Colombia General Discussion

[Famous Mortimer]

Concerning news, folks. Not Good!

The latest Ipsos poll for Semana-RCN shows numbers as poor for everyone as they were pre-June 23 announcements in Havana and has the NO leading the plebiscite by a wide margin.

Direction of country: 71/29 (-14)
Santos favourability: 71/27 (-5)
Santos approval: 73/25 (-5)

President Santos' approvals by issue areas remain negative across the board, only coming close to breaking even on housing and foreign relations (49% approve on each), and lowest (over 80% disapproving) on security, economy, urban security, health and unemployment. On peace, his approval falls 9 points from 44% to 35%.

Santos finished his second year of his second term a few days ago. According to this poll, only 23% say things are better or just as good as a year ago vs. 46% saying that things are worse than a year ago. To give an idea of how unpopular he is, the poll asked how they felt Santos had managed some current events, and 43% said he had not well managed Colombian cyclism in the Tour de France.

Approval of the major institutions remain similar to last time, except the government's approval falls from 31% to 22%. The approval of other organizations, parties and groups similar to last time as well.

Peace process

Optimism in reaching a final agreement: Pessimist 63% (+11), Optimist 35% (-12)
Jail for FARC leaders? Yes 88% (+4), No 10% (-1)
Political participation for FARC? No 75% (+4), Yes 22% (-5)

Plebiscite

Awareness of plebiscite: Aware 65% Unaware 35%

Will you vote? Yes 59% (-5) No 41% (+5)

Plebiscite voting intentions, among those who will vote:
No 50% (+11)
Yes 39% (-17)
Undecided 11% (+6)

Plebiscite voting intentions by Santos approval:
Approve: 87/6/7
Disapprove: 20/67/13

Plebiscite voting intentions by Uribe image:
Favourable: 20/70/10
Unfavourable: 63/28/9
DK: 5/49/46
 
Favourability of major political figures
Obama: 84 (+5)/9
Uribe: 54/40 (-3)
Vargas Lleras: 43/41 (nc)
Correa: 42 (+6)/39 (+5)
Petro: 53/39 (nc)
Peñalosa (Bogotá only): 71 (-4)/26 (+2) (54/35 nationally)
Timochenko: 79 (+4)/8 (-5)
Maduro: 95 (+2)/3

Best president to implement a final peace agreement
Don't know 28% (-2)
Sergio Fajardo 14% (+5)
Germán Vargas Lleras 13% (-1)
Gustavo Petro 13% (-1)
Humberto de la Calle 8% (nc)
Óscar Iván Zuluaga 6% (-2)
Marta Lucía Ramírez 6% (nc)
Alejandro Ordóñez 4% (-2)
Simón Gaviria 3% (+1)
Carlos Holmes 2% (-1)
Timochenko 1% (nc)
Other 2% (+1)

#analysis

It is no surprise that Santos remains very unpopular, after the June 23 bump wore off. What is more surprising is that peace optimism has collapsed entirely, erasing all the gains made with the announcement of the ceasefire/weapons deal in June, since there have been nothing out of Havana to indicate that the talks are going badly - but there has also basically been nothing out of Havana in general, so that may explain the return to the default pessimism/skepticism regarding these talks which has been true since 2013.

The plebiscite numbers are worrying, although this is an outlier (for now). At risk of seeming like I'm 'unskewing the polls', I posit that this big lead for the No is because the media has only talked about the No for the last few weeks - with the news of Uribe officially deciding for the No and and his campaign of lies and half-truths for the No being the only plebiscite-related news in the mass media as of late - so they probably have the early momentum here. The Yes campaign is basically saying exactly this, adding that they've only been doing 'pedagogy for peace' (educating people about the peace accords) up till now, which is somewhat true. But what should be real cause for concern is that, shockingly enough, people are going to answer the guy asking the question rather than the question itself, and Santos is barely more popular than cancer right now and at this point he will not be an asset for the Yes campaign. Hopefully the Yes is intelligent enough to realize this, and limit the involvement of the government in the public campaign, and seek the active participation of civil society and NGOs as much as possible (of course, I hope the government does activate its patronage machines in the background). The amount of hypocrisy, lies and half-truths Uribe is allowed to get away with is very frustrating, and this campaign is really one where "Win the yes needs the know to win against the no"

