con los votos en el paquete electoral. Esto solo se logro comprobar cuando algunos representantes de AMLO pidieron nuevamente el conteo de los votos.
i)Un millon y medio, 2 millones los que sean, asi fueran 100 mil personas piden que se recuenten los votos con todo esto no es necesario?... Otro 88 cuando se cae el sistema y remonta el PRI, que parecido no ese miercoles todo el dia AMLO esta a la cabeza nos vamos a dormir y remonta el PAN... Que coincidencia.
j)Y hablando de coincidencias Calderon invitado de honor siendo secretario de energia a la boda de Ugalde, y dias despues Ugalde en compañia de carlos salinas recibe una llamada de elba esther confirmando su presidencia en el IFE.
k)IFE 15 años de democracia que no sirven de nada, La DEMOCRACIA SEÑORES NO LA CREA EL IFE, sino todas esas personas que voluntariamente por miserables 200 pesos disque para comer, la hacen y los que nos presentamos a votar.
HAY QUE RESPETAR EL VOTO, que bueno que los ojos de otros paises estan observando el cochinero que es MEXICO, que no ha cambiado mucho... ¿que no se limpiaria un poco contando otra vez los votos?.
¿quien alento la violencia con spots tan mentirosos y llenos de una moral que enferma? no fue Felipe calderon y ahora quiere reconciliación ¿quien le cree a ese señor? YO NO y ahi esta mi nombre no soy ningun cobarde para esconderme en la clandestinidad

Posted by: julio cesal leal espinosa | July 20, 2006 12:08 AM

Well, I have to admit that, of the two leading candidates, won the election the one who wasn't all that bad. I'm not sure if AMLO supporters are realizing this but in a way they are confirming what the PAN spots were saying during the campaign: "AMLO is a danger to Mexico". Not because he destroyed the economy or for violent demonstrations as it was the PAN's main idea, but by destroying the creibility of out electoral institutions that have cost us, all mexicans, sweat, blood and tears to build. If some people who didn't vote for AMLO (like me) felt in a certain moment a little bit of sympathy for him, right now, with his current behavior, that same sympathy is totally gone.

I was reading that someone in here was comparing AMLO to Mr. Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Dear God! Poor Roosevelt, he must be revolving in his grave. You just can't compare Mexico current economical stabiliy to USA's economical bankruptcy of the Great Depression. Sure the New Deal worked great during that time since the government was the only entity with enough capital to get the economy in motion again. Of course, with the entire coutry being broke the only way to employ people was by giving them jobs in the contruction industry, building roads and stuff like that. But right now, in Mexico, although unemployment rates are high, a great deal of people do invest and create jobs. There are parts of the country that are on recession but there are some other regions with a great economical boost. The 2006 Mexico is so far away from the USA of the Great Depression.

Posted by: bunburina | July 20, 2006 01:00 AM

JC Leal:
Two comments. You mention "MEXICO que no ha cambiado mucho". You are right, all the alquemests of the 88 fraud are back in business, Camacho Solis, Monreal, Bartlett, all of them, and they are all members or supporters of the PRD.

This is better:
"quien alento la violencia con spots tan mentirosos?". Please explain how a campaign spot "alienta la violencia"? Did the spot perchance jump up and kick a politician's car door? Did it steal a bunch of money from the GDF and go blow it in Vegas? SPOTS(???) causing violence? Boo Hoo.

WILL Someone who supports AMLO's campaign please tell us exactly what they want at this point. Because I do not get it.
1.) Do we need a recount because polling places opened late and people were prevente d from voting?
2.) Do we need a recount because "everybody in Mexico City voted for AMLO, so he must have won?"
3.) Do we do a recount just because it is "good for Mexico" and will "clear the air", never mind that this is illegal?
3A In the event that a recount is done, will AMLO expect Calderon to abide by the results if it turns the vote toward AMLO? Can Calderon expect the same from AMLO. If Calderon cannot expect the same from AMLO, why should he agree to a recount?
3B If the IFE is "corrupt", and the recount still shows the PAN winning, won't that just be more evidence of corruption? Furthermore, if the IFE is corrupt, they will, presumably, cook the recount and screw AMLO, so isn't the whole thing a waste of time?

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 01:05 AM

julio cesal leal espinosa,

Nice rant. Show me hard evidence of what you're saying and I'll believe you.

Oh, and if what you meant by being "en la clandestinidad" is to give us a hard time for using nicknames, let me tell you, it is the internet and we use nicknames for security reasons. If you want you're name to be hacked or some psycho to look you up in the white pages, be my guest.

Posted by: bunburina | July 20, 2006 01:10 AM

4.) Should the election be nullified because
A.) Businessmen exercised their rights as citizens to support a candidate?
B.) Fox ran spots telling the world what a great guy he is, but never mentioned either Calderon or the PAN in them?
C.) the GDF ran spots telling Mexico what great people these perredistas are, giving pensions to grandma?
D.) IFE is corrupt?
E.) Everyone is out to get AMLO?
F.) AMLO was compared to Hugito Chavez? (error, Hugito is a crook, but a much better politician.)
G.) Mexico lost to Argentina early in the world cup, thus depressing the vote?
H.) Great Right Wing Conspiracy, Mexico subsidiary?
I.) IFE cooked the books?
J.) TEPJF is corrupt also?
K.) AMLO is really God (or Jesus, Juarez, Gandhi, M L King, etc), and God cannot lose?

Supposing the election is then nullified, then what?

A.) IFE conducts a new election? IFE is corrupt, if (when) AMLO loses again, and by a bigger margin, will we repeat this whole process?

B.) Somebody other than IFE, which is impartial, conducts the election? WHO WHO WHO?

C.) Cancel elections altogether, since AMLO only wants to help the poor? Just make him president for life? Elections are a waste of money and time anyway, when everyone knows that AMLO will always win. (If he does not, of course, it is FRAUD!)

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 01:14 AM

Julio,

They say that love is blind; same goes for hate. Look at what's going on in poor Oaxaca; a lose/lose situation. Just look what hate can do, then take a deep breath, count to ten & think about your family, your friends. Cool heads are much more rational, just what we need right now. Let's let the TRIFE do its work and then accept the decision like we must or else watch this place go down the tubes.

¡TRANQUIS! ¡TRANQUIS! CALMANTES MONTES

Posted by: K. Vronna | July 20, 2006 01:22 AM

I have heard several people hear complaining about "favorable" coverage given to Calderon by the media, and they blame this on the "ley telerisa". Fine. How did the PRD deputies vote on this law?

Further, in November of last year there was an example, in Brazil, of utter media propaganda in favor of an election result. The Brazilian government pushed a referendum to totally ban handguns. (we all know the criminals and murderers would have been lining up to turn in their guns right away. sure.) EVERY TV network (and there are a lot more than two) in Brazil backed this. A "telenovela" was written in which a gun free Brazil was presented as paradise. President Lula crisscrossed the country campaigning in favor of a "yes" vote. The "NO" campaign was underfunded and disorganized.
Yet, on election day, something like 65% of Brazilians, including majorities in ALL 26 states voted "NO". All the government and media propaganda had ZERO affect. Because Brazilians were smart enough to see through the lies about this referendum.
If Brazilians are smart enough to ignore government propaganda, are the PRD supporters saying that here in Mexico we are too stupid to do this? I think not. I think people everywhere are smart enough to filter out government propaganda.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 01:27 AM

Es cierto se me olvidaba en que pais vivo, que decida el TRIFE, aunque creo seguira igual.

Solo me pondria a pensar que pasara AMLO probablemente no aceptara sino le favorece el resultado.

Que pasara con ese millon, ya no los 13 que votaron por el, Que México esta por venir?. Se calmara el pueblo como en 88, o en 2006 sera diferente, No soy de ningun partido ni PRD mucho menos PAN ni PRI.

Solo expreso lo que veo. Ok calderon gana le ponen la banda presidencial que bonito y luego... cuando quiera hacer las reformas electricas, petroleo, iva etc. En el informe, en la toma de protesta... ¿Donde estara AMLO?, Estabilidad en pocas palabras.

Ese pais dividido aguantara 6 años mas, quizas si, ¿cuantos no aguanto ya?.

Posted by: julio cesar leal | July 20, 2006 01:44 AM

The country is not divided as some people may want to put it. Is the United States divided because the difference in their presidential elections was so little? Not at all. This is how democracies work and we must all understand it and get used to it. Every time, in the United States or in Mexico and elsewhere, there is a little marginal difference between two candidates we are going to have situations where one of them will impugnate the election. That is normal and we accept whatever the Court says in the end.
What is not normal is to see a candidate blaming everyone else but himself for defeat. What is not normal and has not been so in Mexico is to blame the IFE for being one-sided and to blame the President, and the Church and the Business Community and their own Poll Station representatives of being part of the plot, of blaming the media, and blaming just about anyone else. That is not normal and should be condemned. PRD is not challenging the results of the Senator and Congress elections, except for a few impugnations, like the other parties and which are normal, but how come they don't say anything about what they won?
The PRD will suffer very much because already the mayority of the population is blaming AMLO and PRD for the post-election situation. It is not about the impugnation but about these demonstrations where you see pictures of Ugalde depicted as a criminal, where you see the hate towards the president, Felipe Calderon, Etc.
Mexican people do not hate like that, and tells me these people are a little minority manipulated by an irresponsible leader.
Whilst it is true that some 14 million people voted for AMLO, it is not true to say that all of them were PRD followers, a great part of them are already having second thoughts about who they voted for, many of them are already regretting it, many others probably support his claims and would like to see a recount but do not hate Felipe Calderon or the IFE or the President, another part of them were PRD followers who are of course in favor of the recount and may have some hurt feelings about the whole process, but out of all these people, who will be willing to take it to the streets? Only a little bunch. Very little to make a number.
Camacho Solis and Lopez Obrador and Monreal and the others at the PRD are continually repeating their threat of instability, but we know that is not going to happen.
They will have to admit defeat as it is the best thing to do in this situation and the PRD will lose very much in the next elections and they will have learned a big lesson.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 06:52 AM

Anyone see the article in El Universal where Lazaro Cardenas Batel, governor of Michoacan has to defend himself against charges that he is a "traitor" to the PRD? AMLO seems to have discovered yet another enemy.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 10:18 AM

Second interesting article, here:
http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/nacion/140848.html
where another ex PRIista (who should know) blames Fox for "violence", and identifies that known right wing ideologue, Jorge Castaneda as yet another enemy of AMLO.

These people are going to end up with an enemies list that would have made Richard Nixon proud.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 10:23 AM

AMLO won, by sheer numbers he won. Once all the ballot boxes are recounted, vote by vote, if its shown that he didnt win, then so be it. Why is that so hard to accept? Why are all these PANistas Facistas, all hung up about what a bad man AMLO is,no matter what he did during 5 years as mayor of el D.F. he could do no good. He didnt cause Mexico to fall down a cliff being head of its largest city did he? But no matter what he did, he was wrong, and he was bad. Its personal I think, maybe even racist, perhaps? How dare this dark skin indian looking man dare to want to be president of Mexico? Because sense it doesnt make. Everywhere in latin america that had recent radical changes, from right to left, from Argentina, to Venezuela, economys have gone up. That monster Hugo Chavez, has done the terrible thing of having Venezuela humm along at 7percent GPA for over 5years, same in Argentina, where that leftist monster in charge, thumbed his nose at the world bank, the IMF and for almost 6 years has also seen 7 percent growth in those years. In fact, it seems that by going against the grain, those economeys have surged ahead. While those that link themselves to more of the same, like FOX, and now FECAL, have had years of years no growth, zero. NADA So how come AMLO was a danger? Reading all of these ppl here, who want more of the same, who back FECAL because, they must benefit somehow. It will affect them to have a indio in charge of Mexico. Maybe its a sub consious thing, because these ppl really hate AMLO. Since way b4 the election, they have hated AMLO. Closet racists? Who knows, because he did well as mayor of the largest city of Mexico. He did extremly well comparing the numbers in work done, schools open etc. etc. So how was he a danger to Mexico? Nope, its a psych thing really with these ppl here, look how much hate they sprout forth from their minds when they mention AMLO, or his supporters. Yep, me thinks its a race thing, and some of them may be as dark as AMLO or more, a self hate? Who knows, but their the first to attack the idea of a total recount, vote by vote. Voto X Voto. What are they afraid of? FECAL short for Felipe Calderon, 2day comes out with white ribbons for peace. White ribbons....really now, these ppl dont know when to quit.

