Mexico's Conservative Near Win as Court Backs Vote (Tribunal rules on recount numbers)

Reuters ^ | August 28, 2006 | Chris Aspin and Kieran Murray

[StJacques]

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico's top electoral court threw out leftists' allegations of massive fraud in last month's presidential election on Monday, handing almost certain victory to conservative candidate Felipe Calderon.

The seven judges voted unanimously to reject most of the legal complaints by left-wing candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, who said he was robbed of victory in the July 2 vote.

His supporters have paralyzed Mexico City with protests this month and he has vowed to make Mexico ungovernable if the court declares Calderon the winner of the country's most bitterly contested election in modern history.

The initial result showed Calderon, a former energy minister from the ruling National Action Party, won the election by just 0.58 of a percentage point or 244,000 votes.

The judges fell short of formally naming Calderon the winner but they said there were only marginal changes to the original results after recounts and annulments at some of the most fiercely contested polling stations.

"Based on the annulments that were deemed necessary, all the parties lost a considerable amount of votes but that did not affect the results," judge Jose Luna said.

The judges, whose rulings are final and can not be appealed, must declare a president-elect by September 6. . . .

 

[StJacques]

I'm going to copy what I posted in another thread right into the comments section here:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the numbers are:

Felipe Calderon - 81,080 votes annulled
Lopez Obrador - 76,897 votes annulled

This means that AMLO gained 4,183 votes as a result of all electoral challenges resolved, shaving Calderon's 244,000 vote lead to approximately 240,000. I cite this from memory because the article says that "by agreement with the official numbers" there is a difference of 243,934 votes, but I think that is the "before the adjustment" figure. Either way, it doesn't matter. The counting is over and Calderon is in first place.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And Lopez Obrador and the PRD are screaming.

[StJacques]

A Mex-Elex ping for you all.

[GulfBreeze]

They better be careful. If it breaks into civil unrest, we may have to annex them!

(They could be the southern counties of Texas. he he he

[tet68]

And Lopez Obrador and the PRD are screaming.

Hopefully, soon they will KNOW what it feels like to be a
loser.

An attempt by the PRD to throw the government into chaos,
should be given the treatment a failed revolution deserves.

It's what we SHOULD have done to some democrats, not long ago.

[aft_lizard]

I dont want them, too expensive to fix.

[Otho]

Why didn't we pick up Baja California long ago when the boundaries were being drawn?

[ClaireSolt]

Sounds like Soros.

[kinoxi]

Mexico's Conservative Near Win

Al-reuters does it again. He already won, the powers that be at Reuters can't accept it.

[SAJ]

Thanks again, Saint. Peso futures are effectively telling ObraGore to dry up and blow away. The mkt participants think he's the next thing to irrelevant now, evidently.

Certainly hope they're correct!

[WOSG]

"Mexico's top electoral court threw out leftists' allegations of massive fraud in last month's presidential election on Monday, handing almost certain victory to conservative candidate Felipe Calderon."

I dislike very much the media slant that the court "handing almost certain victory" - same nonsense as the myth that a court made Bush President. Wrong. The court is certifying that THE VOTERS ELECTED CALDERON IN THE VOTE.

This has gone on long enough. Obrador-Loserman and his flying circus of protesters needs to fold up its tents and go home.

[colorado tanker]

So, the court decided to defend democratic elections and resist AMLO's thuggish threats.

I suppose the issue now is will AMLO try to force his way into power?.

[kesg]

And Lopez Obrador and the PRD are screaming.

Life is good.

[StJacques]

"This has gone on long enough. Obrador-Loserman and his flying circus of protesters needs to fold up its tents and go home."

I certainly agree that it has gone on long enough. What I expect to see over the next couple of weeks is a final rant or two from Lopez Obrador and his people, and especially surrounding Fox's Sept. 1 national address, which is similar to the "State of the Union" in this country, and then they will be forced by the Mexican federal government to pack up their tents and return the city to its people.

AMLO is going to try to "co-opt" the crowd for the Mexican Independence Day celebration on Sept. 16 with his so-called "National Democratic Convention," but I am in little doubt that the Mexican federal government is not going to let him get away with that.

[BallyBill]

Mexico can now get ready for non stop crying and whining from every left wing idiot. Been 6 years here in the U.S. and some would rather destroy their own country than admit they lost.

[wildwood]

liberals sure are poor losers.

[Reaganez]

"They better be careful. If it breaks into civil unrest, we may have to annex them!

(They could be the southern counties of Texas. he he he"


No,you just take the Northern Pan half.

You make it a federal territory for about 10 years THEN allow the richest states into the Union.

More like Texas as a whole not "southern counties."

Except for the death penalty.

That brings us to a philosophical question: would Texas still be Texas without the Death Penalty? LOL.

[GulfBreeze]

I meant they could BECOME the southern countis of Texas.

[A CA Guy]

I heard the little commie was talking about starting another government within, like his own Hezbollah...

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Why didn't we pick up Baja California long ago when the boundaries were being drawn?

I think we were going to offer Mexico $10M in the late 1800's, but the US Congress refused to authorize the purchase.

[StJacques]

There was a fundamental change in the attitudes of the United States towards Mexico as it related to the acquisition of new territory during the American Civil War when we supported Mexican nationalist Benito Juarez against the usurpation of Mexican sovereignty by the French, who imposed the Hapsburg "Emperor" Maximillian on Mexico in 1862. We greatly feared the possibility that a Mexico controlled by France would funnel arms and economic aid to the Confederacy, which French Emperor Napoleon III (who hated us) had said quite openly was his intention. As a result, in order to prop up Benito Juarez's cause, we very publicly declared that the United States would never again seek the acquisition of territory from Mexico, a policy that became binding upon Abraham Lincoln and every President who followed him afterwards. And the public attitude was one we pursued in private as well. There is a famous diplomatic note in the Foreign Relations Papers of the U.S. in which Secretary of State William Seward wrote the American minister to Juarez, who I think may have been the ex-Union General William S. Rosecrans, in which he instructed the American minister to "emphasize dollars and not dominion" in his talks with the Juaristas, by which he meant that American interests were no longer served by expansion at Mexico's expense and instead should rely on trade with the country.

So if there was any discussion of the acquisition of Baja California after about 1863 it occurred entirely outside the bounds of the official foreign policy of the country. There was the matter of settling the ownership of some small islands in the Pacific near San Clemente Island, and I forget exactly when that was taken care of, but that was about it.