Mexico 2012

[Velasco]

Lopez Obrador is a classical Latin American national socialist type. In Europe, Mussolini has taken that part of the political spectrum to the right: the closest ideological cousin of Lopez Obrador in recent Europe would, probably, be somebody like Berlusconi.  Lopez Obrador represents the old "classical" PRI - the Lopez Portillo kind. And, like Lopez Portillo he has a megalomaniac idea of his own self, which makes him especially bad (ideologically, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas might not be that different, but he is a much nicer person, not given to delusions of personal grandeur). 

I´m not a big fan of López Obrador but your comparisions sound a bit strange. Maybe if AMLO were the owner of Televisa and demonstrators were claiming against him and his "Soap Opera Democracy" Berlusconi would call him a cousin. Do you really think that they are near talking in ideological terms? Leaving apart the word "populist", which is a vague and imprecise definition, I can´t found similarities. I guess that when you are taking about National Socialism you are talking about a certain type of left parties and personalities in Latin America ("populists", "nationalists", etcetera) but you also mention Mussolini. That reminds me when here, in Spain, certain centralist people talk about the "Nazi-onalistas" referring to our own peripheric nationalists. Really, I can´t (under) stand certain types of parallelisms between contexts and situations. Mussolini is a serious thing, even when I understand the resentment towards the Old PRI Guard. 

[Velasco]

Are you talking of AMLO in comparison with Il Cavaliere or Mussolini? Are the two latter exactly the same? And what about the "national socialists"? Criticism is fine and I won´t defend a person like the PRD candidate but I think you are bringing the things too far.

Disrespect for democracy and the rule of law, preference for corporativist monopoly state (as long as the monopolies are domestic and either subservient to the government or directly controled by it), strident nationalism, severe intolerance to criticism, reliance on personal charisma, creation of private "alternative" institutions working for the leader and loyal, primarily or exclusively, to him. Is that enough? Or should I continue?

Are you talking of AMLO in comparison with Il Cavaliere or Mussolini? Are the two latter exactly the same? And what about the "national socialists"? Criticism is fine and I won´t defend a person like the PRD candidate but I think you are bringing the things too far.

[Velasco]

All three are not the same, of course, but they share a lot - I tried to identify the things they have in common. I am not accusing anyone of anything: naturally, neither Berlusconi, nor Lopez Obrador have established a dictatorship or illegally occupied Ethiopia )

Oh, well, you weren´t talking about a march of "red shirts" over Mexico DF. That´s cooling down.

But it is crucially important for understanding Mexican and, more generally, Latin American politics to understand that (with some notable exceptions, of course) the Latin American left and the European far right share both ideological roots and contemporary sensibilities. It is not merely a curiosity that many Latin Americans (not only the left, of course) retained fairly ambivalent attitudes towards the fascist and even the Nazi "experiments" until fairly late: Latin America has never experienced the WWII horrors, so it never got the "liberal innoculation" Europe got, never developed immunity to the siren song of national-socialism.

Which left are you talking about? Obrador or Hermes Binner? Chávez or Allende? Not all the Latin American left has the same ideological background and maybe I am missing the point but I don´t understand your statement about the ambivalence of the left towards the Nazis or the supossedly shared roots (again, which left?). I always thought that Perón was somewhat ambivelent and certainly was a close friend of Franco but, was he a leftist or a mere populist? It´s impossible to compare Perón policies in the 40-50´s with the latter Peronist governments in the seventies (fairly well rightist). Open sympathies can be found in the far-far right (Stroessner of course and some Argentinian or Chilean reactionaries). Maybe there are examples of individual lefties anyway, but now I can´t remember. Despite the "liberal innoculation" in (Western) Europe we have all those far-right and populist parties in countries fairly well civilized, so perhaps they haven´t developed inmunity against this virus after all.

About AMLO personality nothing to say but perhaps it´s understandable (probably not justifiable) a certain degree of paranoia given the Mexican recent History. Everybody knows thet Cuahtémoc Cárdenas won an election and PRI guys made tricks to change the result. I won´t campaign for any Mexican candidate anyway.

