In May of this year, teachers in the Mexican city of Oaxaca held a one day strike to protest for better pay and working conditions.
To say those teachers have a legitimate grievance is an understatement. They are among the lowest paid in Mexico and have very little voice in improving the conditions of the schools and educational system in the province. This yearly protest was their way of showing their political force to demand change.
Something different happened at this year's protest. When the teachers decided to extend their protest longer than a day, other groups began showing up. It began to play into the national election. When local police tried to shut down the protests, they failed (and looked repressive in the process). More protest groups, tending to be more radical and in some cases violent, began building barricades and organizing professionally into a long-term standoff. They began making other demands including the governor's resignation. Five months later, the standoff continued with no end in sight and the issues had gone far beyond the education system.
At this point, the Mexican government has a legitimate right and duty to restore order in Oaxaca. Protesting is a right in a democracy and should be protected, but the right to protest must be balanced with the rights of other citizens to lead normal lives. The Oaxaca protesters have gone too far, shutting down the entire downtown area for months. They have devastated the economy of the province. They have provoked violence. Even the teacher's union has voted to end the strikes at this point. This standoff cannot continue indefinitely and the government should give the Oaxacan people their city back.
Should the governor resign/be forced from office? I've gone back and forth on that question. On one hand, Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz is a corrupt and power-hungry bastard, an anachronism of the now defunct PRI dictatorship. He has regularly used thugs and violent tactics along with corrupting the bureaucracy to get his way. He has also played a key role in censoring the media in the state. On the other hand, rewarding protesters for their violence tends not to be a good long term strategy. In the end, my feeling is that the governor is hurting, not helping this situation, and that he is failing at the basic task of governing. The Mexican federal government would be right to find a legal way to force him out of office.
The saddest part of everything that has occurred is that the initial cause has been lost. Oaxaca's education system is still a disaster and the protests have not led to improvements for teachers or students. The Mexican government should step up to that challenge as well. Ending these protests is only a short term issue and the protests themselves should serve as a warning of underlying problems. The worst thing the federal government can do is end the protests and then leave the status quo. Ensuring Oaxaca and other provinces have a working and modern education system is the only way to provide true long term stability and economic growth to the region. Whether incoming President Calderon takes on that challenge will define whether Oaxaca's protests are a one time event or the opening battle.
Five points on Lula
An impressive second round. Alckmin had momentum entering the second round following his impressive first round showing. President Lula da Silva stepped up to the challenge, campaigned well, showed up to the debates and showed some serious improvement from where he was. He not only won the election; he begins his second term with a fairly strong mandate to govern.
A solid democracy. The fifth largest nation in the world voted in a calm, professional, democratic election. Just 30 years ago, Brazil was emerging from dictatorship and there was fear of extremism from both the right and left. Today, there are moderate and responsible parties across the ideological spectrum that represent the population. That is real progress.
Populism at its best? In a region where "populism" is used by some as a dirty word, Brazil's Bolsa Familia shows how government programs can both win votes and improve lives. Conditional government subsidies have reduced hunger, improved school attendance levels and provided many families with a basic level of income that allows them to live with dignity. The program is providing real short term and long term benefits to Brazil, not just winning votes. For that reason, Lula deserves to be popular for maintaining and expanding this program.
Benefiting from losing Congress. Lula will still manage to put together a legislative coalition, but with fewer PT representatives, most would expect it to be harder to organize. Once organized, the coalition will probably be ideologically wider. In theory, both of those factors should make governing harder, but Lula may benefit. He will be able to share the credit/blame for the government with a wider coalition while no longer being linked to some of the corruption-scarred Worker's Party representatives.
Prediction for the second term. Lula's second term will be an overall positive in spite of facing some down points and more scandals. His domestic popularity is likely to continue and possibly increase. His international profile will increase. Lula really bottomed out in the first term. Unlike many other second term presidents in the region, I think he will learn the lessons from his first term and go out on top.
A solid democracy. The fifth largest nation in the world voted in a calm, professional, democratic election. Just 30 years ago, Brazil was emerging from dictatorship and there was fear of extremism from both the right and left. Today, there are moderate and responsible parties across the ideological spectrum that represent the population. That is real progress.
Populism at its best? In a region where "populism" is used by some as a dirty word, Brazil's Bolsa Familia shows how government programs can both win votes and improve lives. Conditional government subsidies have reduced hunger, improved school attendance levels and provided many families with a basic level of income that allows them to live with dignity. The program is providing real short term and long term benefits to Brazil, not just winning votes. For that reason, Lula deserves to be popular for maintaining and expanding this program.
Benefiting from losing Congress. Lula will still manage to put together a legislative coalition, but with fewer PT representatives, most would expect it to be harder to organize. Once organized, the coalition will probably be ideologically wider. In theory, both of those factors should make governing harder, but Lula may benefit. He will be able to share the credit/blame for the government with a wider coalition while no longer being linked to some of the corruption-scarred Worker's Party representatives.