Posted by: maya0 | July 20, 2006 10:31 AM

Jerry Bourbon:
I don't believe the media favored Felipe Calderon. Actually it was quite the oppossite, the media favored AMLO far more than Calderon or Madrazo. How many times did we AMLO with Lopez Doriga in prime-time and in very friendly talks were Lopez Doriga would actually turn the microphone to AMLO and let him speak? And these interviews usually lasted for more than 30 minutes. How many times Carmen Aristegui talked about AMLO in her tv and radio programs, and Where about Denise Mearker? And Adela Micha? Ciro Gomez-Leyva? and the list goes on and on.
I actually saw an overwhelming presence of analist and comentators in favor of AMLO.
Today, we see Carmen Aristegui, Victor Trujillo, Ciro Gomez Leyva, Raymundo Riva-palacios and many others trying to minimize the terrible errors AMLO is making everyday, they minimized when AMLO threatened Felipe's Family in front of a million people, they minimized how Felipe was attacked by a bunch of fanatics, they minimized how AMLO justified this violent act later. They minimized the Salamanca video affair. They minimized how AMLO has repeteadly declared he will not accept the veredict of the Court unless it favors him. They minimize just about everything. But if President Fox says something about "Renegados" only once, this same hypocrite journalists will repeat it and critize it a hundred times. They have an ear pegged to Felipe Calderon's statements looking for any errors he might make in his speeches. These biased journalists have a score of adjetives ready to be used against the PAN and Felipe: Intolerant, abusive, violent, racist, religious fanatic,etc. And they did it all the campaign. Now we hear this fellows from PRD cry for media coverage. As a write on this blog, Lorenzo Meyer is with Victor Trujillo, as he did all the campaign, talking against capitalism and trying desperately to lay grounds to his cocaine conspiracy theories about the Mexican right wingers. Another sorry AMLO apologist. The poor fellow has so many losts paradises. He should go back to continue writing his marvelous and very respectable first-grade elementary history books for slow-learning kids.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 11:30 AM

A clarification for everyone in this forum: if you voted for Felipe, you are not necessarily a PANista and if you voted for AMLO, you are not necessarily a PRDista. This is important because a lot of us voted for either candidate and do not belong to or identify with either of these two asphixiating political parties. Can´t we be independent voters?

A lot of the hate and intolerance that is being expressed here and on the streets (Felipe´s car being kicked, the art exhibit in support of AMLO being vandalized) is somehow involved with identifying the perpetrators with factions, i.e. PRD vs PAN, pro-AMLO vs. anti-AMLO, pro-free enterprise vs. anti-free market. Why are we having such a difficult time separating the voters from the violence perpetrators and from the personality of the candidate that we voted for? As the song would say: "Relax, don´t do it!"

My next question is: am I allowed to support a vote by vote recount without being labeled a PRDista and without being labelled a Calderon-hater? Why does supporting a recount represent such an insult for some? My best friends here, who were presidents of casillas and counted votes, say that they would not mind a recount and that they would not feel offended about their math skills if the TRIFE ordered one.

Let´s wait and see what the TRIFE says.

About maya´s self hate thesis: some middle-class people that I have talked to have admitted that they did not vote for AMLO for fear of being labeled "nacos". Others did vote for him but are afraid to come of out the closet and admit it in their social circles for the same reason. So, maya, you may have a good point here about the racism but I think it is tainted by classcism as well.

Posted by: Raul | July 20, 2006 11:54 AM

I voted for Felipe Calderon because I believe in his proposal. My vote was not anti-peje and cannot be explained in the context of AMLO being a danger to Mexico, or representing the nacos or else. That is nonsense. North Mexico has traditionaly voted PAN for many years. But I must congratulate Felipe Calderon and his campaign staff for all the work they did. They turned the situation around. AMLO had been campaigning for several years, building alliances and getting more and more popular with his class division speeches. By november last year, he was 43 percent at the voting intention polls. PAN resourced to spots portraying AMLO as a danger for Mexico. AMLO's campaign staff were so slow to react, those spots ran for months until they discovered that the spots were having an echo in the population, then they went to court and got them stopped, but it was too late. In the last weeks, PRD attacked Calderon with many spots on the Fobaproa and Hildebrando issues, hurting Calderon, but it seems they reacted too late. AMLO and PRD lost he campaign because they did not hire a professional election campaign consultor, AMLO's campaigning around the country certainly helped him, but his own mistakes and the late reaction to PAN attacks proved fatal. AMLO has made an incredible effort to overcome the defeat and is fighting back in court. His followers are getting enthusiastic when they see those massive meetings but it is a misleading effort to try to stop his partners from abandon him and to keep himself in the news. He has certainly inspired hope in many of his followers. But the new campaign motto "voto x voto" is also misleading. He has first to revert the results by a little more a quarter of a million votes in order to win, but in the recount, Felipe is also likely to get more votes. The odds are agaisnt him. Plus PAN is defending Felipe's victory at the Court, and also the IFE, they are defending the election results also because their credibility is at stake. The Court will decide on the basis of the credibility of the IFE and its results, and will demand PRD to present evidences of the fraud or of why the votes should be counted again. Contrary to what AMLO is making people believe, the Court will not investigate a possible fraud, they will expect the evidences shown from the accusser, in this case AMLO and will listen to evidences coming from the defense, PAN and IFE. It is two against one. Tough luck.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 12:43 PM

Although maya0's comments are a little disjointed, she makes several good points. The most important to me is the personal tone of the attacks against AMLO. I'm still waiting for rational criticism of his proposed program, for well thought arguments in support of the contention that, if President, he would be a danger for Mexico. Emptyboxes recurs so often to "cocaine" this and "cocaine" that, that I'm wondering about his hobbies...

Bunburina pretends to comment rational, impartially, but she forgets (or worse)mentioning critical facts:

a) We are talking here about use of advertisement paid by all taxpayers (e.g. promotion of federal government activities), in support of a candidate (TV ads). Article 28 of the General Law of Social Development forbids it. Fox government did it; it's illegal. The Supreme Court ordered the advertisement stopped. Regarding re-election. The last Presidential candidate who attempted it was shot dead, already in the 20th Century; as a matter of fact, one of the crazy ideas in the anti-AMLO campaign is his "secret" intention to get re-elected (rumor mentioned, as I recall, by Enriquito Krauze). So, good luck with your "modern" idea.

b) In November of 2003 all the PRD group in the Mexican house of representatives oppossed the composition of the General Counsel of IFE. PRI and PAN (and satellite family business PVM) quashed every attempt to have a dialogue on the proposal. No walk-outs here.

c) We are here talking again not about a citizen voicing his or her opinion, but about a civilian organization supporting a candidate, in disguise of a non-partisan vote-promotion campain. IFE ordered the ad campaign stopped, because what the Enterprise Coordinating Coucil was doing was probably illegal (see COFIPE).

d) and e) Hildebrando and the mishandling of IFE's voter's registration database. Again, these are not "cocaine" conspiracy theories. Accusations against PAN (Josefina Vazquez Mota, Hildebrando, brother-in-law of Calderon, provider of software to IFE) of putting the voters database to illegal use was so solid that it was sent by IFE to the electoral prosecutor.

If we want to accuse or disregard the accusations, why don't we have a minimum of intellectual honesty? Why don't we inform ourselves before speculation and histerics kick in?

Posted by: pasilla | July 20, 2006 12:52 PM

I, like Jerry Bourbon, have wondered about all this crying by the left over "spots tan mentirosos." What was the lie in the PAN television spots?

I did not see them, but what I have heard is that there was a spot with some video of Chavez ranting, followed by some of AMLO ranting. I think they used the clip where he called Fox names. So, where was the lie?

The video just showed two demagogues in full rant and left it to the viewer to draw the comparison. The video showed AMLO insulting the president, something that did not sit well with most Mexicans. His own words and bad behavior did him in.

I also find it curious that people on the left would get so upset by a comparison with Chavez. Isn't he, after all, their darling? Don't they just get all warm and fuzzy when they see him snuggling up with the old scraggly bearded Fidel, the last remaining dictator in Latin America? Wouldn't they expect a president Lopez Obrador to open the doors even wider to communist Cuba?

But there is little need to go over this issue about the accusations that AMLO was a danger to Mexico because, as someone else noted here, in his post-election behavior he has proven that point.

Posted by: Goyo | July 20, 2006 12:58 PM

Goyo, Goyo:

I thought you were a little rational. I read a great comment in one blog this morning... What would you think if I talk to your neighbors and say "Don't get close to Goyo, because he's dangerous." Would you like it? Would you approve my campaign?

Calling the President with the name of a noisy bird, in the heat of a campaign rally, is it a mortal sin? The President is an employee of the Mexicans, one of whom is AMLO; or are you going to deny him the Mexican nationality? Perhaps in the Estados Unidos Mexicanos del Norte...

What I consider a serious intellectual sin, that you and other Calderon sympathizers commit nilly willy is to make a homogenous bunch of all with progressive ideas. How do you know what I think about Hugo (by the way is Huguito, no Hugito) Chavez or Fidel Castro, without me saying? Have I ever accused you to admire Franco or pederast Marcial Maciel? I don't know who you admire; I don't speculate.

I conclude with a rethorical question. Do excercising your rights make you a "danger for Mexico"? Since when?

Posted by: pasilla | July 20, 2006 02:07 PM

Pasilla-- The problem facing Mexico right now does not concern the right to challenge results. There is a legal mechanism for doing so and AMLO is exercising his right to pursue that challenge. He may even get his "vote-for-vote" recount. I am okay with all that.

The problem is that he has made accusations all over the place with no proof. He has accused ordinary citizens who worked for him, for his party, of taking bribes in order to throw the election. When evidence emerges to show that he is wrong he does not apologize, he just makes more accusations.

One day he says there was a manipulation of the computers with some algorithmn and then the next day he says it was done in the old way, implying some massive fraud whereby papers were moved about, records falsified, etc. Well, if it was the latter, there should be a good paper trail to follow. Let's see if he presents that evidence to the TRIFE.

The other reason AMLO has shown himself to be a threat to Mexico is his not very subtle suggestion that there will be violence if he does not get his way. Even after the incident where people attacked Calderon's vehicle, AMLO could not bring himself to condemn violence. He has even issued veiled threats against Calderon's family.

Now, putting aside all political differences, doesn't all this trouble you? Don't you see signs of some instability or, at least, some recklessness of character that would make this man a danger to have in Los Pinos?

In regard to his calling Fox a name, that of a noisy bird, as you say, I have no problem with that. You are right, that is part of politics. But, please consider these two points-- One, his statement did bother many Mexicans, as evidenced by his drop in the polls following that incident, and TWO, it seems strange that someone so sensitive to criticism, who complains about "negative" ads, would be so free in using colorful insults against others.

Now, in regard to your obvious pain at being lumped in with all the lefties in Mexico who seem to admire the old dictator Castro and his young prodigy Hugo (whom I have called Hugo and not Huguito), I am glad to hear that you do not accept that. I would be very happy to hear many more Mexicans on the left express the desire to form a modern leftist alternative, as has been done in Europe and other parts of Latin America. But what I see are people marching into the Zocalo for AMLO carrying communist flags and wearing Che Guevara tee-shirts. I see La Jornada and other publications and, I believe, one or two of the people writing on this blog, defending Chavez.

