The New York Times can’t figure out who won the election. CNN says nothing useful. www.tradesports.com puts Calderon — the so-called "good guy" — in the 85 to 96 percent range.
Mexican update: the betting market speaks
Previous post: Why I find soccer boring
Next post: Random Links for the Day
Is it that the NYT can’t figure it out? Or that they have a vested interest in hyping an electoral crisis?
This will be sorts of an acid test for Mexico’s young democracy: Will all players comply with the institutionally mandated outcome? Or will they take things to the streets and try to get with blockades, demonstrations, etc what they didn’t get in the voting booth?
JB
From the article:
At 11 p.m., with a quarter of the polling places counted, Mr. Calderón led the race with 38 percent the vote, compared to 35 percent for Mr. López Obrador. Mr. Madrazo had 19 percent.
Earlier in the evening, tension gripped the capital as it became clear the margin in the race was razor-thin.
35% to 38% is not “razor-thin”. A margin of a few percentage points is normal in a free and fair election. The warning that López Obrador is a threat to Mexico’s democracy, which played a crucial role in the run up to the election, is already proving true.
the so-called “good guy”
Why the ironic quotes? From what I understand, Calderon’s opponent is cut from the same cloth as the execrable Hugo Chavez and Evo Morales. When one considers the alternative to Calderon, he is an unalloyed good, IMO.
Sounds like Tyler’s not convinced that Calderon is Mexico’s best option? Why?
Comments on this entry are closed.