Prediction for the second term. Lula's second term will be an overall positive in spite of facing some down points and more scandals. His domestic popularity is likely to continue and possibly increase. His international profile will increase. Lula really bottomed out in the first term. Unlike many other second term presidents in the region, I think he will learn the lessons from his first term and go out on top.
POLL NUMBERS!!! October 27, 2006
Back with polls from the four final races of the year in Latin America. The numbers from two weeks ago are here.
In Nicaragua, Cid Gallup says it's Ortega 33, Montealegre 22, Rizo 17, Jarquin 13.
Borge has it Ortega 34, Montealegre 29.
U Central America did a huge sample ballot and came up with Ortega 38, Rizo 20, Montealegre 17.
Zogby has the race Ortega 35, Montealegre 20, Rizo 16.
In Venezuela, Zogby has the race Chavez 59, Rosales 24.
Consultores21 has the race Chavez 50, Rosales 33.
Cifras has the race Chavez 59, Rosales 22.
CECA claims the race is nearly tied and Datanalysis says Rosales is closing in.
The head of Hinterlaces agrees with me, saying that Rosales is slowly gaining and although Chavez is still likely to win, his popularity has taken a hit during the election.
In Ecuador, Informe has the race Noboa 47, Correa 34.
Cedatos has it Noboa 49, Correa 34.
Consultar has it Noboa 53, Correa 26.
In Brazil, Sensus says it's Lula 57.5, Alckmin 33.5.
Ibope has it Lula 62, Alckmin 38.
Datafolha has it Lula 61, Alckmin 39.
I feel fairly confident in saying Lula is going to win this one.
In Nicaragua, Cid Gallup says it's Ortega 33, Montealegre 22, Rizo 17, Jarquin 13.
Borge has it Ortega 34, Montealegre 29.
U Central America did a huge sample ballot and came up with Ortega 38, Rizo 20, Montealegre 17.
Zogby has the race Ortega 35, Montealegre 20, Rizo 16.
In Venezuela, Zogby has the race Chavez 59, Rosales 24.
Consultores21 has the race Chavez 50, Rosales 33.
Cifras has the race Chavez 59, Rosales 22.
CECA claims the race is nearly tied and Datanalysis says Rosales is closing in.
The head of Hinterlaces agrees with me, saying that Rosales is slowly gaining and although Chavez is still likely to win, his popularity has taken a hit during the election.
In Ecuador, Informe has the race Noboa 47, Correa 34.
Cedatos has it Noboa 49, Correa 34.
Consultar has it Noboa 53, Correa 26.
In Brazil, Sensus says it's Lula 57.5, Alckmin 33.5.
Ibope has it Lula 62, Alckmin 38.
Datafolha has it Lula 61, Alckmin 39.
I feel fairly confident in saying Lula is going to win this one.
Argentine prosecutor accuses Iran
Miami Herald:
An Argentine prosecutor on Wednesday sought the arrest of former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, accusing him of approving the 1994 car bombing that killed 85 at a Jewish community center in the Argentine capital.While the prosecutor has not released proof that Rafsanjani directly approved the bombing, it is fairly widely believed that the Iranian government was somehow involved in the terrorist attack. If an actual arrest warrant is issued, it could create some very interesting tensions between South America and Iran.
Week ahead
Still in Las Vegas through tomorrow (winning at blackjack, lost some expensive poker lessons, so running about even). No major blog posting until Wednesday at the earliest. In the meantime:
Voters in Panama approved the canal expansion with nearly 80% voting in favor. Turnout wasn't that great at under 50%. Mora has more.
Brazil is entering the final week of the campaign with Lula fairly far ahead. I thought Randy's analysis last week was good.
Miami Herald interview with Haitian President Preval.
The New York Times covers Portuguese promotion. More than once I've seen conferences on Latin America "forget" to have a Portuguese translator, which I think is rather insulting. On the other hand, in an interview with the media last week, the incoming commander of USSOUTHCOM, who is currently practicing Spanish, said he would make an effort to learn Portuguese and stressed its importance to the hemisphere.
Voters in Panama approved the canal expansion with nearly 80% voting in favor. Turnout wasn't that great at under 50%. Mora has more.
Brazil is entering the final week of the campaign with Lula fairly far ahead. I thought Randy's analysis last week was good.
Miami Herald interview with Haitian President Preval.
The New York Times covers Portuguese promotion. More than once I've seen conferences on Latin America "forget" to have a Portuguese translator, which I think is rather insulting. On the other hand, in an interview with the media last week, the incoming commander of USSOUTHCOM, who is currently practicing Spanish, said he would make an effort to learn Portuguese and stressed its importance to the hemisphere.
