This is what passes for important, incisive, intelligent op-ed material in the Washington Post
For the presidential campaign of Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador, narrowly declared the loser to Felipe Calderòn in Mexico's much-disputed returns, there is good news and bad news. The good news is that he has avoided the two biggest problems that confronted Al Gore in Recount 2000: being forced to contest the election in a jurisdiction where the governor was his opponent's brother, and being tormented by a chief election official who was a partisan operative with a bizarre Queen Esther complex. The bad news, however, is that, where Gore trailed in the initial tally in Florida by fewer than 2,000 votes, Lopez Obrador is more than 200,000 votes behind. It's only a matter of time before the Mexican equivalent of our pundit class begins its demands for "finality."
For Lopez Obrador, the clock is ticking loudly. If he wants to keep his candidacy alive, he must take decisive -- and quite divisive -- action. He must bring meaningful and documented claims of fraud in the election. He must call his supporters to the streets and question the legitimacy of the vote casting and counting process. He must demand that, notwithstanding Mexican law, every ballot be recounted, by hand, to ensure an accurate tally. Above all, he must reject any suggestion that Calderòn received more votes -- indeed, he must insist that any fair count would show that he is the rightful winner.
This, of course, was not the playbook that Gore followed in 2000. The vice president rejected advice to do these things. Instead of claiming victory, he limited himself to suggesting that the result was in doubt -- and unknown -- until a "full and fair" count could be completed. He urged calm among his supporters and called off street protests by progressive groups and allies. He never, ever questioned the legitimacy of the institutions -- the courts or the canvassers -- responsible for the tallies, and he forbade his lawyers and operatives from doing anything of the sort.The Gore approach was dignified, responsible, reasonable -- and unsuccessful.
Yep, that's what I think when I think back on 2000, Vice President Gore was all of those things, except he had his people and his lawyers and the press carrying his water so that he could stay above the fray while the polity was damaged permanently. His behavior was an example of pure pusillanimity and how he's acted since then is the proof (and the above op-ed was written by Ronald Klain who was general cousel for the Gore-Lieberman Recount Committee, sore loser much?)
Downtown Mexico City swelled Saturday with the accumulated frustration and rage of the poor, who were stoked into a sign-waving, fist-pumping frenzy by new fraud allegations that failed populist candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador hopes will overturn the results of Mexico's presidential election.López Obrador ignited the smoldering emotions of his followers Saturday morning, alleging for the first time that Mexico's electoral commission had rigged its computers before the July 2 election to ensure the half-percentage-point victory of Felipe Calderón, a champion of free trade. In a news conference before the rally, López Obrador called Calderón "an employee" of Mexico's powerful upper classes and said a victory by his conservative opponent would be "morally impossible."
If the PRD wrote the press release themselves it wouldn't glow with any more feverish lust and desire for a Lopez Obrador administration than the piece as it was written by the 'objective' WaPo reporter.
I thought I was overstating things with my first post regarding Mexico's election with Civil War, Or Not, but now I'm not so sure.
A real shooting war between the south and the north of Mexico is a real possibility. The army will most likely side with the north, but you have the possibility of Hugo Chavez pouring money and arms to guerrillas in the south who already caused great strife in Chiapas without much backing, and if they combine with AMLO supporters, they could spread even worse violence throughout Mexico.
And if that happens, there's nothing stopping that terror from spreading to this side of the border.
The illegal immigration debate was heated enough before, it's easy to imagine it being a thousand times worse should a shooting war erupt in Mexico and some of the violence gets exported along with the laborers. If things go as bad as they could, and as bad as AMLO seems to wish they would, the horror of a real refugee crisis in a nation of 100Million+ souls right next to us will be the stuff of the nightly news.I still think that the majority of Mexicans have more sense than that and despite the large street protests in Mexico City, AMLO is losing support elsewhere, and beyond grumbling, nothing horrendous will happen. But AMLO's rhetoric is dangerous, divisive, and sounds like the rantings of another faux-populist with desires to become a dictator.
The ad campaigns that compared AMLO to Fidel and Hugo were called cheap and slanderous, yet AMLO's behavior since the election have only reinforced that view.
The election was closer than it should have been. But in a very poor country, appeals to class warfare populism are dangerously intoxicating to many folks. That AMLO didn't win 38-40% of the vote like he polled consistently leading up to the election suggests that at least 10-20% of the impoverished folks that were his target audience have more sense than they were given credit for having.
But back to the Washington Post, any 'news' report that doesn't identify Mr. Lopez Obrador as a dangerous demagogue isn't worth calling news. The positive press that these dictators and dictators in waiting have received from many media outlets is beyond my ability to comprehend, yet it happens again and again.
Disgust is all that comes to mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment