Posted on 08/03/2006 11:55:30 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Latin America: Losing an election is tough. But when a losing politician forces the biggest city in the hemisphere to shut down because he won't accept defeat, as is happening in Mexico, it's warfare against democracy.
The scruffy supporters of failed leftist presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador are not only turning Mexico City into a filthy tent encampment but also blockading Mexico's stock exchange.
They loathe capitalism, of course. But their sweet-talk claim to the media is that they're entitled to a ballot-by-ballot recount of all 42 million votes cast in Mexico's July 2 election.
Their demand is illegal in Mexico's system, which safeguards elections by requiring that all ballots be counted at precinct levels.
What they want now is to wear down the nation's nonpartisan electoral tribunal and force it into a third count. And probably as many as required until their desired result is achieved.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Where's Winfield Scott when you need him?
What they need is "campaign finance reform" eh McManiac?
Anyone out there have any confidence in Mexicos electoral system?
Anyone have confidence in Mexicos anything?
Cesspool of corruption.
Oddly enough, their system seems to be pretty good. Less fraud-prone than the American one, if I understand correctly. But yes - of course - the country is hopelessly corrupt
Actually, the Electoral System in Mexico is about 4X safer and fraud free than the systems of Ohio or Florida. They worked 10 years to get a Federal Election Commission which worked hard to get photo I.D, birth certificates and house addresses in a nationwide system on computers. When I went to vote, there were 4 observers, one of each major party, and ballot boxes had white clear plastic, pictures were taken that it began at 8am as empty. When it came my turn to vote, they bring out the catalog, printed of voters for my precinct, compare my voter ID with their data base, make an X in their book, stamp my finger with nitrate ink, and make a ink impression on my voter card. This they never have done when I went to vote in Okla, Kansas, Texas or California. It isn't all that hard to get registered in multiple states and vote absentee...or am I lying?
http://www.mexiconews.com.mx/19644.html
Have you read At Any Cost by Bill Sammon?Even prior to Gore's abusive litigation, the worst thing was broadcast journalism's calling of states for Gore much faster than it called states for Bush, the margin of victory being similar. I wish I had the data for when CNN called each state in '00 in a spreadsheet. Someone should fit that data to the curve
(Gore% - Bush% + X) = 1/A. . . where A is the delay between poll closing and the calll of a state's electoral vote result for a journalism-perceived 1% difference margin of victory .And where X is the bias in journalism's estimate of the relative strength of the Bush v. Gore vote.
That strikes me as the simplest formula which would predict very little delay if the margin of victory was large - and infinite delay in calling the winner if the two candidates exactly tied - in the perception of journalism, that is . . .
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch a folks.
Seriously, this is amusing. A corrupt socialist government is being dragged to a halt by corrupt, even more socialist losers.
I like it. Sounds pretty hard to corrupt. Wish we'd adopt Mexico's voting system here.
Bet Mexican voters don't have any trouble with "butterfly ballots" and "dimpled" or "hanging" chads, either.
Appreciate the input, good job.
All I ever hear is the corruption there.
Where's Jimmah?
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.