POLL NUMBERS!!! VEGAS!!!
Sorry, no poll numbers this morning as I have an early flight to Las Vegas. I'll double up next week.
Should the Panama Canal be expanded?
Among all the elections this year in Latin America, there are none that offer the substantial choice being given to voters in Panama this weekend. Most elections only directly affect one or two terms of office and can be reversed in future elections. The decision made by Panamanian voters will decide the next century of economics and politics in Panama.
The government's proposal will add a third, wider set of locks as well as deepen the current canal. Once complete, the expansion will double the capacity of the canal and allow wider ships including many US cargo ships that cannot currently cross through the locks. With the expansion, the number of jobs as well as the amount of revenue from the Canal will increase.
Opponents of the expansion say the cost is too high (the government estimates $5.2 billion), the government is underestimating the cost (opponents claim the project will run $10-12 billion) and that the new locks will create environmental damage, particularly to Panama's freshwater supply.
The reasons given by the "no" campaigners are good reasons for extensive planning and oversight of the Canal expansion, but they are not good enough to cancel the project. The cost is significant, but short term. If the expansion is built to the quality of the original, there is no reason that it shouldn't last over a century and ensure that Panama sees its investment into its infrastructure pay off many times over.
UPDATE: More from Miami Herald, Mora.
The government's proposal will add a third, wider set of locks as well as deepen the current canal. Once complete, the expansion will double the capacity of the canal and allow wider ships including many US cargo ships that cannot currently cross through the locks. With the expansion, the number of jobs as well as the amount of revenue from the Canal will increase.
Opponents of the expansion say the cost is too high (the government estimates $5.2 billion), the government is underestimating the cost (opponents claim the project will run $10-12 billion) and that the new locks will create environmental damage, particularly to Panama's freshwater supply.
The reasons given by the "no" campaigners are good reasons for extensive planning and oversight of the Canal expansion, but they are not good enough to cancel the project. The cost is significant, but short term. If the expansion is built to the quality of the original, there is no reason that it shouldn't last over a century and ensure that Panama sees its investment into its infrastructure pay off many times over.
UPDATE: More from Miami Herald, Mora.
Symbolism
Lost among all the other issues during yesterday's UN vote was a small, symbolic moment that defined the two candidates.
As part of the last minute efforts to win votes, both countries handed out small gifts. Venezuela gave delegates blue silk bags full of chocolate. Guatemala distributed small, hand-made bracelets and dolls that are common among its indigenous communities.
While I'm sure the chocolate was appreciated, the unintended image presented was that one country was buying votes while the other country was earning them.
As part of the last minute efforts to win votes, both countries handed out small gifts. Venezuela gave delegates blue silk bags full of chocolate. Guatemala distributed small, hand-made bracelets and dolls that are common among its indigenous communities.
While I'm sure the chocolate was appreciated, the unintended image presented was that one country was buying votes while the other country was earning them.
Five points on Ecuador's first round
The initial results show Noboa 26, Correa 23, Roldos 15, Gutierrez 15, Viteri 10. I'll update with the final results some time on Monday.
Close race. I wrote on Thursday that Correa had peaked and stalled at 35% and was possibly declining. The most recent polls also showed Noboa passing up Roldos for second place. What was surprising was that those two trends collided into a virtual tie between Noboa and Correa with the businessman possibly edging out the former Economy Minister.
Correa underperforms. For Correa, it was a lesson in peaking too early. By hitting the mid-30's in the polls during September, he opened himself up to political scrutiny and attacks, particularly during the debates, that caused his vote share to decline. Significantly, he did not seem to pick up any votes from the large number of undecided voters.
Traditional politics loses. The poor showing by both Roldos and Viteri, while somewhat expected, is a defeat for Ecuador's traditional parties and politicians.
Geographic divide. Looking at the preliminary data, Correa won in the "Sierra" (including Quito and Cuenca) while Noboa won on the "Costa" (including Guayaquil and Manta). The Sierra serves as Ecuador's political center while the Costa serves as its economic center. I fully expect this divide to increase in the second round and understanding the geographic trend is essential to understanding the political turmoil in the country.
Looking towards round two. With two extremely polarizing populists from either side of the political spectrum, there are going to be a large number of voters in the center who will dislike both candidates and will likely remain undecided to the bitter end. In spite of his relatively poor showing in the first round, Correa has a slight edge going into the second round. Noboa is the better known of the two politicians, but faces a large number of people who dislike him. Expect Noboa to lay on the pressure in linking Correa to Venezuela and portraying Correa's policies as a threat to Ecuador's economy and stability. If he can make the charges stick, Noboa can pull off the upset. Otherwise, Correa is likely to win. I expect a close and very negative second round.
