Venezuelan Presidential Election 2012

[Sibboleth]

Zulia is interesting.

[Hashemite]

Zulia is shocking, Chavez lost that state in 2000 and 2006, and he wins it fairly easily this year. What's up there?

[Keystone Phil]

Chavez's 2000 and 2006 challengers were from Zulia. Capriles isn't.

[Tender Branson]

Zulia is shocking, Chavez lost that state in 2000 and 2006, and he wins it fairly easily this year. What's up there?

What Phil said and maybe the opposition Governor there isn't that popular (but I don't know) or the oil boom there is helping Chavez because he's chanelled a lot of this money into rural areas to fight poverty and boost education there.

[Vasall des Midas]

I'm not a fan of the man, but if he was going to do away with the democratic process (or turn it into a complete sham) then he'd have done so years ago.

If there is any one politician in the world of whom that's true, it's Chavez.

[I left.]

I don't like Chavez, but do vote rigging dictators lose referenda by 1%? I've never seen evidence of what some seem to be claiming.

[© Tweed the Younger]

the main reason people want to deduce Chavez is a despot is because he is an egomaniac with a flair for the dramatic -- as much as the red-blooded Americans may hate Morales, Kirchner, Correa, etc., they don't make any allegations.  (American rightists may well, but they're so far off the map there's no accounting for it.)

[opebo]

Wonderful news!

Yay!

[Hashemite]

Chavez's 2000 and 2006 challengers were from Zulia. Capriles isn't.

There's that factor, but Zulia is/was an opposition stronghold at other levels: legislative (2010), referendums (2007 and 2009).

[Vasall des Midas]

the main reason people want to deduce Chavez is a despot is because he is an egomaniac with a flair for the dramatic

Oh yes. And how.

It's not the only reason, though. Venezuela had long been, not just a fairly US-dependent but also a culturally fairly northerly-oriented country (I mean, they play baseball there. And their football team sucked so hard for so long that they used to play in the North American qualifiers because they couldn't compete with the big boys from the rest of South America.) Some of the same is also true of Colombia (which remains in US Clutches). There are also fairly sizable Venezuelan and Colombian immigrant communities in the US, and they're relatively White and legal.
But it's not just a US orientation, it's a Caribbean orientation as well (Capriles' family is from Curacao originally)... which the US also considers its own backyard, of course, but more to the point Cuba, too, is going to be a far more directly relevant issue in Venezuela than in Chile.

And then there's the oil, of course. And the way Chavez at times threw around oil money to buy influence, making him what you'd call a Stategic Adversary of the USA.

And then there's also the factor of Chavez starting the trend with Morales, Correa, Humala all coming later and inspired by Chavism.


Of course, there's absolutely nothing new in leftish populists coming to power on anti American rhetoric in Latin America. A lot of caudillos that were later perfectly tame internationally but not so much at home started out that way. Including one Fulgencio Baptista. It's the staying that way that assures Hugo his place in the history book... and I, for one, think we have mostly the bunglers in the Bush admin and the 2002 coup to thank for it. Credit where it belongs.

[Vasall des Midas]

Chavez's 2000 and 2006 challengers were from Zulia. Capriles isn't.

There's that factor, but Zulia is/was an opposition stronghold at other levels: legislative (2010), referendums (2007 and 2009).

Remind me... are the low margins in the far south part of the historical pattern?

[Hashemite]

Chavez's 2000 and 2006 challengers were from Zulia. Capriles isn't.

There's that factor, but Zulia is/was an opposition stronghold at other levels: legislative (2010), referendums (2007 and 2009).

Remind me... are the low margins in the far south part of the historical pattern?

If you mean the Chavista margins in Amazonas, no, that's actually another interesting thing which appeared in 2010. Amazonas used to be one of the strongest Chavista states, but the PSUV did poorly there in 2010 (the PPT won 41%) and it seems like Chavez did poorly there again this year.

[Vasall des Midas]

Maps!

Right click for full size.

That's by municipality, right? Incredible. Here's Caracas by district.

[Vasall des Midas]

Chavez's 2000 and 2006 challengers were from Zulia. Capriles isn't.

There's that factor, but Zulia is/was an opposition stronghold at other levels: legislative (2010), referendums (2007 and 2009).

Remind me... are the low margins in the far south part of the historical pattern?