Since you say you do not want to be lumped in with all others on the "progressive" side, I exempt you from the question I put to those who like Chavez and support AMLO. What is so wrong with an ad that compared the two men? Let us not forget that Chavez was elected in a democratic election. He has managed to get complete control of the government and has begun to intimidate opponents through some questionable actions, but he has not turned Venezuela into a police state like Cuba.

The growth Venezuela has experienced comes from high oil prices and from a still active middle class business community, but there are good arguments to support Chavez and his social programs at home. So, again, why would the PRD reject any comparison between AMLO and Chavez?

AMLO's slogan "primero los pobres" is something Chavez could have used as well. If the PRD folks think the social programs Chavez has set up in Venezuela are so bad that they don't want to be associated with them, then what kind of programs would they favor?

But, to be scrupulous, the PAN ad did not get into policies, it compared rhetorical styles. Chavez, for whatever faults he may have, is a very intelligent, colorful and entertaining speaker. He can go on for hours and keep crowds listening to every word, much like the old guy in Havana. So why would AMLO object to the comparison? Actually, AMLO can't hold a candle to Chavez in this regard. He can't seem to utter an entire sentence without leaving two or three seconds between each word. I would think then that AMLO and his supporters would be flattered by the comparison to a man who is truly superior in terms of his ability to speak.

Posted by: Goyo | July 20, 2006 02:57 PM

It seems to me the PRD international relations committe is not doing a very good job at convincing the international press of their alleged electoral fraud. Today ABC from Spain is strongly critizing AMLO, no surprise because the newspaper has a right wing editorial line, but PAIS has also done it, and the same for several newspapers from USA and the newest one is The Economist.
AMLO and PRD may be very good at creating perceptions but they have not provided a single hard evidence of fraud. Only their hard core supporters and a few frustrated and sexually-challenged pseudo-intellectuals like Guadalupe Loaeza, Carlos Monsivais, Lorenzo Meyer (great first-grade elementary history cartoon books writer)and other cocaine writers like Julio Hernandez and Ricardo Rocha (a mediocre news host who never got anywhere) and some writers and painters and radicals from gay and lesbian and diabitis associations alike. I invite you fellows who happen to be in Mexico city to go and take a look at their freudanian paintings and canvas where they express their hatred towards fecal, in case you don't know, the frustrated tamale-eating perredistas call Fecal to Felipe Calderon, the democratically elected president of Mexico and a very interesting politician. Felipe Calderon beat AMLO real good in the last elections and of course AMLO and his people can't still manage to admit it.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 05:27 PM

I hate to generalize and fall into stereotypes, BUT (Why do sentences like this ALWAYS include the all important "but"?), Maya Zero makes it hard not to. It seems like every leftest I have known, when they run out of ideas, and realize that they are losing the arguement falls back on two magic words. "Fascist" and "Racist".

Now, the people who voted against AMLO are both fascists and racists. What does this say about Mexico, because it would appear that about 65% of the voters are fascists and racists. Is there any hope at all for the country if this is true? I was going to ask Maya Zero if she thought any of those 27 million anti AMLO racists might be a bit dark themselves, but she explained it perfectly. They hate themselves. How logical! How splendid! The answer to everything is racism and fascism. (The only thing she forgot is to tell us that they are really all El Junque members, too.)

Actually, how stupid and pathetic.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 05:36 PM

Check this out, from El Universal

El diputado local del PRI, José Medel Ibarra, dio a conocer que el sujeto que el pasado martes agredió la camioneta de Felipe Calderón, es el mismo que en octubre de 2003 le asestó a este legislador varios puñetazos en el rostro al salir de una reunión de dirigentes sindicales.
Ubicó a este personaje con el nombre Diego Valle y como trabajador de la Secretaría de Seguridad Pública capitalina, en donde presuntamente ocupa el cargo de indicador.

"Tengo información que quien dice ser estudiante de sociología de la UAM cobra como indicador en la SSP, dependencia en la que el subsecretario Gabriel Regino tiene un grupo de indicadores que se encargan de hacer trabajos de provocación en contra de los que denominan como enemigos de su partido", acusó Medel Ibarra en conferencia.

Sin presentar pruebas de este dicho,


The last sentence is important, but then again, AMLO doesn't feel the need for proofs of any of his wild claims either.

If true, the "merde" is going to hit the "ventilateur"

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 05:39 PM

"About maya´s self hate thesis: some middle-class people that I have talked to have admitted that they did not vote for AMLO for fear of being labeled "nacos". Others did vote for him but are afraid to come of out the closet and admit it in their social circles for the same reason. So, maya, you may have a good point here about the racism but I think it is tainted by classcism as well."

Ok, ok. Some people voted against AMLO becuse they hate nacos. I've heard AMLO supporters say that they voted for him because they hate rich fascist bastards who steal money from the poor. Isn't that playing with stereotypes, from both sides?

It may have a background of classicism, yes, but a racism problem? Give me a break. Last time I checked Felipe Calderón wasn't a tall, light skined, blue-eyed blond. He's from Michoacán and has as much as indian heritage as AMLO.

It is the same thing with the religious argument we have discussed in a past blog. Religion, race, social condition, whatever. I don't believe that makes a determining influence on your vote. At the end of the day it is a matter of interests. AMLO supporters believe he's the righ guy to defend their interests. On the other side, Calderón's supporters believe he's the one who can better defend theirs. Period. Not all indians or poor people voted for AMLO. Not all catholics or rich people voted for Calderón. It is a matter of interests.

Now about what pasilla said, and allow me to quote you for moments:

"We are talking here about use of advertisement paid by all taxpayers (e.g. promotion of federal government activities), in support of a candidate (TV ads)."

The money the political parties use is from all the taxpayers. So using that money for tv ads is illegal? No. I'm being rational here, and there's nothing more rational than the cold letter of the law. Show me the article on the electoral law where it says it is illegal for the president to promote the achievements of his government, and I'll believe you.

About reelections: it isn't something that I've invented, something that came from my crazy mind. A characteristic of modern day representative democracies, like the one we supposedly have, is reelections as well as pluralisma and figures like referendums. Grab any political science book and look for it.

About the CCE, the IFE didn't order anything really. They asked them to stop just to keep the waters calm but there wasn't a crime in the making because they were civilians expresing their opinion. "...the Enterprise Coordinating Coucil was doing was probably illegal (see COFIPE)." probably?? No room for "probably". Show me the facts. If they stopped it is because the time for campaigns had run out. And what do you say about the redes ciudadanas? "We are here talking again not about a citizen voicing his or her opinion, but about a civilian organization supporting a candidate, in disguise of a non-partisan vote-promotion campain" The redes ciudadanas fit your definition perfectly.

And finally, about the IFE's voter's registration database, every single party has it. If there was a mishandling of the database it is very easy to proof since every single party has it! My I remind you that in the complaints the PRD showed to the Tribunal it is not included the cybernetic fraud. The PRD themselves have dissmised that option.

"If we want to accuse or disregard the accusations, why don't we have a minimum of intellectual honesty? Why don't we inform ourselves before speculation and histerics kick in?"

Ditto. I'm being as intellectually honest as I can be. You don't seem to be there yet. So, Pasilla, drop your double standards.

Posted by: bunburina | July 20, 2006 05:39 PM

How nice. Now we learn that the hoodlum who hassled Felipe Calderon is a PRD operator who harasses political enemies. The local PRI congressman identified this thug who goes by the name of Diego Valle. As it happens, this hoodlum reports to the police department of DF and he is also closely associated with the other thug who once harassed Diego Fernandez de Cevallos.
This looks like a great story to investigate. Because we never believed the silly arguments put forth by PRD and AMLO, we knew there was nothing spontaneous about this incident and we also suspected the PRD was behind it, just like they were behind all those stupid perredistas who continually harassed every public event of Felipe Calderon during the campaign. They were always chasing his campaign and provoking in the meetings. Now they have been exposed.
But I am absolutely sure and I can bet the farm that our hypocrite leftist journalists will ignore this story or minimize it. I see biased Carmen Aristegui ignoring it, Victor Trujillo will play fool about it and say "this a perception" his favorite bs, Ciro Gomez Leyva will play it down with an apologetical and mediocre commentary, Raymundo Riva-palacios will never cover anything like that because he is too busy with his cocaine conspiracy theories same as julito hernandes from la jornada, Granados Chapa will say some generalities, Monsivais will attack the right and ignore it in his next commentary and the rest mediocre journalist will completely ignore the story or try to sell us more apologetical and stupid stories about how this is also part of another plot from the right. It was like that all the campaign. And many PRD followers who lack self-respect will also ignore it or eat the crap coming out of the mouths of these leftists apologists.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 08:58 PM

All the information about the elections is transparent, is public and available for the citizens. The elections were clean, the citizens voted without problems, the same citizens counted the votes and the party representatives signed the tally sheets, the PREP worked as planned. The counting at the districts was carried out in all transparency. The IFE presented the results and there was a winner and it was Felipe Calderon.
The rest is lies and anger and false accussations and false videos and false claims of cibernetic fraud and false algorithms that never proved anything and false allegations and manipulation of the PRD followers and the support of radical organizations to AMLO lies and allegations.
We need not explain it to Pasilla or anyone else for the same matter. It happened in this way. The facts are incontrovertible: The PRD has made allegations of fraud without any evidences. PRD and AMLO have over the last two weeks changed their accussations, first cibernetic fraud, and the dumb leftist journalist who believed them have now ridiculed themselves and are trying to get out, and now they are saying the fraud was carried out the old way, by changing the original actas. Another silly argument.
There is no need to explain all these. We live in an information era, and there is a parallel desinformation era, it is up to you where you want to live.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 20, 2006 09:35 PM

Want to know what really sucks? That the Mexican people have been thought of as being so stupid and easily led that if we see an ad on TV that tells us that this candidate is such and such we're just going to believe it as the gospel truth. Our intelligence has been insulted by both the right and the left, but this time around it's been an intolerant "left", (I don't think of them as a true left, just a new rebirth of dirty PRI politics) that has truly underestimated our capacity for seeing through appearances.

In '88 there was no problem at all in finding evidence of fraud. My aunts watched incredulous as the army carted off the ballot boxes before they could vote. My cousin in Michoacán was run off from the polling station where he was well-known as a Cárdenas supporter by several armed men. And the list is interminable, as many of those from Acción Nacional will attest to when they tried to support Clouthier. So people, let's try to keep this in perspective, there just isn't the evidence to support a mass national voter fraud to deprive AMLO of his victory.

I've voted in a different city for almost every election since '88 and I've been confident of how things were run because the people there have been my neighbors, some of them even friends. I practice community building; I get to know the people of my barrio, and not just the ones that think the way I do, so that we can build a consensus for projects that benefit us all. The focus is local. So where can this big fraud in the sky have come from, were we all sold out by our neighbors and our party's reps? And what's next? If I can't win the chess game I'll just crap on all the pieces so nobody can play?

My prayer is that someday Mexico will have a truly worthy left:

One that is more interested in delivering results to the people than just to the political bosses of the party.

One that speaks clearly when it comes to personal freedoms and doesn't support regimes that jail dissidents.

One that is not tied up in ideological chains and ignores the world economic reality.

One that can build bridges with the political players from all sides so that legislative gridlock does not rob us of another six years.

One that will realize that it takes two to tango and see both impresarios and workers as part of the same team.

One that recognizes that handouts are only temporary emergency measures and that fair employment and the CREATION of wealth are the best road to cure economic inequalities.

One that doesn't include prostituted "intellectuals" that only look for a budget niche and contribute nothing to intelligent solutions and can't think out of the box because they can't even find the box.