Close race. I wrote on Thursday that Correa had peaked and stalled at 35% and was possibly declining. The most recent polls also showed Noboa passing up Roldos for second place. What was surprising was that those two trends collided into a virtual tie between Noboa and Correa with the businessman possibly edging out the former Economy Minister.
Correa underperforms. For Correa, it was a lesson in peaking too early. By hitting the mid-30's in the polls during September, he opened himself up to political scrutiny and attacks, particularly during the debates, that caused his vote share to decline. Significantly, he did not seem to pick up any votes from the large number of undecided voters.
Traditional politics loses. The poor showing by both Roldos and Viteri, while somewhat expected, is a defeat for Ecuador's traditional parties and politicians.
Geographic divide. Looking at the preliminary data, Correa won in the "Sierra" (including Quito and Cuenca) while Noboa won on the "Costa" (including Guayaquil and Manta). The Sierra serves as Ecuador's political center while the Costa serves as its economic center. I fully expect this divide to increase in the second round and understanding the geographic trend is essential to understanding the political turmoil in the country.
Looking towards round two. With two extremely polarizing populists from either side of the political spectrum, there are going to be a large number of voters in the center who will dislike both candidates and will likely remain undecided to the bitter end. In spite of his relatively poor showing in the first round, Correa has a slight edge going into the second round. Noboa is the better known of the two politicians, but faces a large number of people who dislike him. Expect Noboa to lay on the pressure in linking Correa to Venezuela and portraying Correa's policies as a threat to Ecuador's economy and stability. If he can make the charges stick, Noboa can pull off the upset. Otherwise, Correa is likely to win. I expect a close and very negative second round.
The other election to watch
While most Latin America watchers will be focused on Ecuador today, everyone should keep half an eye on the gubernatorial election going on in the Tabasco state of Mexico (background from the AP and LA Times).
Lopez Obrador's position as opposition leader may hang on how the PRD do in this election. If the PRD candidate wins, it will in some ways validate AMLO's protest tactics following Calderon's very narrow victory this summer. If the PRI's machine politics pull off the upset, it will further weaken AMLO.
With the Mexican left divided over their tactics and their recent presidential loss, Lopez Obrador needs this win to validate his position as opposition leader and effectively check Calderon in his new administration.
Lopez Obrador's position as opposition leader may hang on how the PRD do in this election. If the PRD candidate wins, it will in some ways validate AMLO's protest tactics following Calderon's very narrow victory this summer. If the PRI's machine politics pull off the upset, it will further weaken AMLO.
With the Mexican left divided over their tactics and their recent presidential loss, Lopez Obrador needs this win to validate his position as opposition leader and effectively check Calderon in his new administration.
POLL NUMBERS!!! October 13, 2006
Good Morning! Happy Friday the 13th. Last week's poll numbers from Latin America are here.
In Nicaragua, the fight over polls is worse than any other country in Latin America. And most of the fighting is being done by Reagan era conservatives who are backing one of the two conservative candidates while trying to knock the other one out of the race. The basic story is Ortega is near 35%, Montealegre and Rizo are both in the mid-20's and Jarquin is in the mid to upper-teens.
In Panama, Angus Reid cites three polls that show the Canal expansion will be approved with over 70% support.
In Venezuela, if you haven't seen the Keller Poll, check out Daniel's or Francisco's analysis. My analysis of the race is here.
In Bolivia, there are signs that MAS is losing approval. Miguel has some good analysis of Bolivian political trends here and here.
In Peru, no surprise, Castaneda still leads the race for Lima mayor with about 65%.
In Brazil, Datafohla has the race Lula 56, Alckmin 44. Ibope has the race Lula 57, Alckmin 43. Vox Populi says it's Lula 55, Alckmin 45. All three of those polling firms are giving statistics of valid voters and not counting undecideds, which means their margins of error are much larger. The actual numbers in all three polls right now are closer to 51-41 with 10% undecided or casting blank ballots.
In Ecuador, where there will be an election this Sunday, Informe has the race Correa 30, Noboa 23, Roldos 19 while Market has the race Correa 26, Noboa 20, Roldos 17, Viteri 11. Cedatos has the race much wider, with Correa 36, Noboa 20, Roldos 20.
In Nicaragua, the fight over polls is worse than any other country in Latin America. And most of the fighting is being done by Reagan era conservatives who are backing one of the two conservative candidates while trying to knock the other one out of the race. The basic story is Ortega is near 35%, Montealegre and Rizo are both in the mid-20's and Jarquin is in the mid to upper-teens.
In Panama, Angus Reid cites three polls that show the Canal expansion will be approved with over 70% support.
In Venezuela, if you haven't seen the Keller Poll, check out Daniel's or Francisco's analysis. My analysis of the race is here.
In Bolivia, there are signs that MAS is losing approval. Miguel has some good analysis of Bolivian political trends here and here.
In Peru, no surprise, Castaneda still leads the race for Lima mayor with about 65%.
