Mexico Recount: Already Finding Votes for Obrador
Mexican democracy and the Presidency is at stake over the next few days as officials recount under 4 million votes (9%), per the order of the "independent tribunal." While the MSM focused on the "defeat" of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's (AMLO) bid to garner a much larger recount, the defeat was really of those many Western elites/journos who kept parroting the lot about an EU sanctioned free and fair election. The ruling meant that 11% of the votes were found to meet the tough legal standard to suspect fraud.
Already, the first major on the ground reports on the ground show a pattern in favor of Obrador. If he gains 11% or say 20% more votes through this, the pressure will really be on to recount all votes (or at least 77,000 precincts as PRD officials now say will suffice.)
From NY Times, Houston Chrincle and Granma:
An election official was quickly dealing out ballots like giant cards on a felt-covered table on Wednesday when Humberto Mejía’s hand shot into the stack like a striking snake. “Wait!” the lawyer for the left-wing Party of the Democratic Revolution cried.
He had spotted a ballot for the leftist candidate, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, that had mistakenly been put with the ballots for his conservative rival, Felipe Calderón. “We’ve only counted two polling places this morning,” Mr. Mejía said, “and I have found two more votes for Andrés Manuel.”
It may not seem like much, but since Mr. Calderón won an official tally last month by just 243,000 of 41 million votes cast — a margin of less than one percentage point — every last vote counts.
////
At one polling station in Mexico City, officials discovered eight missing votes in the first two ballot boxes counted, results that Lopez Obrador's allies were expected to cite to bolster their claims of fraud.
"If this is the norm, the court should order a full recount," said Armando Barreiro, a federal legislator for Lopez Obrador's party, who was observing the counting. "It's for the good of our democracy."///
Claudia Sheimbaum, a member of Lopez Obrador's campaign team, told
the press that so far the places where the votes have been revised
are showing discrepancies.
At one table in Jalisco, she said, "they took 80 votes from us" at
another, 87 votes for Lopez Obrador were not included in the tally
sheet, "just to mention a couple examples."
The partial recount should conclude by Sunday and the Federal
Electoral Tribunal has until August 31 to rule on the challenges
presented. On September 6, the Federal Electoral Tribunal is expected
to declare the validity of the elections and name a president elect.
Regardless what happens with the recount, anyone with an unhypocritical committment to this almighty US concept 'democracy' (and paying attention) should have no problem seeing that the election merits a recount because the conduct of the first count was not in alignment with the very good electoral laws. Vicente Fox and his Government used state resources and made illegal statements. His opponent's ads had to be supressed. The 7 member tribunal has zero PRD members and has already shown its PAN and PRI-ista tendencies.
posted by leftside at
11:23 PM
4 Comments:
Your view is very slanted towards the left and leaves out many of their irresponsible acts in the name of "democracy". They claim they speak for the majority of the Mexican people, yet AMLO and the PRD would do well to remember that 2/3 of the voting population did not vote for him...last time I checked 1/3 is less than 2/3. By the way, 2/3 or 66.667 % is above the 50.0001% typically used to describe a majority.
As you state, some votes have been found to have been miscounted and favored the PRD, but the same goes for the PAN, PRI and the other parties. Several votes were mistakenly counted as PRD votes when they should have been counted towards PAN or one of the other parties. I haven't checked lately, but by my count, less than 200 votes have had to be reassigned to one or the other parties. Somehow, 200 erroneous votes out of the 41 million is a very good indication that the election was conducted in a fair and correct manner. Anyone who uses the six sigma method for determining the amount of "defects" would deem this to be nearly perfect. This is evidence that there was no widespread fraud to keep down AMLO.
As far as the illegal interference from the President goes, it is hard to distinguish whether or not any of his acts are illegal based on current electoral law. After all, one could also argue that the current Mexico City mayor, who pertains to the PRD, is also using the very same tactics that the President used to support the PRD. The electoral court wisely decided to err on the side of caution and the President was told to shut up about his legacy.
Now on to the business groups and the "elite". Why should they not be allowed to express their opinion? I have never been able to comprehend this argument. After all they are Mexican as well, just because they are better off does not make them evil and therefore unworthy of expressing their opinion for one candidate or the other. Just because their opinion doesn't match yours isn't grounds for disenfranchising them. The corporations also have a stake in this election, why can they not express their opinion either?
Now to your last statement regarding the TRIFE. You are correct in stating that there are no PRD members. However, there are also no PAN, PRI, Nueva Alliance members either. Lest you forget, the tribunal members were vetted by all the political parties, including the PRD, and were found to be impartial and therefore worthy of their posts and responsibilities.
Roberto
Thank you for your comments Roberto.
But lets be clear, no one knows how may votes are going which way or another. We'll find out Tuesday. If there is no major change, I'll be the first to admit it. If however, AMLO picks up more than 30,000 votes, I'd argue that would necesitate a full recount because the amount of fraud/miscounting/whatever could be endemic and change the election results.
50% of the Mexican people want a recount, that is what the most recent polls say. Irregardless, such a decision is not made on the basis of polling.
The ruling party was not to interfere in the election because that is Mexican election law. It is a very serious offense. That well connected PAN supporting business groups did much of the barely disguised bidding is a technicality that I can't make a judgement on. But it was certainly not in the spirit of the very good law. The rich need to be restricted in thir "speech" during an election because they have far more ability to project their voice. It is an issue of fairness to those without the means.
Don't get me wrong, I agree with you as well that if there are a significant amount of votes that have been misappropriated then all 41 million votes should be recounted. To do otherwise would be unworthy of any republic that is true to democracy.
Are you sure the results are going to be revealed on Tuesday? I thought it was going to be finished by Sunday night.
It is true that 50% would favor a recount but that is not the same as wanting or demanding a recount. It makes a big difference in how the question is worded and asked by the pollsters for one to assume that 50% of the population is demanding a recount. I agree that such a decision is not made on the basis of polling, thankfully, but on the electoral laws that have been put in place by the congress. Judges are there to interpret the law so that everyone's rights under the law are respected.
I still disagree with your contention that the rich should have their speech restricted. Doesn't the government of Mexico provide funds to all political parties so that they may have their voices heard?
Roberto
Glad to read you are in agreement with that basic point. I fear that even if a trend appears on the basis of this recount, that still nothing will be done and then Mexico may be in real trouble. With or without AMLO, millions of Mexicans will feel cheated.
I meant to write that the votes should be totalled by Sunday...
Yeah the Mexican govt provides funding to all parties. That is the only fair way (wish the US had that... we may be getting it in California soon). That is exactly the reason why outside advertising and messages need to be closely scrutinized. The authorities did indeed stop several commercials and warned against using certain language, but many feel it was too little and too late. Once the untruthful, negative (US-style) adverts comparing AMLO to Chavez ran (illegally), the race changed.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home