One that doesn't back down from the right wing pressure against drug decriminalization and sees that the only way to stop the drug business is to take the profit out of it and invest the law-enforcement money that will be saved in educational programs to prevent the abuse in the first place. (I'm really tired of narco-governments, how about you?)

One that proffers valid arguments instead of name calling.

Posted by: K. Vronna | July 20, 2006 11:16 PM

K Vronna, valid arguements, instead of calling people "racists" or "fascists" or members of el Junque would require rational thought and logical arguements. That seems to be beyond a lot of these people...

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 20, 2006 11:20 PM

K. Vronna, I'm going to print your comment and pray it every night. Who knows? Maybe God, Allah, Mother Earth or whoever is in charge will listen and give us that miracle.

Posted by: bunburina | July 20, 2006 11:30 PM

If AMLO has learned anything from this campaign and election, it's that he should buy bulletproof boots before doing it again. The election was his to win and then he promptly went out and lost it through some of the most flawed strategies ever seen in presidential politics. Need I remind you of some of the biggest? Not attending the first debate, attacking Fox personally and not his policies or cabinet (yeah, real smart, ridicule a popular president, look at the polls and weep), continuing that talk about being 10 points ahead that made his followers less active than they could have been, are but some of the more obvious examples of he and his team's ineptitude and overconfidence.

I and at least 243,934 (1,128,850 total) more progressive leftists chose to give our vote to Patricia Mercado instead of for the "Official Leftist Candidate". If we had not been turned-off by the importing of political mercenaries of the most revolting kind into the PRD, the graft and corruption around AMLO (what kind of "gabinetazo" would we get from Presidente López Obrador?) and the alarming and unhealthy personality cult around his person, then that would have given him the presidency by that famous one vote. That we didn't favor him with our vote has been more than justified by the recent events and statements from this, the man that is orchestrating the demise and perversion of a movement that Mexico needs so much.

bunburina,
While you're praying, pray for the poor artisans of Oaxaca and then go out and buy some artesanía from there. I can't recommend going there at this moment, though, the grafiti doesn't sound too nice - "TOURIST GO HOME - OAXACA ANTICAPITALISTA".

Posted by: K. Vronna | July 21, 2006 12:32 AM

Definetely, I'll make a special prayer to the artists of Oaxaca. It is such a shame that the Guelaguetza got canceled. What do they even gain wth that? They only harm even more their own people. It's insane. I'm buying some ceramic pieces of barro negro. Some oaxacan cheese, chocolate and tlayudas too.

Posted by: bunburina | July 21, 2006 01:05 AM

In April I was in Oaxaca, and drove across the mountains from Puerto Escondido to Oaxaca. In Sola de Vega, I stopped for a Coke, and a (pretty) girl asked me for a ride into Oaxaca. Naturally I said yes. It turned out she was a teacher, a member of the union now tearing the place up. She explained to me how she had now spent 4 years teaching in an indian village a several hour walk from the nearest paved road into Sola de Vega, so she was only able to go home on weekends.
Why do you not work in Oaxaca, I asked? Because, to do that, she would have to BUY the job from one of those worthless people demonstrating in Oaxaca right now. For about 3 years of salary.
The south truly is another world.

Incidentally, leaving aside that the union members in Oaxaca tearing things up are swine, so is governor Ruiz. If ever there was a case for the TRIFE to become involved in an election, it is what happened there in 2004. Gabino Cue, the candidate of a coalition of both the PAN and PRD was screwed, and royally, and it is a disgrace that FOX did not get involved.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 21, 2006 01:19 AM

K. Vronna: Your testimony is most valuable.
I witnessed several dirty elections and not only the 88, the first one when I was 14 and I was with my brother, who served as a PAN representative, and we saw it all, ballot stuffing, voter intimidation, false voters, etc. Then the press was also very different, in Monterrey, the only newspaper to put a fight for freedom of speech was El Norte, the parent newspaper of Reforma, but there were many newspapers in Monterrey like El Diario, today Milenio, that were actually working for the government, in those days its editor was Federico Arreola, who has a history of selling his pen.
And so I and many people of my age, know what an electoral fraud is, and we know this was not the case. AMLO and the PRD are irresponsibly lying trying to manipulate their followers, they are stirring and creating hate. But they are doom to fail for more and more, people will begin to leave them alone.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 21, 2006 07:34 AM

notice how nobody here who is pro calderon, is willing to see the ballot boxes open, and each vote counted voto X voto, nope, all here who are pro FECAL are hate filled ppl who cant stand the thought of AMLO being president, so they will go on and on, how dangerous AMLO is, how bad he is for not bowing down, and taking defeat. How dare that dark skin, indio, and his supporters, demand a recount. Yes, ppl like empthy boxes, and jerry will go on and on, about how they arent racists, or they arent right wing reactionarys, but their words ring clear. Anti AMLO, Anti recount, why? Why are they afraid of a recount? Enough evidence has been complied to assure that the TRIFE, will comply with that demand. Thankfully, these 7 men, are well paid, so they cant be bought, are at the end of their 10 year term, so they have nothing to lose. Most experts, who arent in Mexico, see this favorable to having a recount. So sorry to empty boxes, and Jerry, and all these other right wing reactionarys, your not going to get your wish. Thier will be a recount, and if AMLO loses then, well so be it. We who support AMLO will accept it, and abide. However if AMLO is the winner, in a recount, lets see how these hate filled ppl really react. Just remember one thing, hate filled messages where started by the PAN, and their supporters, so now that that genie is out, one they let out, they want and demand respect, well, u shouldnt have started playing with matches, if u didnt want to get burned.

Posted by: maya0 | July 21, 2006 10:36 AM

In his Reforma column Sergio Sarmiento always offers clear thinking and hard facts to back up his thoughts. Today he takes an optimistic tone and offers some perspective on Mexico's rather new experience with democracy.

For those who read Spanish, I am copying the column here:

Sergio Sarmiento
Los demócratas



"No hay democracia sin demócratas".

Anónimo

Las cosas eran distintas en ese entonces. Jorge Alcocer, director general de la revista Voz y Voto, rememora en el programa de televisión Quinto Poder la situación que vivían los representantes del Frente Democrático Nacional que apoyó la candidatura presidencial de Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas en los comicios de 1988.

En uno de los consejos de distrito, cuando se cantaban los resultados que había que sumar, el secretario general simplemente añadía un cero a las cifras del PRI. Los representantes del FDN protestaron por ese fraude que se realizaba directamente frente a sus ojos y que podía verificarse nada más con cotejar los resultados y las cifras de las actas.

El presidente del consejo no aceptó las protestas y pidió, en cambio, que se sometiera a votación "democrática" si debían o no quedar los resultados tal y como los había asentado el secretario general. La automática mayoría priista en el consejo aprobó mansamente las cifras "enriquecidas".

Más adelante, cuando los representantes del FDN volvieron a protestar porque el secretario general seguía añadiendo ceros a los resultados del PRI, un molesto presidente del consejo se volvió hacia ellos y los increpó: "¿En qué quedamos? ¿Qué no somos democráticos? Eso ya se votó".

Tenemos que reconocer que las cosas hoy son muy distintas. Pretender comparar el 88 con el 2006 es simplemente cerrar los ojos a la realidad. Pero hay muchos que no quieren aceptarlo. A veces parece que, tras conseguir la democracia, nos hemos quedado sin demócratas.

Afortunadamente no es así. Gilberto Rincón Gallardo, ese legendario luchador por la democracia y las causas sociales, encarcelado en 1968 por el régimen de Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, advierte en ese mismo programa de Quinto Poder que hay que tener mucho cuidado de no echar para atrás los logros de muchos años de sacrificio para construir una democracia real.

Que haya manifestaciones y protestas, eso no importa, dice Rincón Gallardo. El problema fundamental de este momento es que, por tratar de deslegitimar un resultado electoral, se eche para atrás el esfuerzo de muchos años por crear un sistema en que los ciudadanos son los responsables de contar los votos.

José Woldenberg, luchador también en las causas democráticas de los años setenta y ochenta, miembro del comité ejecutivo del Partido Mexicano Socialista que formó parte del FDN en 1988 y un magnífico presidente del Instituto Federal Electoral de 1996 a 2003, descarta en varias entrevistas la posibilidad de que haya habido un fraude en los comicios de este 2006.

La idea de que exista un algoritmo que haya podido cambiar los votos de López Obrador por sufragios a favor de Calderón en un fraude cibernético la desecha como una simple fantasía. Y en cuanto al conteo físico de los votos, señala que no es posible comprar a todos los que estuvieron en las casillas. "Yo sí confío en los ciudadanos", afirma.

En medio de la cacofonía que nos invade en este momento, me da gusto escuchar las voces de viejos demócratas como éstos. No son gente que se deje llevar por el último caudillo o por el imperio de lo políticamente correcto. No son políticos que acepten dogmas.

En 1988 ellos estaban en la trinchera luchando contra un fraude electoral real y tratando de construir una democracia cuando muchos de quienes hoy afirman que ha habido un fraude en contra de López Obrador defendían las burdas maniobras del Estado priista. Y es saludable ver que, aun con el paso del tiempo, incluso cuando los antiguos defraudadores protestan contra el supuesto fraude de este 2 de julio, ellos se siguen colocando inequívocamente del lado de la democracia.

Hay voces que se lamentan de que México esté hoy viviendo una democracia sin demócratas. Y es verdad que muchos políticos no tienen pudor en atacar a la democracia en supuesto nombre de la democracia si eso les permite llegar al poder.

Pero deberíamos también celebrar que, a pesar de todo, seguimos teniendo a muchos demócratas a nuestro alrededor. Son hombres y mujeres que están dispuestos a defender el principio de que una elección se gana o se pierde por un voto: que aceptan que los ciudadanos se pueden equivocar, y que precisamente por eso se ha creado un Tribunal Electoral que ventile las quejas surgidas de los comicios, pero que saben que un millón de ciudadanos no participarían en un fraude sin protestar.

En estos últimos días que he tenido oportunidad de escuchar a Rincón Gallardo, a Alcocer y a Woldenberg he dejado atrás el pesimismo que empezaba a invadirme. Quizá tenemos una democracia imperfecta: finalmente todas lo son. Pero mientras contemos en nuestro medio con demócratas como éstos, que fueron objeto de persecución real por sus esfuerzos para construir la democracia y que hoy siguen creyendo en ella aunque ya no sea políticamente correcto, no me queda duda de que la democracia aún tiene futuro en nuestro país.

Posted by: Goyo | July 21, 2006 10:54 AM

Bunburina:

I stand by my words. I gave all relevant information to refute your contentions, including in some cases law name and specific article. You just babble in a vacuum. Anybody can look it up. Sorry, I don't have the time to make the homework for you.

Posted by: pasilla | July 21, 2006 11:20 AM

Sergio Sarmeinto, is another right wing reactionary, anti-AMLO, who has no credibilty since he works for another anti-AMLO institution, called TV Azteca. Why dont u go outside of Mexico, and read how many experts, are hoping that a recount is allowed, and are giving AMLO a real chance of being declared the legitimate winner? But no, FECAL supporters are not willing to give in to the idea of voto X voto. Thankfully it is not up to anyone but the TRIFE, and as many experts outside of Mexico have seen, gives AMLO a good fighting change of having a recount. Something that right wing reactionarys would never have allowed, thankfully it is not up to them. Viva AMLO the legitimate President of Mexico!

Posted by: maya0 | July 21, 2006 11:23 AM

maya0,

None of us are against counting the votes in the polling places where there is proof of inconsistencies. This is completely legal and all parties involved have that right. What we don't agree on is the unsubstantiated claim that all of the packages have inconsistencies. That has been said on several occasions in this and prior blogs. If we prefer to trust the system that all of the political parties built and agreed to respect, that is our prerogative. If you prefer to distrust even your own representatives at the balloting stations, that's yours.