In Brazil, Datafohla has the race Lula 56, Alckmin 44. Ibope has the race Lula 57, Alckmin 43. Vox Populi says it's Lula 55, Alckmin 45. All three of those polling firms are giving statistics of valid voters and not counting undecideds, which means their margins of error are much larger. The actual numbers in all three polls right now are closer to 51-41 with 10% undecided or casting blank ballots.
In Ecuador, where there will be an election this Sunday, Informe has the race Correa 30, Noboa 23, Roldos 19 while Market has the race Correa 26, Noboa 20, Roldos 17, Viteri 11. Cedatos has the race much wider, with Correa 36, Noboa 20, Roldos 20.
What to watch in Ecuador
Ecuador's presidential election is this Sunday. My previous analyses are What's the matter with Ecuador? and Ecuador Remains Undecided.
Now there are just two races to watch:
The race to 40. Rafael Correa dramatically increased his vote share in the polls from less than 15% two months ago to 35% late last month. Then he stalled, not moving in the polls and possibly declining a bit over the past two weeks. He has taken a beating in the debates as the other candidates have all attacked him. If he can manage to pull in enough undecideds on election day, he'll get past 40% and win in the first round. However, if he has stalled at 35%, he will face a very tough second round. Correa knows that he is favored in the first round, but not in the second, so he is in a race against himself to reach 40% this Sunday.
The race for second. The last public polls showed Noboa closing in on Roldos for second place with both obtaining around 20%. An unofficial poll this week suggested that Noboa may be slightly ahead. This one should be close. Who wins second matters because that person will face Correa in the second round, assuming he doesn't reach 40%. Roldos is seen as more moderate and having less negatives than Noboa. But Noboa is seen as a more dynamic campaigner with a stronger organization.
Should be an interesting Sunday.
Now there are just two races to watch:
The race to 40. Rafael Correa dramatically increased his vote share in the polls from less than 15% two months ago to 35% late last month. Then he stalled, not moving in the polls and possibly declining a bit over the past two weeks. He has taken a beating in the debates as the other candidates have all attacked him. If he can manage to pull in enough undecideds on election day, he'll get past 40% and win in the first round. However, if he has stalled at 35%, he will face a very tough second round. Correa knows that he is favored in the first round, but not in the second, so he is in a race against himself to reach 40% this Sunday.
The race for second. The last public polls showed Noboa closing in on Roldos for second place with both obtaining around 20%. An unofficial poll this week suggested that Noboa may be slightly ahead. This one should be close. Who wins second matters because that person will face Correa in the second round, assuming he doesn't reach 40%. Roldos is seen as more moderate and having less negatives than Noboa. But Noboa is seen as a more dynamic campaigner with a stronger organization.
Should be an interesting Sunday.
Can Chavez be beat? (3)
The answer has changed.
Back in April, it looked very unlikely. Between April and August, the opposition fought amongst themselves and eventually appointed Manuel Rosales as their candidate. Beating Chavez was still very unlikely in August. Now in October, the voters have begun to shift in Venezuela. Chavez is still the likely winner of the election, but...
1. One hell of a campaign. Since August, Rosales has run an amazingly well organized and aggressive campaign. He has the momentum. He is setting the agenda. He is organizing on the ground. He is adapting to current events better than the president. This campaign was simply too short. If he had started campaigning at this level a few months earlier, this race would be completely different.
2. This election will be near 50-50. Projecting forward some of the recent polls I've seen (including Keller's), I see an incredibly close campaign emerging. Many of the other recent elections in Latin America have been nearly tied and I believe Venezuela will continue that trend. The president has some very weak numbers, but the opposition is (as expected) slow at picking up the support of those who are disillusioned with the president. Like Mexico, Honduras and Costa Rica, I think it will be close enough that we will not know the winner on election night.
3. Watch for a last minute voter shift. Rosales' campaign may actually resemble another recent campaign in Latin America, that of Bolivian President Morales. Morales won a majority in part due to a last minute shift by voters who had opposed him previously. I think many conditions are building in Venezuela for a last minute seven to twelve point swing that will not register in any polls.
4. Chavez is still likely to win in December. In spite of everything I wrote above, all but the most optimistic of scenarios still show a Chavez win. The fact is, a close election will likely go to Chavez because the president enjoys a few institutional advantages. Still, even though Chavez is likely to win, if I was working on his campaign staff (and I'm not), I would be a bit nervous right now. The president's campaign is going to need to work a lot harder than expected to pull off this reelection.
5. The answer has changed. Can Chavez be beat? Rosales may or may not win this election, but his campaign has shown that a smart, tough, democratic opposition that is actively trying to win support can still prosper in Venezuela. If Rosales loses, his challenge will be to keep up the momentum, keep up the political activism and prevent the opposition from fragmenting back into what it was in April. If Rosales can manage to turn the organization of his campaign into a real positive-agenda political movement (not just "the opposition"), the answer will be yes, Chavez can and will be beat politically over the coming years, no matter what tricks he tries. Chavez may win the election, but he may have lost the illusion of being the only dominant political force in the country.