The other point regarding this poll that I'd like to make is that it has a base of 1000 respondents distributed in 13 of the 28 largest cities in Colombia, which they claim is equivalent to 67% of the urban population but these 13 cities are equivalent to only 36% of registered voters in October 2015 (going by actual turnout, to 32% of votes cast in October 2015, or 38% of votes cast in the 2014 presidential first round and 36% of the runoff votes). 45% of the sample comes from Bogotá, which is comparable to the percentage of Bogotá registered voters in the total of these 13 cities, but Bogotá was only 16% of registered votes in October 2015 and 14% of votes cast. On the other hand, politically the 'rest of the country' (Colombia minus the poll's 13 cities) voted fairly similar to the actual country in both rounds in 2014, except a tiny bit more for Zuluaga in both rounds and less for Clara López in the first round. The Bogotá sample of the poll was the one which had, obviously, the biggest change in plebiscite and Santos approval numbers.

Adding to that, the plebiscite voting intentions were asked only to the 59% of the sample which had said they would vote in the plebiscite, so only 590 respondents. Given what the poll tells us about these 59%, it is disproportionately male and wealthier (and even more Bogotá-heavy) - only 44% of low socioeconomic level respondents said they'd vote, compared to 67% of medium level and 93% of high level respondents (the total sample was 46% low levels, 45% medium levels and 9% high level).

I may be wrong, but I think the 2014 presidential election polls used different samples than these bimonthly polls for the media, and at any rate, Ipsos ed up the runoff in 2014 (apparently it was the only one using a 'likely voter' model). On the other hand, Ipsos has been around for a long time in Colombia and generally has a decent, unbiased track record.

Weird that the same poll that has voters rejecting Santos/peace also has voters picking left-wing and/or pro-Santos candidates for president (or has Vargas Lleras broke with Santos?).

Also, is there a reason for this turn? Or is it just as likely Colombians would have opposed this deal at ANY point?

[Hash]

Weird that the same poll that has voters rejecting Santos/peace also has voters picking left-wing and/or pro-Santos candidates for president (or has Vargas Lleras broke with Santos?).

What can I say? Latin American politics, Colombian politics among them, are always weird and rarely conform to our preconceptions. The actual question referring to presidential choice is mostly worthless at this point, and really shouldn't be taken seriously. Although political machinations for 2018 have already begun, it's just politicking at this point and nobody is really watching it besides diehard Colombian politics aficionados like myself. Without losing sight that the most popular choice remains, by a mile, "don't know" (i.e. 'don't care'), it's mostly a popularity contest/name recognition poll right now. Fajardo and Vargas Lleras are popular, especially the former; Petro is polarizing and mostly unpopular but has his fans; Zuluaga, in contrast, is fairly unpopular but has no natural fan base to himself. The crosstabs, for what they're worth, have Fajardo pulling a good number of those who identify their party as the CD, which is believable in these early days. Vargas Lleras, to my surprise, isn't pulling more uribistas, but has the potential to do so (but is also just speculation right now).

Vargas Lleras hasn't broken with Santos, since it's definitely not in his interests to do so, and he certainly has no good reason to do so since he is very well treated by the presidency. On the other hand, what has stood out from him since 2014 is his conspicuous silence on the peace process and his obvious lack of enthusiasm for it, which is obviously all part of his 2018 strategy. So far, it's working wonders.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

(Re)read my post above, I bring up a few reasons as to why the No is probably ahead right now. There is nothing to indicate that voters would have oppose 'this deal' at any point.

[Velasco]

"The Secret History of Colombia’s Paramilitaries and the U.S. War on Drugs"

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/world/americas/colombia-cocaine-human-rights.html?ref=nyt-es&_r=0

Uribe might not like it, but this article is worth reading.

[Simfan34]

As for why this is happening now and not in the past, well, the answer would really require a book or something quite close to it (and also a deeper understanding of the FARC's internal mentality that nobody - myself nor most Colombian analysts - really seem to grasp).

Given what you've already written, it might not be that great a leap if you actually did write a book. Perhaps a dissertation?

But the most trusted institutions are the Church, the Army, and the United States? What a country!

[Hash]

Given what you've already written, it might not be that great a leap if you actually did write a book. Perhaps a dissertation?