Posted by: TG | July 21, 2006 11:35 AM

maya0,
I suppose that you don't read Sarmiento's column and that anyone who doesn't totally agree with your point of view is a right wing reactionary. But, I thought that this excerpt from his column published on July 12th states his position very clearly.

"Sostengo la posición que he mantenido desde un principio. Que gane quien gane, pero no por berrinches o triquiñuelas, sino por haber recibido más votos. La elección no debe resolverse como una cuestión de fe. Estoy dispuesto a aceptar cualquier impugnación, siempre y cuando tenga sustento. No tengo objeción, de hecho, a que se cuenten nuevamente los 42 millones de votos, si esto ayuda a aclarar la elección y si el Tribunal Electoral encuentra una base legal para ordenarlo."

This doesn't sound unreasonable to me. But, then again you probably consider me a right wing reactionary too because I don't believe everything that emanates from the mouths of the PRD spokespersons.

Posted by: TG | July 21, 2006 12:31 PM

El Tribunal Federal Electoral ya inicio sus trabajos de multiples maneras.
Para empezar hace recuentos (en Reynosa y el DF) en casillas y distritos donde se presentaron inconsistencias. Y analiza las razones y fundamentos legales de las impugnaciones presentadas por los partidos.
Es decir; esta haciendo su trabajo en terminos legales y logicos.
Y, por si fuera poco, los recuentos del IFE en relacion con casillas impugnadas favorecen a Felipe Calderon.
Todo esto significa que nos acercamos, quizas en tres semanas, a un resultado legal y legitimo. Y ese va a ser, lo mas probable por mucho, la ratificacion del triunfo electoral del candidato del PAN.
Mientras tanto, AMLO se aisla aun mas. Su ruido sobre la resistenmcia es cada vez mas polemico. Y hasta el partido Convergencia ya marco su distancia de el y sus acompanantes. Quizas pueda terminar como el llamado Mosh, del CGH, aislado y ridiculizado.
Veremos. Falta ya poco.

Posted by: Eduardo Valle | July 21, 2006 12:39 PM

As far as i am concerned, we have to abide by the TRIFE and the rule of law. The PRD, PAN, and PRI all created the current laws and the legal process involving electoral disuputes.

The PRD might have legitimate grievences, but it is imperative that all parties follow the rule of law. If the PRD fails to ignore the rule of law, it will invite all others to ignore the laws, and it will fail miserably at governing the republic.

The TRIFE has the last word, enough said.

Posted by: Carlos H | July 21, 2006 12:52 PM

Ladies and gentlemen:

How do you call a statement like this?

"Only their hard core supporters and a few frustrated and sexually-challenged pseudo-intellectuals like Guadalupe Loaeza, Carlos Monsivais, Lorenzo Meyer (great first-grade elementary history cartoon books writer)and other cocaine writers like Julio Hernandez and Ricardo Rocha..."

A shinning tidbit of progressive ideology? A cogent argumentation? I'm not afraid to call bigotry when I see it, no matter who incurs in it. By the way, I'm still waiting for some names of the beyond any reproach, pristine, strict teetotaler intellectuals that emptyboxes favors.

Goyo: I find disingenous that your admired Sergio Sarmiento references only political figures who, coincidentally, have supported recently Calderon and PAN's claims. How about another fighter for democracy, member, with Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, of the Democratic Current (CD), of the National Democratic Front (FDN) by the name of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador?

Can somebody tell me why recounting all the votes is illegal? It has been done before. Has the court then commited illegal acts?

I'm not sure who amazes (and, to tell the truth, amuses me) the most: the delirant supporters of the candidate of the right or the "modern leftists." I'll keep reading.

Posted by: pasilla | July 21, 2006 12:55 PM

"Can somebody tell me why recounting all the votes is illegal?"


The law is very clear, and the law was created by all political parties, including the PRD. The law estates, that you cannot open any ballot, unless theres proof that theres irregularities in that particular ballot.

And now, permit me to explain why this law was created and why it is so important that we follow it and respect it, no matter what.

You have to understand one very fundamental thing of all elections, all elections have errors, why? because humans are involved and thus, human error is always present. In most elections, the margin of victory or defeat is large enough so that the losing side, understands that theres no way it can win even if all human error is erased from the process. In close elections, the margin of error can decide who wins an election or not, so naturally, it would seem logical to do a recount, but the problem is, a recount would not erase the margin of error, it would only change it. This means that if you do a recount, the numbers will definatelly change, but then we have another problem.

If you do 5 different recounts, they will all produce different results because of the margin of human error. And 3 can go to Calderon, and two can go to Obrador, so in essence, its imposible to 100% tell who really won the election in my opinion.

Having explained that, you can understand why a recount would not solve anything, it would only complicate matters so its not an option.

In reality, theres only two choices for the TRIFE, these two choices will be made based solely on the one single most important question there is.

Do the irregularities presented, warrant an anullment of the election, yes or no.

After they awnser this question, they will only have two ways to go:

1.-Anull the election

2.-Do a partial recount


As you see, there is no legal room for a full recount, why? because it will not solve anything and it will create even more problems.

By supporting a full recount, the PRD is in fact asking for an anullment, they know just like i have shown, that a recount is truly not an option.

Posted by: Jesus Chavez Partida | July 21, 2006 01:45 PM

To finish my last post, i have to say that it is important to follow the law because in some instances, you cannot fully tell with full clarity, wich party won. We see that same principle applied all over our society during close calls, a refeere, an umpire, a military analist, will make a call based on the best information available. We can review that information and have diferent opinions about it, but there is a need to have a system that settles these matters, even if its not 100% perfect.

If we expect 100% accuracy, we will never achieve it, nobody would accept defeat because there would always be a posibility for success, even if small, and thus, we couldnt function as a society.

Posted by: Jesus Chavez Partida | July 21, 2006 01:52 PM

"Can somebody tell me why recounting all the votes is illegal? It has been done before. Has the court then commited illegal acts?"

Pasilla: I am not against a recount, and neither is PAN, what he and his staff have repeteadly said is that they will accept:
1. Whatever the Court's desicion is.
2. If the Court decides there are grounds to open any ballot packages and recount them, the PAN will accept it as it is the law.

You see, basically, what he PAN is saying is that it is up to Court to perform a recount.
AMLO and PRD are trying to convince people that the Electoral Court can do whatever they want to with the votes and that is far from the truth. The Court is there to interpret the law which was enacted by Congress. The Court cannot not legislate from the bench, it obeys and applies the law, interpretations of the law and its words may vary always to limited degrees but they cannot break the law or create new law out of the blue. If the law allows for a total, indiscrimitate recount under certain conditions and circumstances where the certainty or legality of the election results is compromised well then I guess they will enforce the law. But they cannot create a new law.
What we all have heard from PAN and Felipe Calderon is that they will accept whatever the Court's veredict is. We have yet to hear the same from PRD and AMLO.
In another cheap plot to press the Courts, AMLO and his people are trying desperately to make Felipe Calderon accept a new recount, in order to be able to let all the pressure of the desicion on the shoulders of the Court's judges. This is not fair. The PRD and people like Pasilla and Maya0 are trying to tell the Court what to do and conditioning the desicion to something they believe is better.
The Court has to decide based on the law of the land. If the law allows for recount and the Court decides it best fit the situation, so be it. But if the law does not allow for it or the Court decides otherwise, So be it.
And we should all accept it.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 21, 2006 01:52 PM

Bravo por Jesus Chavez.
Ademas la tesis del TRIFE es que cuando hay recuento total por autoridades electorales (caso Tabasco, de caracter ESTATAL), se ANULA toda la eleccion. Que es lo que formalmente, mediante escrito al TRIFE, busca el PRD.

Posted by: Eduardo Valle | July 21, 2006 01:57 PM

More funky news, the respectable PRD law attorneys apparently have done a great job on their main impugnation. Apparently they must have worked overtime finding quotes to support their claims from great democratical figures such as Stalin: "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything." and they also spent a great deal of time copying and pasting entire phrases from Wikipedia to argument their claim. I am totally impressed. I have said in these forums that our Mexican left related more to communism, lenninism and sometimes stalinism rather than relating to the modern left from Europe. But I never thought these fellows would prove me right so fast! I wonder who's the idiot at the PRD camp who came out with this stupid quote. Perhaps Gerardo Fernández Noroña (who got caught driving intoxicated not too long ago and insulted the officers for free) or that lame loser of Jesus Ortega, the fool who was responsible for the embarrassing and funny affair of the empty boxes, I got a picture of this morons and claudia carrying those stupid empty boxes. It was a glory! an Ode to imbecile heights human beings are still capable of reaching!

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 21, 2006 02:12 PM

I like to mention Sergio Sarmiento now and then just to see the reaction. Yes, he is a believer in free markets, democracy, rule of law and all those other rightwing ideas. But he is also a clear thinker who presents his arguments in a very concise manner with facts to back up his logic.

That is not to say he cannot be wrong or that I always agree with him. But, it seems to me, that if you disagree with a person who presents such an argument, you should respond by attacking his logic or the facts he presents rather than make an ad homimen attack against his person.

His point in this column and in others this week was more than reasonable. He has bent over backwards to be fair to AMLO and treated him with respect. But people who prefer battling in the streets will probably never appreciate such consideration.

Posted by: Goyo | July 21, 2006 02:37 PM

Sarmiento has also declared his support for a recount. To support the recount does not necessarily mean to believe all the allegations of fraud from AMLO.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 21, 2006 02:59 PM

Jesus Chavez Partida:

Could you please, please direct me to the law that clearly forbids the opening of ballot envelopes?

Do you have access to the TRIFE sentence that annulled the Tabasco 2000 gubernatorial election?

I would love to read whatever you point to.

Posted by: pasilla | July 21, 2006 03:50 PM

I've been following this from England and there have been articles here on probable fraud purely on the maths - see following article

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/james_k_galbraith/2006/07/the_mexican_standoff.html

It would seem to me that there is indeed enough doubt for there to be a vote by vote recount. The presidential candidates offer significantly different programmes so the result must be checked when there are such strange anomolies.

Posted by: Marie H | July 21, 2006 05:16 PM

Marie H: To answer your question:
In my opinion there is no fraud, but we can say there are some doubts.
AMLO and PRD know perfectly that they have no evidence to proof there was ever any fraud and that is why they are coming out with different and contradicting stories everyday.

But there are some important factors that cast a doubt and make AMLO and his people think they still have got a chance to win. I will try to explain myself in facts:

Fact 1:We had a huge election, more than 40 million votes.
Fact 2: The difference between the winner Felipe Calderon and AMLO is of only 250,000 votes, about .5 percent.
Fact 3: The counting was carried out by regular people, in front of party representatives, but they were all regular people. Humans are not perfect, there are errors, arithmetical errors are very likely.
Fact 4: Any statistical analist will tell you that with such little difference between the two leading contenders, a recount is likely to cause:
1) add more votes to Felipe Calderon increasing the difference (likely)
2) add more to AMLO and less to Felipe, reducing the difference.(likely)
3) Revert the result by adding many more votes for AMLO and many less to Felipe, enough for AMLO to surmount the difference and win. (less likely, but likely)
Fact 5: According to the above AMLO needs a recount in order to have a chance to win and become president (Pasilla and other malignant PRD followers in these forums support this terrible option of a recount).
Fact 6: Felipe Calderon does not want a recount because he knows there is a chance to lose, even though he has an lead difficult for AMLO to overcome (I and Bourbon and other decent people in these forums support Felipe, and we don't want a recount, a recount is a danger for Mexico in this moment).
Fact 7: AMLO needs to sell the idea of a recount. But he cannot ask for a recount simply because there is a chance of arithmetical errors or because there is a chance to revert the results, that does not legally justify the need for a recount. He needs hard evidence or pressure.
Fact 9: The possibility of Fraud sells the idea that a recount is needed in order to legitimate the next president.
Fact 10: AMLO and PRD decide they don't care about the institutions in Mexico and accused IFE and everybody of fraud inventing and fabricating evidences, they get caught with a false video of fraud from Salamanca but are able to pin the doubt. A lot PRD followers who were sad at the results buy the lie, AMLO mobilizes them, adding a moral ingredient of pressure to the Courts who will take a long look before making a desicion.
Fact 11: The Court has got experience and know this is a strategy to get them to order a recount without having enough hard evidences.
Fact 12: AMLO wants to convince and push Felipe Calderon to support a recount, which will make it easier for the Courts then. But Felipe will not fall into the trick. Felipe will resist any attempt for a recount as it posses a chance to lose what he has won.