[Velasco]

The "left" I am talking about is, of course, the "illiberal non-Communist left", in the Calles/Obregon-Peron-Kirchner-Chavez tradition. Then, of course,there is APRA - they didn't call themselves FAJistas before WWII for nothing )   Bolivian Morales is a rather special case: but then, Bolivia has never emerged from feudalism, so it is bound to be special.

The Pro-Soviet or pro-China, properly Communist groups, of course, are a special case, but they haven't had that much of a governance experience - baring Cuba, of course (though whether Castro brothers are that far removed from the fascist tradition is worth thinking about).

I did mention notable liberal exceptions. Naturally, the bulk of the Chilean left has been very different, for instance (even pre-Pinochet). So is, post-Vargas, the left in Brasil, I guess. There are other exceptions as well, of course. But the more typical Latin American left is, undeniably, fascist. Whether it does send out the red or yellow or whatever shirts depends on historical circumstances, and not on the ideological aversion to such mode of action.

If you make an aggregation of "liberal" or "acceptabe" (by westerner standards) leftist parties in Latin America (PT, Brazil; PS, Argentina and Chile; some "social democracy" in countries like Costa Rica...) maybe you´ll find that this type is not so uncommon.

Sounds uncompromising your assesment: "the more typical left is fascist". Really, you can say what you want about Evo Morales or leaders like him but never "fascist" (and , oh Dear, he´s "aborigin"). Partially agree with "special cases" like APRA and some people like the Peruvian President´s father but, again, it sounds too steadfast. And like I said before, Perón was not a leftist.  Communists types like Castro or Maoists like Sendero Luminoso must be classified in another section.

[Velasco]

Ag is right when he says that PS is a minor party in Argentina but in the last Presidential Hermes Binner ended second (a fairly distant second) leading a coalition in the same fashion of Frente Amplio (Uruguay). And yes, Costa Rica "social democrats" (like in Guatemala, Dominican Republic and others) are not too leftist in the classical sense. Kirchner goverment represents the presumed "left-wing" of Peronism but as you said in this genuine Argentianian political movement you can see all types of speech, ranging from "neocons" to "radical left". I don`t believe in the leftist convictions of the Kirchner couple, maybe you can find a genuine left in "Proyecto Sur" and an "European left" in the mentioned Binner coalition. I can´t hardly identify the PRI movement with a classical left, it depends on which PRIista president are you talking about. I see many differences between Lázaro Cárdenas and López Portillo.
 
He´s also right when he says that the usual terminology "left-right" doesn´t work in many Latin American countries. But I think that he´s absolutely missing the point when he tries to identify left with fascist totalitarism in Latin America. This continent is pretty complex and every country deserves his own analysis.

[Velasco]

He´s also right when he says that the usual terminology "left-right" doesn´t work in many Latin American countries.

I don't agree with such kind of statement in any country that is at least semi-industrialized. Well... Maybe on Southeast Asia.

Probably. My sin here was generalization. Let´s talk about single countries.

BTW, my impression of Mexican politics is that It reached the 1930's 20 years before and got out 70 years after. What about nowadays, does the PRI still have some identifiable wing based on any, at least lose, idea, or are them just a bunch of whores, like the average contemporary Latin-American politicians?

The second (a bunch of w...) fits very well with PRI and Peronists (Kirchner or rightist wings). I don´t feel very happy with the average European politicians, so I will be moderate talking about Latin Americans. Anyway I agree with you.

[Velasco]

In the name of God, why is not Brazil a part of the Latin American community? We were talking about Latin and not Spanish America. Brazil is politically and economically integrated in the continent and in fact is the real and almost the only superpower there. And they have a strong desire of being integrated; even the teaching of Spanish language in the school is compulsory.

[Velasco]

Two days ago former Mexican president Vicente Fox (PAN) proclaimed his support for the PRI candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto. Obviously the PAN leadership is distressed.