Back in April, it looked very unlikely. Between April and August, the opposition fought amongst themselves and eventually appointed Manuel Rosales as their candidate. Beating Chavez was still very unlikely in August. Now in October, the voters have begun to shift in Venezuela. Chavez is still the likely winner of the election, but...
1. One hell of a campaign. Since August, Rosales has run an amazingly well organized and aggressive campaign. He has the momentum. He is setting the agenda. He is organizing on the ground. He is adapting to current events better than the president. This campaign was simply too short. If he had started campaigning at this level a few months earlier, this race would be completely different.
2. This election will be near 50-50. Projecting forward some of the recent polls I've seen (including Keller's), I see an incredibly close campaign emerging. Many of the other recent elections in Latin America have been nearly tied and I believe Venezuela will continue that trend. The president has some very weak numbers, but the opposition is (as expected) slow at picking up the support of those who are disillusioned with the president. Like Mexico, Honduras and Costa Rica, I think it will be close enough that we will not know the winner on election night.
3. Watch for a last minute voter shift. Rosales' campaign may actually resemble another recent campaign in Latin America, that of Bolivian President Morales. Morales won a majority in part due to a last minute shift by voters who had opposed him previously. I think many conditions are building in Venezuela for a last minute seven to twelve point swing that will not register in any polls.
4. Chavez is still likely to win in December. In spite of everything I wrote above, all but the most optimistic of scenarios still show a Chavez win. The fact is, a close election will likely go to Chavez because the president enjoys a few institutional advantages. Still, even though Chavez is likely to win, if I was working on his campaign staff (and I'm not), I would be a bit nervous right now. The president's campaign is going to need to work a lot harder than expected to pull off this reelection.
5. The answer has changed. Can Chavez be beat? Rosales may or may not win this election, but his campaign has shown that a smart, tough, democratic opposition that is actively trying to win support can still prosper in Venezuela. If Rosales loses, his challenge will be to keep up the momentum, keep up the political activism and prevent the opposition from fragmenting back into what it was in April. If Rosales can manage to turn the organization of his campaign into a real positive-agenda political movement (not just "the opposition"), the answer will be yes, Chavez can and will be beat politically over the coming years, no matter what tricks he tries. Chavez may win the election, but he may have lost the illusion of being the only dominant political force in the country.
Ecuador's caudillo
AP profiles Ecuadorian politician Leon Febres Cordero
Febres Cordero's four-year presidential term ended in 1988, but as the combative leader of the rightist Social Christians, Ecuador's largest and best organized party, he has dominated Congress and the courts for the past 15 years. He normally controls about a third of its 100 seats, and given its fractured makeup of more than a dozen parties, that's enough to guarantee him a virtual veto over legislation.Febres Cordero is also one of three presidents to finish his full term in the last 27 years. Some view him as the solution to Ecuador's problems, a stable strong leader who knows how to work the system. Others view him as the problem, an entrenched politician whose has maintained personal power at the expense of the country's democratic development.
Lula shows up
After skipping the first three debates, President Lula da Silva took the time to attend last night and discuss the issues with Geraldo Alckmin. The Miami Herald and Bloomberg have the roundup in English while O Globo has a more detailed description.
Alckmin's campaign has clearly decided that they want to win this election by focusing on the current corruption scandal rather than the other issues at hand. The challenger spent the entire debate trying to bring the discussion to the dossier and other scandals. Lula's strategy was less clearly defined, having spent much of the debate defending himself. Where Lula did go on the offensive, he focused on the economic successes of his government and pointed out Alckmin's failures as governor.
Alckmin risks losing votes by appearing to bully the president, who is fairly well liked. However, being eight points down in the polls, he has decided to take that gamble. Lula's team needs to do a better job responding to the accusations while bringing the issues back to their agenda.
In the end, the most important part of the debate was that Lula was actually there. Failing to appear at the first three debates hurt his campaign. Brazilian voters needed to see that their president cared enough to appeal for their votes, and last night they did. Alckmin may have gained a few points during the debate through his negative campaign, but it wasn't enough to shift the race. Lula, simply by showing up, probably won the night.
Alckmin's campaign has clearly decided that they want to win this election by focusing on the current corruption scandal rather than the other issues at hand. The challenger spent the entire debate trying to bring the discussion to the dossier and other scandals. Lula's strategy was less clearly defined, having spent much of the debate defending himself. Where Lula did go on the offensive, he focused on the economic successes of his government and pointed out Alckmin's failures as governor.