And there you go. That is what I think it's happening.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 21, 2006 07:53 PM

"Jesus Chavez Partida:

Could you please, please direct me to the law that clearly forbids the opening of ballot envelopes?"

There isnt any law that says you cannot open a ballot box, and thats because the TRIFE does have the authority to open them, but if you read the following articulo, you will see that the word "en casos extraordinarios" clearly says that the TRIFE will only consider resorting to what i interpret as ballot recounts, only in extraordinary cases, wich means to me, if there is clear and solid proof.

ARTÍCULO 21

1. El Secretario del órgano del Instituto o el Presidente de la Sala del Tribunal, en los asuntos de su competencia, podrán requerir a las autoridades federales, estatales y municipales, así como a los partidos políticos, candidatos, agrupaciones, organizaciones políticas y particulares, cualquier elemento o documentación que obrando en su poder, pueda servir para la sustanciación y resolución de los medios de impugnación. Asimismo, en casos extraordinarios, podrán ordenar que se realice alguna diligencia o que una prueba se perfeccione o desahogue, siempre que ello no signifique una dilación que haga jurídica o materialmente irreparable la violación reclamada, o sea un obstáculo para resolver dentro de los plazos establecidos, de conformidad con lo señalado en las leyes aplicables.


Another thinhg worth mentioning, is that an election can't be anulled unless theres GENERALIZED violations.


ARTÍCULO 78

1. Las Salas del Tribunal Electoral podrán declarar la nulidad de una elección de diputados o senadores cuando se hayan cometido en forma generalizada violaciones sustanciales en la jornada electoral, en el distrito o entidad de que se trate, se encuentren plenamente acreditadas y se demuestre que las mismas fueron determinantes para el resultado de la elección, salvo que las irregularidades sean imputables a los partidos promoventes o sus candidatos.

Posted by: Jesus Chavez |Partida | July 21, 2006 07:55 PM

Here's something that all of us can agree on; let's thank the Post for the opportunity to air our views this openly. Let's give ourselves a pat on the back for exercising our right to do so. Let's be grateful for the sacrifice of so many people's time, work and sometimes their lives in building a Mexico where we can have these debates.

Posted by: K. Vronna | July 22, 2006 12:26 AM

El destruir las manifestaciones de apoyo por parte de artistas en reforma no es una agresion, no es una provocación ¿donde quedaron los pacifistas? siempre con su doble moral igual que su candidato Felipe calderon, o no? e Hildebrando, por un lado sus manos limpias y por el otro su cuñado generador del padron con especificaciones de sexo, edad, domicilio, y claro tendencia partidista, o quien recibe oportunidades, para favorecer al PAN. ¿que se va olvidar? si se confirma el candidato del pan como ganador ¿que va hacer?, estamos ante un fraude electronico + fraude manual (ruleta, carrusel, mapaches, urnas embarazadas, etc) que bien aprendieron del PRI no, es mas superan ya al maestro. Pero eso es lo que se queria el PRI como 3 fuerza pero no se preocupen que es lo mismo el PAN pero con distinta cara en esencia lo mismo.
Instituciones? cuales? el IFE (instituto del fraude electoral), a poco si se respeta la ley en nuestro pais? que bien se me olvidaba que estoy en foxilandia, no aqui si se respeta la ley por eso les recomiendo lugares a donde ir de vacaciones en primer lugar vamonos a ACAPULCO no, despues a OAXACA, Quizas tal vez a MICHOACAN porque no vamonos tambien a TIJUANA uy que bonito.
Y mientras tanto unos cuantos sigamos pensando en la paz y pongamonos nuestro moño blanco y no se les olvide destruir cualquier expresion mediante la palabra o el arte.
Si confiemos en las Instituciones asi como el IFE, la SIEDO, PGR, TRIFE, IMSS etc, realizan un perfecto trabajo y todos las respetan. Y sino preguntenle a raul salinas, al gober precioso, a villareal, etc.
Y Felipe presidente !!!!! ehhh ups presidente del empleo... para su cuñado va a ser el de registro electoral, su sobrina diputada, su esposa claro tambien diputada en estos momentos despues 1 dama otra martita no.
Asi con el pais dividido y no hablo de division felipe-amlo no vayan a iztapalapa, oaxaca, estado de mexico, etc, donde hay pobreza extrema en todos luagares de nuestro pais no se vayan muy lejos les aseguro que muy cerca de donde transcurren su dia hay pobreza, esa es la division la diferencia en la repartición de la riqueza. Y no con su .58% de votos que nadie les cree. Claro con su padron rasurado gracias a Hildebrando ¿cuanta gente conoces que ya habia votado y no ha hecho ningun cambio en su credencial y no aparecio en la lista nominal, pero no se preocupen en otras casillas votaron hasta los muertos claro pues su Dios FECAL se los permitio, y sino pregunten al IFE con sus casillas donde votaron mas de los registrados en la slista nominal no...
Tienes el valor o te vale jeje diria telerisa. y brozo saldria esbozando una sonrisa.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 04:48 AM

El destruir las manifestaciones de apoyo por parte de artistas en reforma no es una agresion, no es una provocación ¿donde quedaron los pacifistas? siempre con su doble moral igual que su candidato Felipe calderon, o no? e Hildebrando, por un lado sus manos limpias y por el otro su cuñado generador del padron con especificaciones de sexo, edad, domicilio, y claro tendencia partidista, o quien recibe oportunidades, para favorecer al PAN. ¿que se va olvidar? si se confirma el candidato del pan como ganador ¿que va hacer?, estamos ante un fraude electronico + fraude manual (ruleta, carrusel, mapaches, urnas embarazadas, etc) que bien aprendieron del PRI no, es mas superan ya al maestro. Pero eso es lo que se queria el PRI como 3 fuerza pero no se preocupen que es lo mismo el PAN pero con distinta cara en esencia lo mismo.
Instituciones? cuales? el IFE (instituto del fraude electoral), a poco si se respeta la ley en nuestro pais? que bien se me olvidaba que estoy en foxilandia, no aqui si se respeta la ley por eso les recomiendo lugares a donde ir de vacaciones en primer lugar vamonos a ACAPULCO no, despues a OAXACA, Quizas tal vez a MICHOACAN porque no vamonos tambien a TIJUANA uy que bonito.
Y mientras tanto unos cuantos sigamos pensando en la paz y pongamonos nuestro moño blanco y no se les olvide destruir cualquier expresion mediante la palabra o el arte.
Si confiemos en las Instituciones asi como el IFE, la SIEDO, PGR, TRIFE, IMSS etc, realizan un perfecto trabajo y todos las respetan. Y sino preguntenle a raul salinas, al gober precioso, a villareal, etc.
Y Felipe presidente !!!!! ehhh ups presidente del empleo... para su cuñado va a ser el de registro electoral, su sobrina diputada, su esposa claro tambien diputada en estos momentos despues 1 dama otra martita no.
Asi con el pais dividido y no hablo de division felipe-amlo no vayan a iztapalapa, oaxaca, estado de mexico, etc, donde hay pobreza extrema en todos luagares de nuestro pais no se vayan muy lejos les aseguro que muy cerca de donde transcurren su dia hay pobreza, esa es la division la diferencia en la repartición de la riqueza. Y no con su .58% de votos que nadie les cree. Claro con su padron rasurado gracias a Hildebrando ¿cuanta gente conoces que ya habia votado y no ha hecho ningun cambio en su credencial y no aparecio en la lista nominal, pero no se preocupen en otras casillas votaron hasta los muertos claro pues su Dios FECAL se los permitio, y sino pregunten al IFE con sus casillas donde votaron mas de los registrados en la slista nominal no...
Tienes el valor o te vale jeje diria telerisa. y brozo saldria esbozando una sonrisa.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 04:48 AM

El destruir las manifestaciones de apoyo por parte de artistas en reforma no es una agresion, no es una provocación ¿donde quedaron los pacifistas? siempre con su doble moral igual que su candidato Felipe calderon, o no? e Hildebrando, por un lado sus manos limpias y por el otro su cuñado generador del padron con especificaciones de sexo, edad, domicilio, y claro tendencia partidista, o quien recibe oportunidades, para favorecer al PAN. ¿que se va olvidar? si se confirma el candidato del pan como ganador ¿que va hacer?, estamos ante un fraude electronico + fraude manual (ruleta, carrusel, mapaches, urnas embarazadas, etc) que bien aprendieron del PRI no, es mas superan ya al maestro. Pero eso es lo que se queria el PRI como 3 fuerza pero no se preocupen que es lo mismo el PAN pero con distinta cara en esencia lo mismo.
Instituciones? cuales? el IFE (instituto del fraude electoral), a poco si se respeta la ley en nuestro pais? que bien se me olvidaba que estoy en foxilandia, no aqui si se respeta la ley por eso les recomiendo lugares a donde ir de vacaciones en primer lugar vamonos a ACAPULCO no, despues a OAXACA, Quizas tal vez a MICHOACAN porque no vamonos tambien a TIJUANA uy que bonito.
Y mientras tanto unos cuantos sigamos pensando en la paz y pongamonos nuestro moño blanco y no se les olvide destruir cualquier expresion mediante la palabra o el arte.
Si confiemos en las Instituciones asi como el IFE, la SIEDO, PGR, TRIFE, IMSS etc, realizan un perfecto trabajo y todos las respetan. Y sino preguntenle a raul salinas, al gober precioso, a villareal, etc.
Y Felipe presidente !!!!! ehhh ups presidente del empleo... para su cuñado va a ser el de registro electoral, su sobrina diputada, su esposa claro tambien diputada en estos momentos despues 1 dama otra martita no.
Asi con el pais dividido y no hablo de division felipe-amlo no vayan a iztapalapa, oaxaca, estado de mexico, etc, donde hay pobreza extrema en todos luagares de nuestro pais no se vayan muy lejos les aseguro que muy cerca de donde transcurren su dia hay pobreza, esa es la division la diferencia en la repartición de la riqueza. Y no con su .58% de votos que nadie les cree. Claro con su padron rasurado gracias a Hildebrando ¿cuanta gente conoces que ya habia votado y no ha hecho ningun cambio en su credencial y no aparecio en la lista nominal, pero no se preocupen en otras casillas votaron hasta los muertos claro pues su Dios FECAL se los permitio, y sino pregunten al IFE con sus casillas donde votaron mas de los registrados en la slista nominal no...
Tienes el valor o te vale jeje diria telerisa. y brozo saldria esbozando una sonrisa.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 04:49 AM

no quise mandarlo tantas veces, una disculpa de antemano, se trabo la maquina y no se que paso, chequen la hora del mensaje 2 tienen la misma hora y el otro difiere en 1 minuto error de internet o mio. Perdon a todos

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 05:01 AM

My most deepest gratitude and appreciation go to those respectable citizens who dutifully and gracefully endeavoured to ruin those obscene and crappy pieces of art being exposed at the Alameda Central. Not normally can we find today people committed to such lofty purposes.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 22, 2006 07:19 AM

Daniel Cervantes,

No estoy de acuerdo con la destruccion de las mantas en la ciudad de Mexico, pero asi mismo no estoy tampoco de acuerdo con esos que reclaman fraude sin primero haberlo probado legalmente, esto lo encuentro tremendamente irresponsable.