Yesterday in The Guardian: "Computer files link TV dirty tricks to favourite for Mexico presidency"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/07/mexico-presidency-tv-dirty-tricks

In May the Mexican newspaper Reforma reported payments to journalists ("roughly $2.4 millions") from Peña Nieto.

http://knightcenter.utexas.edu/blog/00-10087-mexican-presidential-candidate-paid-millions-dollars-journalists-mentions-media

Business as usual?

[Velasco]

I found a web called "adnpolitico" full of Mexican polls.

http://www.adnpolitico.com/encuestas/2012/06/19/consulta-mitofksy-da-157-puntos-de-ventaja-a-pena-nieto

Consulta Mitofsky (15-17 June) says: Peña Nieto (PRI) 44.4%; AMLO (PRD) 28.7%; Vázquez Mota (PAN) 24.3%; Quadri (PANAL) 2.3%.

Excelsior (13-14 June) puts Vázquez Mota in second place: PRI 42%; PAN 29%; PRD 27%.

Milenio (15-17 June): PRI 44.4%; PRD 27.1%; PAN 26%.

There are polls every day. No suspense except for the second place.

[Velasco]

I'm trying to teach myself how to draw maps with Inkscape so I did some maps for the 2006 Mexican election because it was a very interesting one. I uploaded three maps showing PAN, PRD and PRI percentages at  state level, check my gallery and give me opinions, please. The map below shows the margin between Calderón and AMLO in every state at the last election. I´ll post some maps for the current elections when data are available.



Also I did this other using a base map available at Wikipedia showing the real PRI base of power: the states.

[Velasco]

Should be kept in mnid that not all PRI-governed states are the same. For instance, Zacatecas and Michoacan (BTW, your map is wrong - it's been retaken by PRI) have been under PRD control for years until recently (so was BCS, which is now held by PAN). Chihuahua, Queretaro, Yucatan, Nuevo Leon, San Luis Potosi have all had PANista governors, and Tlaxcala has been controlled by both PRD and PAN in the past. On the other hand, places like Tamaulipas, Coahuila, Durango, Tabasco, Campeche and a few others have never had a non-PRI governor in history.

OK, ag, thanks for the correction. I've put Michoacán on PRI hands (editing the map is easy). Blame me for using a list of governors from Wikipedia. I took 2006 percentages from IFE. Also I know that PRD official colour is yellow, not red, and its symbol is the Aztec sun. If PRD is red in the map is for aesthetic reasons and for an easier ideological identification. So now there are only three southern states and the DF on PRD and allies side and a handful of states in North and Central Mexico governed by PAN. The PRI dominance is overwhelming.

I´ve read in El País that Macera, the PRD candidate, would be easily elected in DF. Mexico City is an island, of course. What about the other states?

I think that it wouldn't be a surprise an EPN landslide in Northern states. I suppose that PRD and PAN weakness in North and South Mexico respectively run against their chances.

[Velasco]

I found some polls for the gubernatorial races.

DF (Mexico City)/ Milenio: Mancera (PRD) 58%; Paredes (PRI) 17.9%; Miranda (PAN) 9.9%; Guerra (PANAL) 1.7%; None 12.6%. Percentages are "gross preferences".

Jalisco/ El Universal: Sandoval (PRI_PVEM) 39.9%; Alfaro (MC) 21.9%; Guzmán (PAN) 15.7%; Garza (PRD) 4.7%; Martínez (PANAL) 1.5%; None: 15.5%. Also gross preferences.

Morelos/ El Diario: Orihuela (PRI_PVEM_PANAL) 32%; Garrido (PRD_PT_MC) 32%; Rivera (PAN) 19%; Yáñez (PSD) 1%; None: 16%. Gross pref. The closest race by far.

Yucatán/ El Universal: Zapata (PRI_PVEM) 48%; Diaz (PAN) 23.5%; Villanueva (PRD_PT_MC) 6.4%; Guzmán (PANAL) 0.8%; None 21.3%. Gross pref.

