Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
I certainly sense a media campaign against AMLO and the Yellow Revolution (the name that would be logical to use for the Western media but the one they won't adopt). One strange thing is that every Reuters article on the subject is titled "leftist" this "leftist" that, without names, for example the latest: Mexico leftists try to shut capital in vote battle.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jul 31st, 2006 at 07:59:07 AM EST
It is funny, the election was not really talked about until it was the week of the election. I think BushCo thought it would go smoothly, in other words, without media coverage like Peru's and Columbia's election, where BushCo got the people they wanted and the media hardly covered their election.

I think that will be the next diary, a comparison of how those elections with this one. They had exactly the same results in Mexico. AMLO projected to win and in the end and a surprise, lost.

The similarities between Mexico and Columbia/Peru's election

  1. Urbi and García were not projected be their countries President and they are;
  2. Both countries had a lot of irregularities in their election;
  3. Both countries had very minimal coverage in the our MSM.

The only difference now between Mexico and Columbia/Peru, is the post-election coverage.

What if there was full coverage of the election and the post-election here in US, would projected to winner before the election be President now? That is an answer we never will know.

AMLO and the Yellow Revolution, I like it.

If we are suppose to be the new media then we shall adopt it, therefore, we should try really hard to mention it as often as we can, "AMLO and the Yellow Revolution."

Corruption and hypocrisy ought not to be inevitable products of democracy, as they undoubtedly are today. - Gandhi

by XicanoPwr (chicanopwr at gmail.com) on Mon Jul 31st, 2006 at 08:54:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I beg to differ on one small point: predicting García's victory in Peru. I covered that election on ET, and noticed that most polls about possible second-round match-ups saw Ollanta Humala losing against García, quite possibly because of true-blue right-wingers opting for the 'less bad' from their viewpoint rather than stay at home. (On the other hand, given the election irregularities and slow counting, I submit it could be that García lost in reality, and polls were either simply off or worse, not representative.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Jul 31st, 2006 at 10:26:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What I can do, is look at what you wrote and see the sources you used and I can see what I find and share it with you and go from there. No need to recreate some thing you already covered and your knowledge of the Peruvian election.

Given the track record of BushCo fixing elections and only calling the validity of those election that didn't go their way, it does have to make you wonder a bit when they start throwing in those magic terms such as "free and fair" and "commitment to democracy."

US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said June 5 that the United States congratulated the Peruvian people "on what would seem to be an open election free of violence."  McCormack said the United States had not heard any serious reports of electoral irregularities, "so this is an important moment for the Peruvian people."

McCormack said the United States will have an assessment of how Peru's election was conducted on "whether or not it was free and fair."  The spokesman said the results of the election were "up to the Peruvian people and we will respect whatever results the Peruvian people express through the ballot box."

The United States previously commended Peruvians on their commitment to democracy while withholding comment on the country's presidential candidates.

Iraqi Elections: "To Be Free and Fair..."

Corruption and hypocrisy ought not to be inevitable products of democracy, as they undoubtedly are today. - Gandhi
by XicanoPwr (chicanopwr at gmail.com) on Mon Jul 31st, 2006 at 01:03:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Upon checking my earlier diaries and sources, some correction: before the first round, it was right-wing candidate Lourdes Flores Nano who consistently beat Humala in a hypothetical runoff vote in opinion polls; but between the two rounds, García beat Humala in every poll. Interestingly, it was García who most vehemently protested poll results, and that for favoring Lourdes over him.

Note that in the first round, the two main candidates acceptable to Washington got 48.1% together vs. Humala's 30.6%, with two more ex-Fujimori right-wingers getting another 12.2%, which is beyond the margin of disputed ballots, and which makes the relative narrowness of Ollanta Humala's second-round defeat (given that voting is compulsory) the more impressive. (BTW, he himself conceded, while Lourdes Flores wouldn't concede her third place in the first round for almost a month.)

So all in all, I'd say: to give a different result, the scale of the needed vote tampering would be so large that it would have been more than enough for the US to propel Lourdes Flores not only into second but first place in the first round. On the other hand, the US could well have had a role in the campaign, and that while betting on multiple horses in the race.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Jul 31st, 2006 at 03:43:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Top Diaries

Occasional Series