La realidad es, que el TRIFE decidira si Felipe Calderon es un tramposo, o si Lopez Obrador un mentiroso, y espero que los seguidores de los dos bandos, tengan los pantalones para aceptar su derrota.

Posted by: Jesus Chavez | July 22, 2006 10:50 AM

Daniel Cervantes, why are you criticizing vandalism of political posters on public property, yet have not a word to say about the violent agression on Felipe Calderon as he was in his car?

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 22, 2006 11:24 AM

Daniel Cervantes,

Los maestros de fraude como Bartlett, Camacho y otros del viejo PRI ya estan con Andres Manuel. El asunto ahora es muy sencillo-- o tiene las pruebas de fraude AMLO o no? El TRIFE decidira pronto.

Pero es muy probable que AMLO y sus manifestantes profesionales vayan a seguir protestando porque para ellos marchar en las calles gritando es mejor diversion que el cine, el futbol o qualquier otra cosa. Y, al final, ellos no creen en las instituciones ni en democracia. Nada mas quieren el poder.

Posted by: Goyo | July 22, 2006 02:38 PM

In relation to those so called art paintings from well reknown artists. We should say the truth and the truth is that they were really insulting to millions of Mexicans who did not vote for AMLO and do not agree with a recount. already we are listening to threats from AMLO and Camacho Solis and Noruña and we do not need to see more insults.
And what bothers most is that these alleged painters claim to be neutral and only to express a defense of the vote but in reality they are following AMLO's agenda, one of the canvas actually depicted an ugly drawing of Felipe Calderon. These paintings were not about defending the votes, they were about hate.
And please let's be polite with our American bloggers here and maintain the comments in English.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 22, 2006 05:11 PM

Perdon, emptyboxes-- I was answering our friend Daniel and thought perhaps his English is not so good.

I find your point very interesting. I had heard reports about this "art exhibit," but it appears, from what you say, this was just another trick to use public funds and public places for political purposes.
Yet these are the people who complain if the president makes a statement or if the business community expresses an opinion.

Posted by: Goyo | July 22, 2006 05:56 PM

Goyo: These artists are working for PRD and we all know what their agenda is. Jose Luis Cuevas, Vicente Rojo, Gilberto Aceves Navarro and the rest are clientele painters working for the DF government. Everybody knows that the DF uses the same techniques Cuba and other repressive governments use to buy the artists and intellectuals by "promoting through government programs" which is nothing but some budget from our taxes dedicated to these cocaine artists and intellectuals. In this way the PRD keeps them by its side and uses them to advance their political agenda. They also do the same with journalists and writers, for example Gutierrez from Diario Monitor received a lot of adds from the DF, and he is clearly in their payroll, same can be said about Monsivais, DF dedicated a museum to honor him and has "promoted" his works, meaning they have financed him, another one in the payroll.
In this particular case of the so called murals to promote the vote x vote recount, it got really gross, with these fellows openly showing their affection for AMLO and their hatred for Felipe Calderon.
They are all totally disconnected from reality.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 22, 2006 06:24 PM

I think the days ahead will be very interesting. As the timeline for TRIFE approaches AMLO and PRD get more and more desperate, they know they have no chance to win and now they are actually openly betting on an anullment.
Now Noroña is critizing the IFE for defending the election, well of course they have to defend it, they did a good job.
I, like Goyo and others here in these forums, find comfort when I hear Woldemberg, Gilberto Rincon Gallardo, Jorge Alcocer, and others defending the results of the elections and defending the IFE. It depresses me to think we could ever be governed by such people like Lopez Obrador, Camacho Solis, Noruña, Leonel Cota, Claudia Shaubam, and the others. And it really makes me feel bad specially because of what I have seen and heard from them over the last three weeks.
Before the elections, a week or two before, Felipe Calderon and Manuel Espino had said that the election was going to be a very close one and that they would win by a million votes or so. As it turned out, it was much less. But the point is that I, and many panistas were prepared to lose, because when Felipe told us the election was going to be close, he was also warning us that we could lose, and that we should make an effort and convince more people.
I must confess I was prepared to lose and to accept AMLO and his team as the new president, I said to myself: it is democracy, you either win or lose.
But now I am having second thoughts, I know the possibility for AMLO to ever become president is really very, very far, but just the thought of it makes me think. And now I know, I am not prepared to have this person as president. Not after I have seen him lie so much, not after I have seen him threatening the whole country with social unrest. Not after I have seen him falsely accussing the IFE and trying to destroy it, the very foundation of our modern and newly born democracy. Not after I have seen the PRD and AMLO sending his people to attack and offend Felipe Calderon, Not after I have seen AMLO and PRD trying to annull the whole election and to make the whole country go through a constitutional crisis with terrible economic and social consecuenses. I am not ready to accept AMLO as president. I think I will never be and I am sure many out there feel the same way.
As I read the lasts threats uttered by PRD officials today, I ponder on the very future of our nation and I think whether we one day will be able to discuss, not how to get out economy better and provide good jobs for our people, the way to do this is well known and many countries have already done it and there aren't any alternatives, but rather if my country will ever be discussing how to reach the stars as other countries are already discussing it today.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 22, 2006 06:44 PM

ohh perdon no crei que era algo de elite entrar a este blog ahora resulta que solo en ingles se puede expresar uno, ¿donde queda la pluralidad? para eso fue creado internet no, es una red que permite la comunicacion entre muchas computadoras de diversos paises con el simple hecho de manifestar ideas. Disculpa no se bien escribir ingles lo acepto pero no creo que sea una razon para detallar algunas cosas. Ahora que si quieres ya no escribo, solo quedaria de manifiesto tu cerrazon ante las postura de otras personas no? rompeme la computadora jajaja.
En relacion a que si son empleados o no los intelectuales del gobierno del distrito federal o no, creo que tienen derecho como cualquier ciudadano a la libre expresion, en eso radica nuestra constitucion mientras no interfieras en la libertad de terceros, si estan a favor o no, no tiene mucho que ver.
O que calderon tiene a chespirito no?, a hermosillo o al kikin...
En efecto Diego valle quien agredio a Felipe hizo mal ya que violencia provoca mas violencia. Pero el tratar de ya enargolarse como presidente de mexico felipe calderon no impulsa a eso si hablamos de respeto a las instituciones el tiene que ser el primero si quiere ser presidente. Hasta que el TRIFE no resuleva las controversias y emita su veredicto Calderon no puede tener reuniones con sindicatos, empresarios, grupos catolicos como si ya fuera el presidente de Mexico. Claro puede reunirse con cualquier persona pero no como si fuera ya el presidente electo, esto unicamente crsipa los animos de mucha gente que cree que fue fraude y no son pocos la duda esta en el aire y tocara al TRIFE aclarar esa duda.
Ok mencionan a camacho, nuñez etc viejos del PRI , pero que me dicen de los bibriesca, zavala, de elba esther.
Y que no en el 88 clouthier era quien realizaba su resistencia civil, y no era foz quien pedia que se abrieran los paquetes electorales, muy bien merecido el apodo de traidor a la democracia y no solo eso a los mexicanos que creyeron en el y vean los resultados.
Cuantos empleos no se perdieron?, Narcotrafico creo que volamos a parecernos mucho a colombia? falta poco quizas en unos 6 años no creen...
AHH ya se con lo que se pudiera decir oye pero en la ciudad de mexico no se hizo nada contra la delincuencia etc, ok una de las facultades hasta ahora del presidente de mexico es: que si la seguridad de la ciudad de mexico no es la optima èl el presidente puede tomar el mando de los organos para solucionar el problema. Entonces no solo fue culpa de amlo si Fox podia hacer algo porque no lo hizo.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 06:54 PM

por favor si en rules de este site encuentran algo que impida escribir en español diganme en que parte y me abstendre aunque no lo crea justo. hablando de esas rules que aparece una liga en la parte de abajo llamada full rules rescate algo y lo pongo a su consideracion.

You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence will not be tolerated.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 06:58 PM

Pueden escribir en chino si se les antoja, pero como es del POST, y el idioma del Post es ingles....Igual seria raro escribir en ingles en un foro de Reforma.

Dices que es culpa de Fox "tomar el mando de los organos para solucionar el problema" de la violencia en chilangolandia. Legalmente podria. Pero armaria un desmadre politico, y bien lo sabemos todos. Por eso no lo hace.

Le podemos dar las gracias a la ley federal de trabajo por los empleos no generados en este sexenio, una ley que Fox quiso modernizer pero no pudo, cortesia de los diputados perredistas.

Finalmente, el que quiere comparar esas eleciones con las del '88 esta o loco o ignorante. Donde estan los millones de votos robados? Que decian los observadores internacionales en 88? (nada, porque no eran permitidos) A poco que los medios ignoraron a AMLO como lo hicieron con Cardenas. Disculpa la palabra pero unicamente un pendejo emparejaria esas eleciones con las del 88. Punto.

Posted by: Jerry Bourbon | July 22, 2006 07:40 PM

mmm que casualidad en la jornada de hoy diario mexicano en la Rayuela dice mas o menos asi Rayuela

No nos equivoquemos: los del 2006 son los mismos del 88... Los mismos dueños de México.

http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2006/07/22/index.php

ah no culpo a fox de los empleos no creados , si de los que estaban y se perdieron. Y tampoco de la violencia en el Df, solo que si tanto la critican porque no hacen algo aunque fuera un desastre politico. Y que mas changarros con Felipe eso fue lo que se la paso diciendo en toda su campaña o hablaba de mas economia informal para el caso es lo mismo. Todos pongamos pequeños negocios haber quien compra con tanta competencia veamoslo en las colonias digamos populares, cuantas tiendas de abarrotes ya no hay?.

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 07:59 PM

Daniel: You are free to post as you please. I was just asking for the sake of those people who do not understand spanish. Just for the sake of good manners. But it is up to you all.

Posted by: emptyboxes | July 22, 2006 08:09 PM

Por favor, todos, cualquier persona que vivió las elecciones del '88 bien sabe que estas (2006) fueron muy, pero MUY diferentes. No se vale compararlas.

As for posting in English, I have to agree with Jerry that out of courtesy for the Post and its international readers we should try to express our views in that language if possible. If you feel you cannot adequately do this, please write in Spanish, this is a free space and there are no elitist rules to stifle anyone's voice. But please, no more personal attacks and out of respect for all who participate, try to get up to speed by reading all the posts you may have missed; you might find an answer to some of your questions and this will not become a redundant exercise.

Creative civil resistance..... Blocking access to banks and the workplace doesn't exactly strike me as creative. Blocking the access to banks only hurts the elderly and the small business owners who make up the largest number of users in Mexican banks. (If you don't believe me just go to one at midmorning and see for yourself) The big boys never show up at a bank, if your beef is with them, then go block the entrance to their mansions. If the true economic costs of all these marches and protests were to be calculated into sales and man-hours lost for the lower and middleclass sectors some of the AMLO supporters might see how they are hurting these innocents. Try being responsible and not affect adversely the lives and well being of a large sector of the population that neither perpetrated fraud nor betrayed AMLO.

Jerry, try "tontejo", or else they're going to call you to task. And yeah, as you asked in the other blog, I'm truly baffled by these people calling me a fascist. If as a progressive I decide not to support the "Candidato Izquierdista Oficial", that's my right and I'll not be intimidated by name-calling, nor will I resort to that practice. If you're using FECAL to refer to Calderón, you immediately lose all credibility with rational thinking participants, just as you will if you make comments about AMLO being a basket case. Let's show people outside of Mexico that we can hold a decorous debate.