For the Presidential Milenio-GEA ISA (25-27 June)  says:

Peña Nieto (PRI-PVEM) 39.5%; AMLO (PRD-PT-MC) 24.1%; Vázquez Mota (PAN) 18.9%; Quadri (PANAL) 1.8%; None: 15.7%. Also gross pref.

http://www.adnpolitico.com/encuestas

[Velasco]

Well, everyone has accepted the result, it seems - except for one person. AMLO says, that he will "wait for the final count".

Of course.

He meant, till the official count on Wednesday.

It's a waste of time, isn't it? The margin between EPN and AMLO is lower than expected but it will grow anyway. Now the PREP figures say that EPN has 36.8% of vote and AMLO 33.2%.

It's morning here. I took a look at some gubernatorials. Chiapas seems to be a PRI-PVEM-NA landslide (PRD is polling only 17.1%). In Jalisco (PREP 85.16%) PRI is ahead with 39.5% followed by MC (32.65%) and PAN (20.5%). In Morelos the PRD lead alliance is ahead with 43.2% followed by PRI and allies with 35.3% and by PAN with only a 14.6%. In Tabasco PRD and allies seem to be slightly ahead of PRI. No surprises in DF.

[Velasco]

It's undeniable that AMLO performed well and he's a pretty good campaigner but looking at the 5% margin I wonder how Ebrard performance would have been.

It's a bit complex trying to guess how went the vote transfers. It's a too big country and there are too many local factors in Legislatives and Gubernatorials.

[Velasco]

Is this PREP result the final? I was waiting until the 100% was reported.

Puebla and Veracruz are the states with closest result. In Puebla AMLO is 0.12% ahead of EPN; in Veracruz EPN (33.65%) is only 0.02% ahead of JVM (33.63%), AMLO is 3rd with 28.9%.

Chiapas has elected the first "green" governor in History, Manuel Velasco (PVEM). Of course the Ecologist Green Party of Mexico is far away of being an actual environmentalist party. He is endorsed by PRI and PANAL. The result was a landslide: PRI-PVEM-PANAL aggregate is 63.4%; PRD-PT-MC won 17.6% of the vote and PAN 9.1%.

In Jalisco the PREP result (91.1% reporting) is PRI-PVEM 38.8%; MC 34.1%; PAN 19.9%; PRD 3.4%. Major defeat for PAN.

Morelos is the other PANista lost state. It's on PRD side now. PRD-PT-MC 43.3%; PRI-PVEM-PANAL 34.7%; PAN 15.1%.

PRI loses Tabasco to PRD, PAN holds Guanajuato, Yucatán is still a solid PRIista state and in Mexico City (Distrito Federal) Mancera won a landslide. So the gubernatorial map now is:

[Velasco]

I can't understand AMLO's strategy. It's pretty obvious that PRI guys are not pure and crystal water, you have all that media scandals, presumed payments and so on, but putting all the electoral process under challenge when 690 international observers have reported nothing...

Here you are, Ken and Barbie:

 

[Velasco]

Yes, of course, but if you have paid atention to The Guardian's scoop about Peña Nieto, Televisa and that presumptive and orchestrated campaign against him in 2006 maybe you'll understand his paranoia. I regard him as old-fashioned, stubborn and lacking of self-criticism but not as an evil agent. Anyway I'll never understand him and if I were Mexican I'd be more comfortable with Ebrard or another guy.

[Velasco]

Map for the winner candidates, preliminary results. Caution: Puebla and Veracruz states are too close to say and the winner candidate may change with the official results. Vote percentages, not margins



EPN have won 21 states. His best performances are at Zacatecas (above 50%), Sinaloa, Chiapas or Durango. AMLO won 8 (included DF) and polled better at his home state of Tabasco (59%) and in Mexico City (52%; 6 points below of 2006), he also did very well in Guerrero (Acapulco!). JVM gained three states, the PANista stronghold of Guanajuato and Nuevo León and Tamaulipas in the north.  

[Velasco]

Whats up with Chiapas? I thought that would have voted for the crazy man.

They voted for the crazy man, EPN.

No, he is the stupid man, AMLO is the crazy man.