Alckmin risks losing votes by appearing to bully the president, who is fairly well liked. However, being eight points down in the polls, he has decided to take that gamble. Lula's team needs to do a better job responding to the accusations while bringing the issues back to their agenda.
In the end, the most important part of the debate was that Lula was actually there. Failing to appear at the first three debates hurt his campaign. Brazilian voters needed to see that their president cared enough to appeal for their votes, and last night they did. Alckmin may have gained a few points during the debate through his negative campaign, but it wasn't enough to shift the race. Lula, simply by showing up, probably won the night.
POLL NUMBERS!!! October 5, 2006
Good morning. Last week's Latin America poll numbers are here.
In Ecuador, it appears Correa continues to gain support. Market has the race Correa 26, Roldos 19, Noboa 12, Viteri 8. Cedatos has the race Correa 37, Roldos 21, Noboa 19, Viteri 12. The Cedatos poll also suggested Correa would win a second round matchup. Informe says it's Correa 27, Roldos 17, Noboa 16. Informe also uses some different methodology to drop some of the undecideds and null voters to find Correa 35, Roldos 22, Noboa 21. I think Cedatos used similar methodology, but couldn't get the internal numbers.
In Bolivia, Apoyo reports President Morales' approval rating has dropped to 52%. Analysis by Miguel here.
In Argentina, a poll of foreign leaders showed Chavez in first with 23%, followed by Castro at 22% and Morales at 14%. At 50% approval, Chavez's approval was also the highest on the list.
In Chile, President Bachelet's approval has stabilized at 45%.
I haven't seen any new numbers in Brazil since the first round, but if anyone see those or others, feel free to leave them in the comments.
UPDATE: Randy e-mailed to note a new poll from Datafolha out tonight has Lula 54, Alckmin 46.
In Ecuador, it appears Correa continues to gain support. Market has the race Correa 26, Roldos 19, Noboa 12, Viteri 8. Cedatos has the race Correa 37, Roldos 21, Noboa 19, Viteri 12. The Cedatos poll also suggested Correa would win a second round matchup. Informe says it's Correa 27, Roldos 17, Noboa 16. Informe also uses some different methodology to drop some of the undecideds and null voters to find Correa 35, Roldos 22, Noboa 21. I think Cedatos used similar methodology, but couldn't get the internal numbers.
In Bolivia, Apoyo reports President Morales' approval rating has dropped to 52%. Analysis by Miguel here.
In Argentina, a poll of foreign leaders showed Chavez in first with 23%, followed by Castro at 22% and Morales at 14%. At 50% approval, Chavez's approval was also the highest on the list.
In Chile, President Bachelet's approval has stabilized at 45%.
I haven't seen any new numbers in Brazil since the first round, but if anyone see those or others, feel free to leave them in the comments.
UPDATE: Randy e-mailed to note a new poll from Datafolha out tonight has Lula 54, Alckmin 46.
Review the stamps first
BBC reports that Nicaragua is considering building a rival to the Panama Canal.
The obscure title refers to the fact that prior to the US Congressional vote in 1902 on where to build a Canal in Central America, lobbyists for Panama sent Nicaraguan stamps with a famous volcano to all the US Congressmen. The possibility of a volcano eruption was seen as a reason not to choose the country, and Panama won by four votes. It's one of those odd trivial moments in history that changed the course of events for two nations.
If built, the Inter-Oceanic Nicaragua Canal would cut time and several hundred miles off the route from China to Europe or North America. It would also carry super-ships of up to 250,000 tonnes, significantly bigger than the vessels that currently pass through Panama.There have been talks about building a canal through Nicaragua since the early 19th century and President Bolanos has mentioned it before. The other option would be a land bridge that would allow easy transport of supplies and would likely be much cheaper and easier to maintain.
The obscure title refers to the fact that prior to the US Congressional vote in 1902 on where to build a Canal in Central America, lobbyists for Panama sent Nicaraguan stamps with a famous volcano to all the US Congressmen. The possibility of a volcano eruption was seen as a reason not to choose the country, and Panama won by four votes. It's one of those odd trivial moments in history that changed the course of events for two nations.
ASPA: Got one right
The Bush administration will waive the ICC immunity requirements in ASPA and will restore military aid to over a dozen Latin American nations.
ASPA was passed by the Republican Congress in the mid-1990's and required all nations receiving IMET and certain other types of military aid to grant immunity from ICC prosecution to US troops in their territory. Many countries resented being forced to sign the Article 98 agreements to maintain military aid and nearly two dozen countries, mostly from Latin America, refused to sign. By refusing to sign, the countries knew that they may be risking serious cuts in US military aid.
Rather than protecting our troops, ASPA has become a political liability. It has harmed our military relations with other countries. It has begun reducing aid at a time that transnational crime and security issues are increasing. It has taken our attention off other issues in the region. And, if the restrictions continue, other countries such as Spain and China will step into the vacuum that the reduced aid leaves.