Well, I fully intend to write my MA paper/thesis on the parapolitics scandal and/or something related to the broader topic of the intersect between political violence and electoral processes in Colombia, so yeaaah.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Nutmeg]

The plebiscite failed. Now what? President Santos previously said the only Plan B was continued war.

Interesting breakdown by department.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Santos is saying the ceasefire will only until last October 31?   What is he trying to do? 

[Velasco]

Santos wins Nobel Price

https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2016/press.html

[Hash]

Santos is a complicated man (who isn't?) who got to where he is today through a great deal of Machiavellian power plays, trickery and shady deals. It's doubtful that Santos would have become president if he hadn't strategically allied with Uribe (in 2005) and played his cards to get Uribe's endorsement in 2010. In spite of all that, the man deserves it: it's clear that he has staked his entire legacy on the pursuit of a difficult peace, and unlike all his predecessors, he persevered even when it wasn't popular, politically expedient or appeared to be unreachable. Given the nature of politicians around the world and, uh, the nature of Colombian politicians, I think that we should recognize that it's a pretty ing rare quality in political leaders nowadays. Hopefully Santos is able to salvage a peace agreement before he leaves office in 2018. He deserves it, certainly more than any Colombian politician.

Álvaro Uribe must be livid. I am sure he has destroyed more than a few items in his house this morning. The vile traitor has won the Nobel Peace Prize. It's also a wonderful " you" to the idiots who voted No so that "Santos won't get the Nobel prize". At least Uribe is still The Great Colombian - at least that award isn't a Castro-Chavista conspiracy!

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's definitely deserved, but has a really bitter taste.

There should be a Nobel War Prize, and the Colombian people should have won it.

[Velasco]

Yes, Santos deserves this prize, as well the commitee's wish to encourage the parts involved in order to find a solution and save the process is legitimate. Uruguay's president Enrique Mujica told once that the possibility of peace in Colombia is the most important thing happening in Latin America. Also, it'd be ok if this award to the bloody traitor makes Uribe angry.
.

[Velasco]

It's definitely deserved, but has a really bitter taste.

There should be a Nobel War Prize, and the Colombian people should have won it.

 I was very disappointed when I read the news on Monday morning, but I think that you wouldn't have said that in case the result would have been as narrow as it was but the reverse: Yes 50.2/ No 48.8. Even though there is reason to feel anger or disappointment, it's unfair to say that all the people who rejected the agreement wants the continuation of the war.

On a side note, I found a Colombian couple on Sunday while I was walking in a ravine. I made a casual comment on the referendum happening that day and their reaction seemed to me unenthusiastic. The day after they came to my mind again.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's definitely deserved, but has a really bitter taste.

There should be a Nobel War Prize, and the Colombian people should have won it.

 I was very disappointed when I read the news on Monday morning, but I think that you wouldn't have said that in case the result would have been as narrow as it was but the reverse: Yes 50.2/ No 48.8. Even though there is reason to feel anger or disappointment, it's unfair to say that all the people who rejected the agreement wants the continuation of the war.

Over 80% of voters either abstained or voted no. Those who abstained are just as guilty.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

It's definitely deserved, but has a really bitter taste.

There should be a Nobel War Prize, and the Colombian people should have won it.

 I was very disappointed when I read the news on Monday morning, but I think that you wouldn't have said that in case the result would have been as narrow as it was but the reverse: Yes 50.2/ No 48.8. Even though there is reason to feel anger or disappointment, it's unfair to say that all the people who rejected the agreement wants the continuation of the war.

Over 80% of voters either abstained or voted no. Those who abstained are just as guilty.

I was depressed about the agreement being rejected, but come on.  Why more people didn't vote, I don't know, but I can only guess many people did not know what to make of it for some reason, maybe felt they weren't well informed enough about it, or were hearing too many things from the NO propogandists placing doubt in their minds. What I have to wonder would the result be in another country if you had an agreement like this perceived accurately or not as lenient on a group that had engaged in terrorism, made by an unpopular government?   Wouldn't be a slam dunk in any case.

But since then we've seen people marching in the streets demanding that the drive toward peace is not given up.  And not only have Santos and the FARC not given up, and now they are being joined by the ELN rebel group and the Uribist (post)paramilitary AGC who have decided to seek peace as well.  So there is hope.

[Frodo]

Perhaps a (durable) peace deal could follow the cease-fire?

Colombia announces ceasefire with five illegal armed groups