Posted by: K. Vronna | July 22, 2006 08:52 PM


respect please, everybody can have a different ideas about eleccion 2006 and 88

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 22, 2006 09:41 PM

I am impressed by K. Vronna's eloquent plea for decorum. I also think this blog has served as a good forum for those of us who feel anxious about the current state of affairs in Mexico. We may get emotional at times, perceiving a threat from one side or the other, but it is in our mutual interest to keep the discussion polite.

Posted by: Goyo | July 23, 2006 02:41 AM

We can discuss a thousand points in this topic, but at the end, it all comes down to who trusts TRIFE and who doesn't.

I personally feel both Calderon and Obrador are not good leaders to push Mexico into the correct path, and it saddens me that out of 100+ million, we could only come up with these two viable alternatives? then again, look at Bush and Kerry, and i guess the trend is for who has better political operatives and campaign managers, not who has better plans and better ideas.

When i discuss this elections topic with anybody, i first ask them, do you trust TRIFE or not? if they say they don't then it is useless to say another word, regardless if they are PAN or PRD supporters.

All we have is TRIFE, and to me, our institutions are far more imporatnt than any presidentail candidate, specially, these two.

Posted by: Jesus Chavez | July 23, 2006 05:50 PM

Maya:

Venezuela is growing despite Chávez, not because of him. Poverty has declined a little since he took office, but it would be almost impossible for it not to with the oil price about seven times higher (SEVEN TIMES) than when he took office (though of course plenty of African governments manage to do it). The fall in poverty should have been larger. Some of his government's poverty reduction programs have results, but, as with the Cuban case, it is not necessary to wreck the economy to institute poverty reduction programs, as has been done recently in Mexico and Brazil. Growth has also been high in the latest years partly because of a rebound from a large fall before, due both to the strike at PDVSA and Chávez's economic policies. Same thing with Argentina. The high growth has a lot to do with the rebound from the crisis, though it might not last much longer if power generation and private businesses in general are not promoted soon by Kirchner. Going back to Venezuela, the murder rate has almost tripled under Chávez, which says a lot about the collapse of already weak institutions due to even less democracy than before.

With respect to Mexico's elections, I believe that if the government had had control of the electoral machinery, it might have cheated the result if it favored López Obrador. Though debatable, the 'desafuero' process seems to me illegitimate (an 'amparo' violation by an authority is not a 'minor' issue as some in the foreign press had it, but it is not either a reason to exclude the leading presidential candidate in a country where the law is not strictly enforced; I would love to see a study that showed how often 'amparos' are violated, to see if it was justice made to order, which is not justice and which I believe was the case, or if the 'desafuero' was valid) and I believe warrants my previous statement. However, the intent in this case is not enough to justify an annulment. Fortunately, there does not seem to be a way for the government to organize a fraud (the main hero here is José Woldemberg). It could only be done by co-opting more than a million people, and in such a case there would surely have arisen some evidence even before the election. There were irregularities in specific places, but that does not amount to fraud (I think it highly irresponsible for the PRD to use the word fraud without hard evidence). Voting station functionaries in some places could have colluded to alter results, but since they were randomly selected from the general population, the cheats could go either way, especially since support between both leading candidates was so evenly divided. I see no reason to suppose PAN supporters had a bigger tendency to cheat than PRD supporters, or that PRI supporters went one way.

Much has been said about possible manipulation of the PREP. The statistical analysis of the likelihood of the way results appeared is interesting, though I am not qualified to give an opinion (interesting, if biased, article of Galbraith's son in the Guardian, quoted by someone above). Its handling by the IFE is certainly suspect and should be addressed later (whether the PRD had no say in the appointments of the IFE heads because of its intransigence and manipulation or if it was mobbed by the other parties, I cannot say). But the PREP results are completely disconnected with the official results, so it is not a central issue. It cannot lead to fraud. Much has been said about Calderón being irresponsible by claiming victory early, but he HAD to, since AMLO had done so previously. In the big leagues it is not possible to be naïve, it is even irresponsible.

As for the proposed full vote recount, it is impractical, not to say impossible (the votes were counted by citizens because it is the most impartial way to do it we have; if they are recounted by an authority, human error should be lower, but so would credibility, which is the whole point in citizens participation, especially since AMLO does not seem to trust anyone and since he has also alleged 'traditional' fraud, like ballot stuffing, against which a recount is useless; if they are recounted by citizens and the results are reversed, Calderón could rightly call for another recount arguing human error, and so ad infinitum). It is illegitimate if not illegal (the fact that the TEPJF has the authority to order a full recount does not mean it should do so without solid justification, which in this case there is not). And it is naïve (it would only lead to annulment, which is clearly what the PRD wants). I am sickened by calls for a recount so that AMLO is pacified. There is no reason for us to try to pacify him and his supporters, it is blackmail. They are a minority. Let them try to wreck the country, so that the left stays in the wilderness for a while longer until it comes back to its senses. I suppose people in the PRD like Ortega, the Cardenas family, Amalia García, Ebrard, etc., are waiting for the TEPJF to issue a ruling to jump ship, being then certain that AMLO would not win, and thus try to minimize the cost to the party without risking having dumped AMLO in the event he happened to win in the ruling.

The PRD has a stronger case for the annulment of the election on the grounds that the Federal Government illegally supported the PAN. Even if it is done in countries like the US, I do not think it is correct in the Mexican case for the president to intervene on behalf of a candidate, not least because for that reason Fox has lost any authority to mediate things now, like the kings of Spain and Thailand can, for example, given their hard won moral authority. The caveat here is that AMLO received huge support also, from the Mexico City government. It is very telling that he blocked public transparency laws for the capital (along with macroeconomic stability and poverty reduction programs, the transparency law and institute are Fox's biggest successes; bear in mind that the illegitimate casino concessions Creel gave Televisa came to light because of this law), and that the big infrastructure projects were directly adjudicated (it was a gem to see Claudia Sheinbaum accepting it was illegal for her to have done it, but that AMLO was clean; never mind that she is of his closest aides). It is obvious that the PRD used the Mexico City government to channel large amounts to its campaign, I would think more dubiously than the Federal Government. The air time was evenly divided, and so spending must have been, and, if not, it was AMLO who got preferential treatment from the TV stations. The PRD complains that businessmen supported Calderón, but remember AMLO received support from many unions. All in all, things were even, and I personally believe that the PAN reacted rather than lead in dubious practices, first versus the PRI at the beginning of Fox's term and then versus the PRD and its practices in the capital's city hall (for PRD internal politics, which is practically a black box to me, see Paco Ignacio Taibo II's article 'Pacto con el Diablo'; well written).

Another reason not to fully recount the votes (not that the above are not enough), and one that is only said in anonymity, is that there exists the possibility of a reversal, if only because human error (unlikely, however; remember that in those booths where there was a recount Calderón increased his votes on average; it is misleading for AMLO to show only cases of counts where he was affected). Under no circumstances should the risk be taken of AMLO winning, especially since, contrary to the 'desafuero' case, the moral case and public opinion are more in the PAN's side. I prefer to have a president not deemed legitimate by a third of the electorate (which should diminish with time, as with Carlos Salinas' case) than having AMLO and his people in the presidency. As 'Catón' rightly said, it is better to have him six months, at the most, in the streets, than six years, at the least, in the presidency. AMLO is dangerous because he wants full power at any cost, amply demonstrated, and because he is a VERY GOOD politician (and manipulator). Add the patronage power of the presidency and the easiness of co-opting PRI deputies, and México barely escaped a very delicate situation. In other words, considering there is not a second round of voting, a particularly able opponent with disturbing characteristics (obviously an approximation, but valid nonetheless), an immature democracy (though not the electoral process itself) and citizenry, and there is a stronger case for realpolitik than for idealism. I can understand the illegitimate and illegal things the PAN has done, like the alliance with Elba Esther Gordillo, and although there are obviously many cases of unjustified moral decline (most obviously Santiago Creel; I feel Marta Sahagún and family started from the bottom, so I see no decline there, though there is in the case of Fox), when faced with such opponents as the PRI and the PRD. The issue is not to be absolutely clean, but to be the least dirty possible without being naïve. For me, so far to vote PAN is a clear-cut case of choosing the lesser evil. I hope that by the next election democracy has taken hold strongly enough for me to be able to vote in terms of decency and not of pragmatism. As in Spain, where, if I were a citizen, I would have switched, as many did, from the PP to Zapatero after Aznar tried to manipulate the Madrid bombings, regardless of their respective programs.

Posted by: bladerunner | July 24, 2006 03:12 AM

Anulación de la votación...

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 25, 2006 01:30 AM

Y piden respeto a la Instituciones, cual sera la Institución mas importante del país a caso no sera la Presidencia de la Republica. ¿pero si el propio presidente no la respeta? ¿como pide respeto?... Con sus multiples discursos a favor de calderon enlodando el proceso electoral, no me digan que quieren pruebas de eso, bastaria haber visto la televisión o haber leido algun periodico.
¿Quien pide respeto? el traidor a la democracia... Mejor ocupese del NARCOTRAFICO señor presidente, ese problema si le falta el respeto a las instituciones, si las destruye, y sino preguntar en Apatzingán Usted pide respeto a las Instituciones escondiendo la cabeza, cuando en nuestro pais a diario hay asesinatos por ese problema. NO AL FRAUDE ELECTORAL impuesto por usted, ugalde-hildebrando y calderon. Diferencias entre 88, 2006 si las hay claro ahora los medios estan abiertos claro para destruir a los contrincantes si no me creen vean a lopez doriga cuando entrevista a AMLO, ¿donde estan los millones de votos perdidos decia alguien en este sitio? ya los encontraron despues de que ugalde los tenia escondidos por insconsistencias en las actas ... PERO FALTAN MAS por eso VOTO POR VOTO y no es solo por repetir una frase. Y les dicen violentos a los que se manifiestan por estar en desacuerdo, por diferir o discentir de los demas, por que ellos creen que fue fraude, solo se pide que el TRIFE esclarezca las cosas. Violencia no me hagan reir volteen a su alrededor a apatzingan, guerrero, df, tijuana, estado de mexico, oaxaca etc...

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 26, 2006 03:48 AM

And they ask for respect to the Institutions, which is the Institution most important of the country? to case not is the Presidency of the Republic. But if the own president does not respect her? How he asks for respect?... With her multiple speeches in favour of calderon sign covering the electoral process with mud, do not say to me that they want proofs of it, have seen the television or well-read a newspaper .
Who asks for respect? The traitor to the democracy... Better deal with the DRUG TRAFFICKING mister president, this problem if lacks the respect to the institutions, if it destroys them, and but to ask in Apatzingán asks for respect to the Institutions hiding the head, when in our country to diary there are murders for this problem. NOT TO THE ELECTORAL FRAUD imposed by you, Ugalde-Hildebrando and Calderon.

You differentiate between 1988, 2006 if they are the clear one now the means is opened clearly to destroy the opponents if they do not believe me see to lopez doriga when he interviews AMLO, where is the million lost votes say someone in this site? Already they found them after ugalde the have hidden for mistakes in the acts... BUT THEY ARE ABSENT more because of it I VOTE FOR I VOTE and it is not alone for repeating a phrase. And say to them violent those who they demonstrate for being in disagreement, for differing, for which they believe that it was a fraud, only it is asked that the TRIFE clarifies the things. Violence do not make me smile, over around it to apatzingan, guerrero, df, tijuana, estado de mexico, oaxaca etc...

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 26, 2006 03:49 AM

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 27, 2006 02:31 AM

sunday 30 july, Museum of Anthropology-zocalo mexico city, since 11:00 hrs. VOTE FOR VOTE.

Posted by: viridiana | July 28, 2006 05:27 PM

ASAMBLEA PERMANENTE all whit AMLO

Posted by: daniel cervantes | July 30, 2006 09:47 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com'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