If you mean the Chavista margins in Amazonas, no, that's actually another interesting thing which appeared in 2010. Amazonas used to be one of the strongest Chavista states, but the PSUV did poorly there in 2010 (the PPT won 41%) and it seems like Chavez did poorly there again this year.

I meant Amazonas and Bolivar. Thanks!

[Bacon King]

For an interesting comparison with the above, here's a map of the municipalities that Capriles visited over the course of the campaign:

[後援会]

Um, I'll freely and gladly take this back if I'm mistaken, but aren't you a Pinochet fan?

I'm not saying that particular bit of whataboutery excuses Chavez's human rights violations, mind - I thought it was self-evident that my post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

I don't love Pinochet, but I'm fully willing to acknowledge him the least bad of several evils in the time period when he took power, though by the time he stepped down, he no longer carried that honor.

"Least bad of several evils" is not something that describes Chavez. Obviously, Pinochet isn't a model for governance, but if we look on it from a consequentialist and counterfactual angle, we can say that for all his personal failings (which are too long to be described here), Pinochet's coup had better outcomes than the alternatives, making the world somewhat better than it otherwise would have been. Chavez has been bad for both Venezuela, the United States, and the world. If an analogy is necessary - one can prefer the Soviet Union defeat Nazi Germany without being a strong supporter of Stalinist Communism.

Also, this is probably the 8th time I've had to explained this stance. Is the forum's version of "I can see Russia from my house."?

[Bacon King]

Not to interrupt Pinochet chat (Pinochat?) again, but here's swing and trend maps I made comparing 2006 and 2012:

[後援会]

What the heck is up with that one part of Venezuela that decided to like Chavez more?

[Bacon King]

What the heck is up with that one part of Venezuela that decided to like Chavez more?

Chavez's opponent in 2006 was Zulia's governor, so a homestate effect (which was no doubt intensified by Maracaibo's traditional rivalry with Caracas) from the last election that wasn't present in this one.   

[後援会]

What the heck is up with that one part of Venezuela that decided to like Chavez more?

Chavez's opponent in 2006 was Zulia's governor, so a homestate effect (which was no doubt intensified by Maracaibo's traditional rivalry with Caracas) from the last election that wasn't present in this one.   

Makes a lot of sense.

[Marcus Aurelius]

What's the difference between swing and trend maps ?

[Californian Tony]

What's the difference between swing and trend maps ?

Trend is swing relative to the national swing.

[Insula Dei]

What's the difference between swing and trend maps ?

Trend is swing relative to the national swing.

Or more explicitly put: Swing compares how a region voted now to how it voted 6 years ago.

Trend compares the swing in a region to the national average swing. (If a region swung 5% away from Chavez, while the Nation as a whole swung 10% away from him, that'd mean the region would be trending towards Chavez)

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What's the difference between swing and trend maps ?

Trend is swing relative to the national swing.

Or more explicitly put: Swing compares how a region voted now to how it voted 6 years ago.

Trend compares the swing in a region to the national average swing. (If a region swung 5% away from Chavez, while the Nation as a whole swung 10% away from him, that'd mean the region would be trending towards Chavez)

With trend you have the silliness where Democrat gets 90% in DC in a close election. Next Democrat gets 95% in DC, and wins by 20 points nationwide. Oh noes, DC trended away from the Democrats.

[batmacumba]

Um, I'll freely and gladly take this back if I'm mistaken, but aren't you a Pinochet fan?

I'm not saying that particular bit of whataboutery excuses Chavez's human rights violations, mind - I thought it was self-evident that my post was somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

I don't love Pinochet, but I'm fully willing to acknowledge him the least bad of several evils in the time period when he took power, though by the time he stepped down, he no longer carried that honor.

"Least bad of several evils" is not something that describes Chavez. Obviously, Pinochet isn't a model for governance, but if we look on it from a consequentialist and counterfactual angle, we can say that for all his personal failings (which are too long to be described here), Pinochet's coup had better outcomes than the alternatives, making the world somewhat better than it otherwise would have been. Chavez has been bad for both Venezuela, the United States, and the world. If an analogy is necessary - one can prefer the Soviet Union defeat Nazi Germany without being a strong supporter of Stalinist Communism.

Also, this is probably the 8th time I've had to explained this stance. Is the forum's version of "I can see Russia from my house."?

Oh, no, please. Not this, again...