This legislation was really failing to accomplish its original goal and was harming our relations with our allies at a time we need to be doing all we can to improve them.
The Bush administration made the right call waiving 21 countries from from the ASPA requirements. While there will be few visible instant results, they have prevented a small issue from becoming a long term disaster to US policy in Latin America.
ASPA was passed by the Republican Congress in the mid-1990's and required all nations receiving IMET and certain other types of military aid to grant immunity from ICC prosecution to US troops in their territory. Many countries resented being forced to sign the Article 98 agreements to maintain military aid and nearly two dozen countries, mostly from Latin America, refused to sign. By refusing to sign, the countries knew that they may be risking serious cuts in US military aid.
Rather than protecting our troops, ASPA has become a political liability. It has harmed our military relations with other countries. It has begun reducing aid at a time that transnational crime and security issues are increasing. It has taken our attention off other issues in the region. And, if the restrictions continue, other countries such as Spain and China will step into the vacuum that the reduced aid leaves.
This legislation was really failing to accomplish its original goal and was harming our relations with our allies at a time we need to be doing all we can to improve them.
The Bush administration made the right call waiving 21 countries from from the ASPA requirements. While there will be few visible instant results, they have prevented a small issue from becoming a long term disaster to US policy in Latin America.
Five points on Brazil's first round
Brazil's presidential election is going to a second round. First some results.
Lula da Silva: 48.61%
Alckmin: 41.64%
Helena: 6.85%
Blank or Null votes: 8.42%
1. More than corruption. It's easy for the global media to pick up one campaign theme and run with it, but there were many domestic political and economic issues at play. Crime is a major issue that was barely discussed in the media (both candidates had their faults). Brazil's economy is growing, but nowhere near the pace it needs to. The Real has gained vis-a-vis the dollar, helping Brazil's economy overall but hurting some key sectors that probably cost Lula votes. One side accuses Lula of not moving fast enough on social programs (land redistribution, Bolsa Familia); the other side says he has failed to manage economic restructuring (pension reform, debt restructuring). There were plenty of issues that cost Lula votes in the first round.
2. Ok, yes, corruption too. The scandals were a continuous negative thread hanging over the Lula campaign. When voters are told day after day that the president's party is corrupt, it will hurt approval ratings.
3. The undecideds broke for Alckmin. The real shock of this election was that nearly all the undecided voters broke for Alckmin. He was regularly polling around 30% before the election and the number of undecided voters ranged from 10-15%. The movement of the undecideds to the opposition camp was probably caused by the most recent corruption scandal, but it should be seen as a major victory for Alckmin.
4. Alckmin with momentum. In one strong second place showing, Alckmin has changed his image from lackluster challenger to potential giant slayer. He has a long way to go, but there should be no doubt that he has the momentum.
5. Lula is still the favorite. In spite of showing poorly in the first round, President Lula da Silva is still the favorite in the second round. His campaign's first task will be doing something to shake up the race and disrupt Alckmin's momentum. Their second task should focus on getting 55-60% of the vote in the next round so that Lula can start his second term strongly.
Lula da Silva: 48.61%
Alckmin: 41.64%
Helena: 6.85%
Blank or Null votes: 8.42%
1. More than corruption. It's easy for the global media to pick up one campaign theme and run with it, but there were many domestic political and economic issues at play. Crime is a major issue that was barely discussed in the media (both candidates had their faults). Brazil's economy is growing, but nowhere near the pace it needs to. The Real has gained vis-a-vis the dollar, helping Brazil's economy overall but hurting some key sectors that probably cost Lula votes. One side accuses Lula of not moving fast enough on social programs (land redistribution, Bolsa Familia); the other side says he has failed to manage economic restructuring (pension reform, debt restructuring). There were plenty of issues that cost Lula votes in the first round.
2. Ok, yes, corruption too. The scandals were a continuous negative thread hanging over the Lula campaign. When voters are told day after day that the president's party is corrupt, it will hurt approval ratings.
3. The undecideds broke for Alckmin. The real shock of this election was that nearly all the undecided voters broke for Alckmin. He was regularly polling around 30% before the election and the number of undecided voters ranged from 10-15%. The movement of the undecideds to the opposition camp was probably caused by the most recent corruption scandal, but it should be seen as a major victory for Alckmin.
4. Alckmin with momentum. In one strong second place showing, Alckmin has changed his image from lackluster challenger to potential giant slayer. He has a long way to go, but there should be no doubt that he has the momentum.
5. Lula is still the favorite. In spite of showing poorly in the first round, President Lula da Silva is still the favorite in the second round. His campaign's first task will be doing something to shake up the race and disrupt Alckmin's momentum. Their second task should focus on getting 55-60% of the vote in the next round so that Lula can start his second term strongly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)