All Romans are crazy, the Gaul village is at Selva Lacandona (Chiapas). This time it seems that Chiapanecos got tired of PRD and went again into the arms of PRI (and PVEM). As far as I know PRI was very strong in Chiapas historically.

[Velasco]

Wow, another royal family in Chiapas! Manuel Velasco Coello, the Governor elected is engaged with Anahí, a well known telenovela actress:





This "green phenomenon" in Chiapas seems to be very interesting, I'm clueless about it but in the 2006 Gubernatorial PAN and PANAL endorsed the PRI-PVEM candidate against PRD. Definitely the Gaul village is not at Tuxtla Gutiérrez.

More soap opera, EPN and family:



By the way thanks for the explanation about the counting system, ag. I realized later that PREP was ended with 98.95% reported.

Edit: I was in a hurry when I posted this morning (GMT). Velasco and Anahí are not exactly engaged: they have a romance according to Proceso.

[Velasco]

Reuploaded the map of the Preliminary Results. An error occured and the Chiapas-Veracruz border appeared with a strange shape. What a coincidence. Sorry for the inconveniences.

My "hero" of the moment, Manuel Velasco Coello, has an entry in Wikipedia (only Spanish version) but its content is mainly propagandistic. A few data: Born in 1980 (aged 32) in Tuxtla Gutiérrez, the Chiapas State Capital. Grandson of a neurologist. Local backbencher in 2001 and Federal MP in 2003. Coordinator of PVEM´s parliamentary group. Elected Senator for Chiapas in 2006 under the banner of PRI-PVEM alliance. His nickname is "Güero" and has been elected Governor of Chiapas with 68% of the vote (50% of margin over PRD´s candidate!). Isn't he a prodigy?

[Velasco]

Yes, you are right. The neurologist, Manuel Velasco Suárez, was Governor of Chiapas between 1970 and 1976. Thank you.

Re-uploaded too AMLO and Calderón maps for 2006. Maybe, I'll post them later for comparative purposes.

[Velasco]

#Yosoy132 does not recognise the election result.  A spokesperson read a memorandum at UNAM University in Mexico City. Their allegations are that the electoral process was "stuffy in origin" (maybe the adjective does not fit, the original word is "viciado"). They alleged state violence, vote buying, rigged polls and media manipulation.  Irregularities occured not only in the voting day or in the electoral campaign "it was a process grouted years ago by the factic powers, national and foreign, violating national sovereignty, that pretends to guarantee neoliberal structural reforms" in labour, energy, security and fiscality. #Yosoy132 rejects "the process of imposition" of Peña Nieto as President of Mexico.

Link (in Spanish)

http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2012/07/05/mexico/1341464347_979388.html

The Guardian has also some information: "Claims of dirty tricks cast shadow over Peña Nieto's Victory"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/04/mexico-elections-shadow-pena-nieto

They detail some of the allegations, per example:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is going to be entertaining.



 

[Velasco]

#Yosoy132 has certain similarities to the Spanish Indignados. One of the main characteristics of these movements is heterogeneity. So, perhaps you are right regarding the authors of that memorandum as a small radical group, in fact #Yosoy132 and Indignados are the aggregation of many small groups and individuals.

I have not a conclusive opinion about the electoral process. It seems clear that Peña Nieto has won and this margin of 3 million of voters is higher than the alleged 1 million of buyed votes. On the other hand all those allegations about the pre-paid cards, media bias and abbusive PRI campaign spending seem to be more than hypothetical. Unfortunately those irregularities are still a part of the landscape and demonstrations in these cases are justified. Anyway AMLO is commiting a mistake if he goes in the same way of 2006.

By the way I've read an interview with EPN, you can check El Pais if you are interested. He expressed himself in moderate and consensual terms, I found his answers a bit hollow too. The lacking of a parlamentary majority is now regarded as a challenge and an opportunity (obvious speech).

[Velasco]

According to BBC World, with almost every vote counted (99.3%):

EPN 38.2%; AMLO 31.56%; JVM 25.42%