Posted on 07/04/2006 2:21:15 PM PDT by StJacques
The President of the IFE clarifies that the 3 million votes which the candidate of the For the Good of All coalition says were lost to them, are ballots which arrived at the Institute with inconsistencies, and that is the reason why, according to an agreement reached with the political parties, that these had to be put aside.
Luis Carlos Ugalde, President Advisor of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), said that the three million votes which Andrés Manuel López Obrador, candidate of the For the Good of All coalition, [which claims] they lost the votes, are ballots which arrived at the institute with inconsistencies such as errors in the way they were filled out, and that is the reason why, according to an agreement reached with the political parties, that these [ballots] had to be put aside.
The aforementioned, [Ugalde] said, explains the difference1 to which the PRD candidate refers.
In an interview with Carlos Loret de Mola on the news program Primero Noticias, Ugalde said that these ballots count because they are registered, it is only necessary to review them with the political parties.
Before the accusation Lopez Obrador made in which [he charged that] the PREP2 was manipulated, the electoral official [Ugalde] indicated that this procedure was reviewed in the weeks leading up to the election by the political and scientific parties of UNAM3 and other prestigious universities.
Ugalde rejected [the charge that] the determination of closing the presidential election and not posting the results of last Sunday, July 2, was political.
"It is a scientific decision. There were five experts who were brought together that night and they were the ones who recommended this to me at 10:45 p.m."
Finally Ugalde indicated that the votes of each bloc which have already been counted and recorded as reported votes, are those which were sent to the 300 District Councils. What will be done tomorrow will be to remove report by report, those which are already included in the the vote count of each bloc, and to be adding [other] reports of votes.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translator's Notes:
1The "difference" to which Ugalde refers is the discrepancy between the total number of ballots counted and the number of votes recorded for the various presidential candidates, a figure that accounts for about 3 million ballots out of a total of over 41 million cast. See http://graficos.eluniversal.com.mx/tablas_presidente/presidentes.htm for a complete count of the recorded presidential vote.
2The PREP is the Program of Preliminary Electoral Results, the agency of the Mexican government that handles the preliminary vote count, before the process of its certification begins.
3UNAM is the acronym of the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
4Under Mexican electoral law, the preliminary vote count stopped at 8:00 p.m. Monday evening, July 3. At that time just under 99% of all votes were counted.
Hanging Chadalitos! Bump
That works out to a rejection rate of about 7.32%. What is the expected ballot rejection rate in the US?
Anything above 2-3% would seems kind of high to me, but then I burned out on this stuff back in 2000 and haven't paid much attention to voting statistics or methodologies since then.
Sounds like the same old crapola, different place!
A bunch of Mexicans may have voted against "their own best interests", LOL!
Any time a commie loses, it must be someone else's fault!
Voters in the providence of El Florida.
Voters in the providence of El Florida.Closer analogy than you realize. Lopez Obrador first gained national prominence with a fight over dubious vote counting in Tabasco (like Florida, on the Gulf, where the goveror was a relation of the putative winner). It turned out he was right -- the party that supposedly won had indeed cheated, and, under the rules at that time, an interim governor took office until the next Congressional election when there was a special election under close supervision.
Recounts like this are SOP in Mexican politics... all it means is the rejected votes have to be looked at again, and that the rate is much higher than it should be. There aren't any "hanging chads" in Mexico ... ballots are printed on security paper and marked with a special pencil.
> I burned out on this stuff back in 2000 and haven't paid much attention to voting statistics or methodologies since then.
The consolation to be taken from the 2000 fiasco is that the lefties--the ones at home awaiting the outcome, not the goons in Florida trying to rig the recount--were burnt to a crisp. As for Mexico, I'm sure that Jimmuh is down there making sure that the vote count is "correct."
A 7.32% rejection rate seems staggering, but think what ballot tampering must have happened during the PRI's 70 years in power.
Anyone know what the DUmmie line on this election is? Both sides are pretty anti-american, so either way, DUmmies win.
They are also tossing around the idea that the Karl Rove International Coup Machine had a heavy hand in this, and they are predicting violence in the streets.
An international conspiracy!
So true, the DUmmies are HOPING for violence in the streets, and making overtures about our 2006 elections going the same way if they lose.
When the left goes on a rampage it usually sets fire to the neighorhoods of the poorest and loots their stores.
That's because the rich can afford to buy guns and/or their own private security, and shoot back at the rampagers.
It's still a thoroughly stupid (and typically leftist) response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.